Examining the Politicization and Framing of HEA 117 in the US Between 2019 and 2021
Keywords:Higher Education Act of 1965, Section 117, foreign influence, malign influence, international partnerships
In 2019, the U.S. Department of Education (DED) began increasing its enforcement of the Higher Education Act, Section 117 statute, which provides instructions for institutional reporting regarding foreign and contracts. The three questions guiding this article include: What were DED’s stated premises for the investigations? How was international engagement characterized in the notices? And finally, what traits, characteristics, and/or qualities were attributed to different actors? After providing an overview of Section 117, this article examines the notices of investigation issued by DED between 2019 and 2021 to better understand how the Agency discursively characterized malign and/or undue foreign influence utilizing a discourse historical analysis approach. After exploring these questions, this article then discusses the problematic assumptions revealed by four frames which emerged from the notices of investigations and concludes with a brief reflection on the continued challenges for universities and their international engagement (broadly defined) moving forward.
America COMPETES Act, The, H.R. 4521. (2022, January 25). U.S. House of Representatives. https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20220131/BILLS-117HR4521RH-RCP117-31.pdf
American Council on Education. (n.d.). Comprehensive internationalization.
Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. University of Chicago Press.
Boydstun, A. E., Card, D., Gross, J. H., Resnik, P., & Smith, N. A. (2014). Tracking the development of media frames within and across policy issues (Working Paper). https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~nasmith/papers/boydstun+card+gross+resnik+smith.apsa14.pdf
Creutzfeldt, N. (2020). Traditions of studying the social and the legal. In N. Creutzfeldt, M. Mason, & K. McConnachie (Eds.), Routledge handbook of socio-legal theory and methods (pp. 9–34). Routledge.
Creutzfeldt, N., Mason, M., & McConnachie, K. (2020). Socio-legal theory and methods. Introduction. In N. Creutzfeldt, M. Mason, & K. McConnachie (Eds.), Routledge handbook of socio-legal theory and methods (pp. 1–8). Routledge.
Crumley-Effinger, M. (2021). SEVIS, Surveillance, and international students: New avenues for international education surveillance studies. In A. Wiseman (Ed.), Annual review of comparative and international education (pp. 141–161). Bingley. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-36792022000042B008
Dollar, D., & Hass, R. (2021, January 25). Getting the China challenge right. Brookings Institute. https://www.brookings.edu/research/getting-the-china-challenge-right/
Entmen, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
Entmen, R. M. (2010). Cascading activation: Contesting the White House’s frame after 9/11. Political Communication, 20(4), 4115–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600390244176
Fairclough, N. (2012). Critical discourse analysis. In J. P. Gee & M. Handford (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 9–20). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203809068.
Foreign Influence Bill, CS/HB 7017. (2021, June 9). Florida House of Representatives. https://myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=72872&SessionId=90
Gilardi, F., Shipan, C. R., & Wuest, B. (2021). Policy diffusion: The issue-definition stage. American Journal of Political Science, 65(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12521
Harvard University. (2019). A message to the community regarding Jeffrey Epstein. Office of the President. https://www.harvard.edu/president/news/2019/a-message-to-the-community-regarding-jeffrey-epstein/
Higher Education Act, 20.U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. (1965). Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/chapter-28
Higher Education Act, Section 117, 20.U.S.C. §1011f(a) (1965). Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/1011f
Higher Education Act, Section 117, 20.U.S.C. §1011f(a) (2021). 117th Congress of the U.S. government. https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/2fd489d0-dd27-4c0d-a48f 482bcd68633d/E3C3E4DC071DD980E4C243EA9B371800.gifts-in-higher-education-act.pdf
Hollibaugh, Jr., G. E. (2019). The use of text as data methods in public administration: A review and an application to agency priorities. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 474–490. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy045
Holt, L. F., Kjærvik, S. L., & Bushman, B. J. (2022). Harm and shaming through naming: Examining why calling the Coronavirus the “COVID-19 Virus, not the “Chinese virus” matters. Media Psychology, 25(5), 639–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2022.2034021
Jansa, M. N., Hansen, E. R., & Gray, V. H. (2019). Copy and paste lawmaking: Legislative professionalism and policy reinvention in the States. American Politics Research, 47(4), 739–767. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X18776628
Junk, W. M., & Rasmussen, A. (2019). Framing by the flock: Collective issue definition and advocacy success. Comparative Political Studies, 52(4), 483–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414018784044
Koduah, A., Agyepong, I. A., & van Dijk, H. (2016). “The one with the purse makes policy”: Power, problem definition, framing and maternal health policies and programmes evolution in national level institutionalised policy making processes in Ghana.
Social Science & Medicine, 167, 76–87. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.08.051
Krzyzanowski, M., & Wodak, R. (2008) The politics of exclusion: Debating migration in Austria. Transaction Press.
Lasswell, H. D. (1950). Politics: Who gets what, when, how. Peter Smith.
Lee, J. (2021). International higher education as geopolitical power. In J. Lee (Ed.), U.S. power in international higher education (pp. 1–20). Rutgers University Press.
Letter to Chairman Rob Portman. (2019, November 27). U.S. Department of Education Office of the General Counsel. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/psi-nov27-2019.pdf
Letter to Chairman Rob Portman. (2021, January 5). U.S. Department of Education Office of the General Counsel. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/portman-jan8-2021.pdf
Letter to the Honorable Miguel Cardona. (2021, June 17). U.S. House of Representatives (Virginia Foxx and Jim Banks). https://banks.house.gov/uploadedfiles/6.15.21_letter_to_cardona_china_universities.pdf
Linder, F., Desmarais, B., Burgess, M., & Giraudy, E. (2020). Text as policy: Measuring policy similarity through bill text reuse. Policy Studies Journal, 48(2), 546–574. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12257
Long, K., Etheridge, C., O’Connell, C., & Hugins, K. (2021, Summer). Rising global fears of foreign interference in higher education. In International Higher Education, 107, 8–10. https://doi.org/10.36197/IHE.2021.107.04
Maslow, W. (1986, October 16). Opinion. Education act would curb foreign gifts. The New York Times.
Notice of 20 U.S.C.§ 1011f Investigation and Record Request/Cornell University. (2019). Department of Education Office of the General Counsel. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/07/19/2019-15425/notice-of-investigation-and-record-requests
Notice of 20 U.S.C.§ 1011f Investigation and Record Request/Rutgers University. (2019). Department of Education Office of the General Counsel. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-07-19/pdf/2019-15425.pdf
Notice of 20 U.S.C.§ 1011f Investigation and Record Request/Harvard University. (2020). Department of Education Office of the General Counsel. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/harvard-20200211.pdf
Notice of 20 U.S.C.§ 1011f Investigation and Record Request/Georgetown University and Texas A&M. (2020). Department of Education Office of the General Counsel. https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-13904.pdf?utm_source=federalregister.gov&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pi+subscription+mailing+list
Notice of 20 U.S.C.§ 1011f Investigation and Record Request/Yale University. (2020). Department of Education Office of the General Counsel. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/yale-20200211.pdf
Notice of 20 U.S.C.§ 1011f Investigation and Record Request/University of Maryland and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology [MIT]. (2019). Department of Education Office of the General Counsel. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/11/21/2019-25231/notice-of-investigation-and-record-requests
Reisgl, M., & Wodak, R. (2009). The discourse-historical approach (DHA). In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse studies (pp. 23–61). SAGE.
Rumbley, L. E., Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Leask, B. (2021). Trends in global higher education. A 2020 perspective. In D. Deardorff, H. de Wit, B. Leask, & H. Charles (Eds.), Handbook of international education, 2nd ed. (pp. 3–22). Stylus Publishing.
Singh, S. P., & Swanson, M. (2017). How issue frames shape beliefs about the importance of climate change policy across ideological and partisan groups. PLoS One, 12(7). e0181401. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181401
U.S. Attorney’s Office District of Massachusetts. (2020, January 28). Harvard University professor and two Chinese nationals charged in three separate China related cases. Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/harvard-university-professor-and-two-chinese-nationals-charged-three-separate-china
U.S. Congress. (1958). United States Code: National Defense Education Program. 20 U.S.C. §§ 401–589. https://www.loc.gov/item/uscode1958-004020017/
U.S. Congress. (1986). Public Law 99-498—Oct. 17. 99th Congress. S. 1965. Higher Education Amendments of 1986. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/99/s1965/text
U.S. Department of Education Office of the General Counsel. (2020). Institutional compliance with Section 117 of the Higher Education Act of 1965. [Report]. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/institutional-compliance-section-117.pdf
War Department. (1944). Explanation of the provisions of “The G.I. Bill of Rights” Public law 346—78th Congress. Washington, DC.
Weiss, G., & Wodak, R. (Eds.) (2003). Critical discourse analysis. Palgrave Macmillan.
Weiss, J. A. (1989). The powers of problem definition: The case of government paperwork. Policy Sciences, 22, 97–121. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00141381
Weiss, J. A., & Gruber, J. E. (1984). Knowledge for control in fragmented policy arenas. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 3(2), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.2307/3323934
Wilkersen, J., Smith, D., & Stramp, N. (2015). Tracing the flow of policy ideas in legislatures: A text reuse approach. American Journal of Political Science, 59(4), 943–956. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12175
Wodak, R., & Chilton, P. (2005). A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis: Theory, methodology and interdisciplinarity (Discourse approaches to politics, society and culture). John Benjamins.
Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2009). Critical discourse studies: history, agenda, theory and methodology. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse studies (pp. 1–22). SAGE.
Wood, B. D., & Vedlitz, A. (2007). Issue definition, information processing, and the politics of global warning. American Journal of Political Science, 51(3), 552-568. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4620084
Wray, C. (2020, July 7). The threat posed by the Chinese government and the Chinese Communist Party to the economic and national security of the United States. [Transcript]. Hudson Institute. https://www.fbi.gov/news/speeches/the-threat-posed-by-the-chinese-government-and-the-chinese-communist-party-to-the-economic-and-national-security-of-the-united-states
Xiaoxing Xi, et al. v. Andrew Haugen, et al. (2022). Brief of Asian Americans Advancing Justice–AAJC & Asian Americans Advancing Justice–Asian Law Caucus as amici curiae in support of appellants Xiaoxing Xi et al. https://www.advancingjustice-alc.org/media/Amicus-Brief-Filed-Professor-Xi-02142022.pdf
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The findings, interpretations, conclusions, and views expressed in Journal of Comparative and International Higher Education (JCIHE) are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed in any manner to CIES, HESIG, or the sponsoring universities of the Editorial Staff. These works are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License. Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute articles that appear in JCIHE as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and JCIHE, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All other uses must be approved by the author(s) or JCIHE. By submitting a manuscript, authors agree to transfer without charge the following rights to JCIHE upon acceptance of the manuscript: first worldwide serial publication rights and the right for JCIHE to grant permissions as its editors judge appropriate for the redistribution of the article, its abstract, and metadata associated with the article in professional indexing and reference services.