Posted on by m.fernandez · 4 Comments

W1-Introduction & Responses

Hello Everyone,

My name is Melissa Fernandez and I work at the CUNY Welcome Center as an admissions counselor. I have been in the office for about a year now and have had some wonderful experiences with international students, which is why I choose to take this class. This will be my last semester at Baruch in the MSED program, but hope to make it a memorable one. I would really like to take my degree and work with institutional research focusing on curriculum development and pedagogy. I look forward to meeting and working with everyone.

 

Summary on Readings:

I found the overview of the history of international higher education rather interesting because comparing it with the history of higher education in the United States; the struggles were very different even though they had a common goal of bettering higher education. The theme of conflict and religious differences around the world impeding on the cooperation of international higher education has been one that I am very interested in learning about because recently conflict and religion have been creating tension globally. It was interesting to see how the articles were written from different perspectives. As the second article mentions that the U.S is not as educationally international as many of us Americans thought. It is “funny” for lack of a better word to see that other countries would not rank the U.S first as a country to have their students study abroad in. On the contrary we started the Fullbright Program during turmoil to help increase international higher education. The survey that was taken regarding a strategic plan for internationalization left the U.S on the bottom and Europe on the top. Again as an American our society allows us to see this differently. After reading the two articles and trends that were going on in higher education I see that our country is very much closed off from understanding and knowing what other countries are doing in higher education and we focus much more on our attributes than our weaknesses. I look forward to becoming more aware of the countries that are creating initiatives like Russia in increasing their international faculty to 10% and international students to 15% by 2020. I hope that the more of us who are informed about international education could help change the perspective of the U.S to other advancing countries because with more bonds that we have there is an opportunity for more understanding.

Posted on by e.truong · 1 Comment

W1: Elaine Truong; Introduction & Response to Readings

Hello everyone! My name is Elaine Truong and I am in my second-to-last semester of the MS-Ed HEA program at Baruch. I went to Hunter College for my undergraduate degree where I majored in political science and minored in English literature. I recently started working as an academic advising coordinator for graduate students at Baruch’s School of Public Affairs. I am interested in higher education policies and law and how these affect disadvantaged students.

This week’s article did a great job in providing us with the overview of international higher education policy: what it meant in the past and what it means presently. From the Altbach article, one of the purposes of internationalizing higher education was to spread peace and diplomacy during or after times of tension and conflict. For example, the prestigious Fulbright Fellowship came about after World War II as a way to foster diplomacy and development in war torn countries or in third world countries that recently received their independence. However, as the Cold War advanced; students and institutions of higher education became political objects in the tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union. The internationalization of higher education was used as a political tool to spread one country’s influence in a region over the other country. Although, the Cold War has officially ended, the use of higher education to increase influence and dominance in the international arena has not ended.

Presently, the argument for the internationalization of higher education, according to the Oxford Trends report, is to allow students to gain worldly experiences and to develop soft skills that employers will find desirable. The underlying narrative is essentially the same, which is to have students from one region dominate the job economy and thus become the dominant international power. Higher education has become a means to an end, which is not necessarily a bad thing. I do agree with the presumption that students who “study abroad” are able to develop certain soft skills that are valuable to employers in an ever-expanding and inter-connected world. These skills are important for students, but what worries me is that students from other regions are more likely to get this experience than American students. As the Oxford Trends note, the most mobile students are students from Asia, specifically China. Chinese students chose to study abroad in higher proportions in comparison other regional students. Many of these students chose to study in the United States and in the United Kingdom. Therefore, is an  imbalance of students between countries that send out the most students and those that take in the most students. It is in the interest of the US to try and correct this imbalance of students who study aboard with new policies and programs that allow students to be competitive on the international level. I found the Green article the most interesting because it identifies this imbalance and it puts into perspective how few US institutions of higher education are actually thinking about internationalizing. At School of Public Affairs, where I work, the focus has continued to be internationalization. So, it is very interesting to know that our school is part of the minority who are focused on internationalizing

Overall, I found the articles very eye-opening this week and really enjoyed the focus on the policy trends in international higher education.

References

Altbach, P.G. and Wit, H.D. (2015).  Internationalization and global tension: Lessons from history. International Higher Education, 81, 2-4.

Green, M.F. (2015). Is the United States the best in the world? Not in internationalization. International Higher Education, 81, 7-9.

University of Oxford. (2015) International trends in higher education 2015.

 

 

Posted on by j.kalaidis · 3 Comments

W1: Intro & Response to Readings

Hi everyone! My name is Jen Kalaidis, and I am in my second semester of the HEA program. I currently work as the Program Assistant for the undergraduate public policy program at Hunter College’s Roosevelt House. In this role, I have the opportunity to work closely with both Hunter College students and faculty. I am pursuing my MSEd to continue to advance my career in higher education, where I hope to work in academic advising and/or education abroad. I am originally from the Twin Cities, and I received my undergrad degrees in History and Global Cultures from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I also spent a semester studying abroad in Paris, France and a did an summer internship in Buea, Cameroon.

badger

Response to reading:

In an increasingly globalized world, international education is more important than ever for a student’s academic and professional success. While most universities are vocal about their support for increasing international exchange between students, faculty, and institutions, their actual practice of promoting this exchange varies by country and institutional type. The main overlapping theme I noticed in this week’s readings is the how much economic and foreign policy goals of an individual country shape its universities’ international education opportunities.

Altbach and de Wit discuss the history of the internationalization of higher education. They discuss the role universities played in the twentieth century — and continue to play today — as arbitrators of international diplomacy. Following the devastation of WWI, “there was a strong belief that the academic community could help build international solidarity and contribute to peace building” (Altbach and de Wit, 2015, pp. 2). While there would be another world war just a few decades later, which proved to be a big setback for internationalization efforts, the idea of universities being the “means of fostering the development of mutual understanding” (Altbach and de Wit, 2015, pp. 2) continued throughout the Cold War. With global tensions on the rise in many regions of the world, Altbach and de Wit close their article discussing how international education is one of the “essential mechanisms for keeping communication open and dialogue active” (Altbach and de Wit, 2015, pp. 4).

Despite the important role international higher education can play in global affairs, Madeline Green’s article discusses how the United States is lagging behind in its efforts. While she does not go into specific detail as to why this is the case, here are some questions that came to mind from the reading, which I hope we can explore this semester:

  • Is the increasing cost of higher education in the U.S. a reason why international students are choosing other destinations to study instead of the U.S.? Likewise, are financial barriers the reason why less Americans study abroad than students in other countries?
  • Do the increasing funding cuts to higher education impact the ability for American universities to send students abroad?
  • With much of U.S. foreign policy focused on the Middle East, why is it that there is so little international student exchange between the U.S. and that region?
  • What role does an increasingly isolationist Republican Party play in shaping international higher education?

The final reading, the Oxford report, discussed many other areas of international collaboration beyond just the exchange of students. From satellite campuses to MOOCs, internationalization is rapidly changing the global higher education landscape. My most surprising take away from this reading was that only 10 percent of American students study abroad (University of Oxford, 2015, pp. 7). Since the report shows that the countries that put the most resources into international education are the ones who are generally reap the most benefits, I find this particularly troubling.

Those of us working in New York City are fortunate to work with many international students, but this is not the case at many American universities. With such strong evidence of the social, political, and economic benefits of international education, I hope the U.S. strengthens its participation in the larger global higher education landscape.

Posted on by Natallia Kolbun · 3 Comments

W1: Natallia Kolbun – Introduction & Article Response

Hello everyone, my name is Natallia Kolbun. I received my bachelor’s degree in Finance and currently still work in the industry. I started HEA program as a result of my personal interests. In 2015 I co-founded a non-profit organization that provides scholarships, mentoring and eventually educational and support services to college students whose families have been affected by cancer. I believe that this program can help me understand higher education and the needs of the students in more depth. I’m five classes into the program, yet I am already considering leaving finance to pursue a career in Higher Education.

I really enjoyed the readings for today’s class, as they touched upon several important topics of international higher education, which I am sure will come up throughout the semester. The two topics that I personally was intrigued and simultaneously concerned about were Green’s article on US and internationalization and the role of politics in higher education.

I find Green’s article somewhat controversial. It could partially be due to the lack of details on the IAU Study that Green uses to make his point. According to the study, US provided lower indicators in the interest and implementation of internationalization within participated US colleges and universities versus all participated institutions around the world. Yet, there are no details in regards to the size, mission and location of those institutions. The United States has over 5,000 colleges and universities throughout the country, some of which are small, specialized, or have a unique mission to accomplish, which is not a representation of the majority of the large US Higher Ed Institutions. The United States is also a number one country that takes/welcomes the largest number of immigrants every year. Both of the above facts, in my opinion, are very important when discussing internationalization of higher education, yet it does not seem to be considered in the study. It is also important to keep in mind that the United States is the most diverse country in the world and has already a great base of internationalization within the institutions without study aboard programs or other international relations. In addition, the location of the institutions in the survey is also very important. Colleges and Universities located in New York and California, for example, would be more interested in international relations than institutions in the Midwest, simply because New York and California are the states with most diversity and international relations in general. Therefore, it seems as if politics still play a large role in the choice of the geographical areas institutions pick as their top priority. Asia is the top choice for the US, since the US has a tremendous portion of their trade, manufacturing, and outsourcing relationship with Asia, which seems to benefit both areas over the last decade. On the other hand, the US relationships with Russia and Europe have become more competitive (it feels like the Cold War between Russia and the US has never ended), rather than collaborative, which might be directing European interests to Latin America and Middle East instead.

I am interested to see what others think about this topic, as well as to see the actual implementation of internationalization strategies within institutions here in the US and abroad in the next couple of decades.