The ACE article International Higher Education Partnerships: A Global Review of Standards and Practices brings to our attention common themes and key concepts which are required in order to have successful international programs and partnerships. The article points out how active engagement with the world has become an essential part of a students higher education in order to prepare students to live and work in this interconnected global world. Now that this concept of international education is widely accepted, the issues that we struggle with is HOW do provide this type of education. Based off various survey results, half of Unite States institutions have at least one partnership with institutions abroad and even higher percentages have joint degree programs or dual degree programs with partners abroad. However, with these partnerships, comes an array of challenges. The article examines the themes the Blue Ribbon Panel identified which fall under two categories: Administration and Management and Cultural and Contextual issues. The themes include Transparency and Accountability, Faculty and Staff Engagement, Quality Assurance, Strategic Planning and the Role of Institutional Leadership, Cultural Awareness, Access and Equity, Institutional and Human Capacity building, and Ethical Dilemmas and “Negotiated Space”. I chose to focus my post on the Cultural and Contextual issues these partnerships face.
With any type of international program, whether domestic or abroad, awareness and sensitivity to cultural differences is essential to success. ACE identifies how communication between stakeholders on both ends of the partnership is essential to identifying the possible cultural differences that may cause problems or tensions and explore possible solutions before the start of the partnership. I had never really thought of this before reading this section of the article and while it makes perfect sense, I had never thought about the important role that stakeholders can play in exploring cultural differences and establishing best practices for cultural acceptance in their program. I always looked as stakeholders on each end as more of a business transaction, where each explores what this partnership can do for them and working out the logistics of how to make it happen. It seems that the training of faculty and staff on cultural sensitivity varies greatly from campus to campus and while I know we have discussed that there is no “one size fits all” model for internationalization, I am curious if there could be an educational training model that all schools who wish to internationalize require for faculty and staff. We have programs like Safe Zone for faculty and staff to become more aware of the issues that face LGBTQ students and how they can better serve this population – lets develop a standardized program that addresses cultural awareness. I did some research and it seems like there are many resources available for teachers to tap into in order to become a culturally sensitive educator; however, I did not come across one standard or specific program for higher education faculty and staff. One article from the National Education Association puts it perfectly: “Understanding our culture is important so that we understand how we interact with individuals from cultures that are different from ours. This understanding helps us see our students and their families more clearly, and shape policies and practice in ways that will help our students to succeed.” Not only does understanding our own culture help us relate to people from different cultures, it is also important to understand different educational practices in different areas of the world. Teaching style, grading techniques, and evaluation processes are all very different depending on the countries the partnerships are between. Faculty play an essential role in this process and the ACE article points out an example from a dual degree partnership between Appalachian State University and Universi-dad de las Americas in Mexico. The two schools sent faculty back and forth to discuss course content, curriculum and what the program would actually look like at each campus. The faculty were able to collaborate to develop “cultural norms” for the program, which took into account their cultural differences, creating a program that would be accessible for all students involved. These interactions created a solid foundation for their program and opened the lines of communication for any problems or issues that may arise.
I agree that a “standardized program that address cultural awareness” should be created for institutions looking into global partnerships. Besides faculty and staff, students should be seen as stakeholders who can be involved in “exploring cultural differences and establishing best practices”. Sometime students are overlooked when it comes to their involvement in planning and implementing special programs/projects. Students should be involved and trained to be culturally sensitive because if they will apart of dual or joint degree programs and spending a significant amount of time away from their home institutions it is important they understand and know how to interact with individuals from other cultures.
I am in agreement that we need a broad scale cultural training in the same vein as the Safe Zone program. I recently participated in an ‘Intercultural Competence’ training held on campus for faculty and staff. We participated in exercises on communication, and learned about the different models/theories of culture shock. The most enlightening part was a presentation on China. We learned about their Confucian heritage of learning and how English is taught. We learned some common proverbs that help to explain cultural viewpoints. In the US we may say ‘The early bird gets the worm’ whereas in China there is one along the lines of ‘The lead bird is usually the first to be shot’. We learned reasons behind behaviors such as a group of students going to a dept together.
This seminar was an eye opener and something that should be available campus wide as everyone, faculty, staff students, has regular interactions with international students. Our dept has been discussing trainings for topics such as education and learning in Korea (our top country for international students), and lessons on pronounciation of Chinese names. Such steps toward intercultural competence would achieve a more inclusive campus culture. We expect international students to acclimate to American education and culture, so we should be aware of their backgrounds as well.
Allison Olly
Thank you for sharing Allison! This sounds like exactly the type of program I would be interested in.
I appreciate your honesty in revealing that you had not thought about how important it is for stakeholders of international education programs to identify, explore, and attempt to address cultural differences through best practice implementation before the start of a partnership. I am in that same boat. I thought that through experiences in “the field” stakeholders might come together to address occurrences that have arisen and work to ease or eradicate tensions in a more reactive fashion. This is good to know. I came across an article by the AAC&U (2014) that details how nurses at the University of Virginia’s School of Nursing are trained to work with patients from socioeconomic, ethnic, racial, and cultural backgrounds that are different from their own. Their students can participate in international learning practices across sixteen countries and the college also opens its doors to international students who serve as international visiting scholars which include students, clinicians, and faculty members, to offer perspectives from other cultures. I think this is phenomenal!
https://www.aacu.org/diversitydemocracy/2014/spring/baernholdt
Hi there. I really enjoyed reading your post, and I, too, was most interested in the cultural component of the articles. While faculty are crucial in building internationalization partnerships (as the reading points out), I think it is crucial that professionals with a formal background in cross-cultural communication are also involved. Many commentators blame the rise of administrative positions as one of the reasons tuition rates have spiked in the last decade. While there is some truth to that, the university experience in general has gotten a lot more complex and requires these roles — case in point: internationalization. Because the college experience is much more than just the formal academic curriculum, it is necessary for universities to hire trained higher education professionals — whether these are student affairs professionals or international education experts. Obviously I am biased — and we probably all are, since we’re in a higher education graduate program — but this class has really reiterated just how important it is to have higher education professionals who are well versed in the latest developments in the field. When it comes to internationalization, having non-academic staff who have been trained in cross-cultural communication — and whose job is specifically to facilitate this — would help smooth over possible areas of conflict or misunderstanding before it became detrimental to a partnership.