Before taking this course, I viewed student mobility as the most significant part of an internationalization strategy. One where some institutions had an advantage over others, with more capital, staffing and programing built into the curriculum to support these initiatives; not all colleges could compete. The ACE article we read this week, as well as many of the other articles and case studies we have looked at throughout the semester, support the practice of a more “comprehensive internationalization”, where campuses can achieve a more overall international campus, involving support and buy-in from the entire campus community. The ACE survey project to map internationalization at US campuses was extremely helpful to put in perspective where the United States currently lies and how far we’ve come over the last decade in the internationalization initiative happening globally. Despite the economic struggles are country has recently faced, almost half of institutions surveyed stated their funding for internationalization has increased and 27 percent said their funding has remained steady since 2008. Between 2006’s survey and the 2011 survey – scholarships and funding for student mobility seems more prominent among institutions. Across all types of institutions, doctoral, masters, baccalaureate, associates and special focus, scholarships for education abroad increased from between 4% – 13% between 2006 and 2011. All schools increased their efforts, with special focus institutions making the biggest jump, going from 0% in 2006 to 26% in 2011. However, despite the increase in funding, it was disappointing to see that 42% of higher education institutions do not offer any form of study abroad activity. Due to some of the conversations we have had in class, what is not surprising was the increased efforts and scholarship opportunities for international students coming to the US to study. Almost 40%, of all types of institutions, had some form of international recruitment plan. This is not surprising as the high tuition price international students pay to study in the United States. Support services for international students have increased, however have a long way to go and I believe as these service opportunities and programming for international students increases, so will international applicants. Orientation seems to be the main service offered; however, international students need support far beyond their first week at the institution. The attached article shows how colleges are even increasing international student fees in order to provide better services and programming options specifically for international students.
4 thoughts on “Mapping Internationalization: Student Mobility”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi! Nice post. I was also pleasantly surprised to see that funding for internationalization increased (or remained steady) during the Great Recession. Because most HEIs faced general budget cuts, it definitely shows that internationalization is a huge priority for them to not extend those cuts to various internationalization initiatives.
To your point about the stat that 42% of higher education institutions do not offer any form of study abroad activity…I wasn’t at all surprised to read that, given that “thirty-eight percent of those enrolled in higher education are over the age of 25 and 25 percent are over the age of 30. The share of all students who are over age 25 is projected to increase another twenty-three percent by 2019.” (source: http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2012/03/opinion/steven-bell/nontraditional-students-are-the-new-majority-from-the-bell-tower/#_).
Many of these adult learners work full time or have families, which would make it nearly impossible for them to study abroad. That is why it’s important that the other areas of internationalization — research partnerships, curricular, etc — are also seen as important. For many HEIs that serve a large percentage of adult learners, increasing the resources to internationalization at home would have a much more lasting impact than trying to push students to go abroad.
Hi Christy,
Thanks for your thoughtful reply! I really loved the point that you make about the direction internationalization is heading. I, too, was pleasantly surprised to see that everything regarding this movement has been on a steady incline since around 2008, especially considering the current political turmoil overseas. Something I would be curious to further discuss is it the class thinks it is more beneficial to incorporate internationalization at home, or studying abroad? Although I have never studied abroad, I would assume that both efforts truly have positives and negatives depending on what the student is looking to take from their participation.
Best,
Melissa Parsowith
Your post mentions one of the statistics found in the surveys that 42% of higher education institutions do not offer any form of study abroad activity. I also found this odd, because as we have discussed in class the number tool for the internationalization of higher education is student mobility; studying abroad is the number one way in which mobility can be achieved. I would have like to see what type of institutions were included in that 42%. Associate programs are not known for their study aboard opportunities but I know that they do exist. I work for KBCC and every semester the Honors department takes a select group of students to the Salzburg Global Seminar in Austria. I think community colleges can find ways to implement study abroad opportunities it may not be an option for all students but it will still introduce those selected to new experiences.
I too was surprised and a little happy that education was thriving despite the recession. Its also pleasing that the focus of internationalization increased so much within 5 years from 2006 to 2011 as you pointed out. You go on to speak about the 42% of HEI that do not offer study aboard or related activities, even with the increase its not surprising to me because as I’ve stated numerous times, that America as behaved or believe it was the optimal level of greatness and everyone strives to be like us, so why would/should we try to be inclusive?
Another point is that I’ve been having more conversations about internationalization with my personal circle, and the opinions are very interesting, seeing as even though the resources are there, people not in this profession don’t know more about it than speculation.