This week’s reading was great at addressing the weaknesses within our current system of internationalization. Each nation has developed their own methods for internationalization and their goal seems to be a competitive edge on accumulating more international students. I believe the concept presented by this article to develop a more global approach would be beneficial. Instead of each country utilizing a plethora of programs that differ at the institution, state, and regional level, there should be shared goals and values. I respect the article for mentioning creating national and international policies and practices should make a commitment to quality, equity and accountability. I learned in the Student Services courses that institutions should work towards a common goal, with a holistic approach of servicing the education needs of students to produce a higher rate of success. Replicating that on a global level would work.
Last week we discovered that the conception of internationalization was a result of war and aimed to ensure peace and understanding. However, when each country and nation competes for international students, the primary focus seems to revolve around the quantity of students, regardless or not if they can financially support the increase of students. Converting to a global initiative for internationalization would enable higher education institutions to assess their programs on outcomes and impact instead of output.
I guess the main question should be, what do we want students to take away from study abroad that can be measured after graduation? Do we want to know if they are choosing to stay in the foreign country of choice? Are we more interested in learning what fields of they end up working in five to ten years post-graduation and how it can be aligned to being culturally aware? Are we interested in their accomplishments outside of their current careers, such as potential to create non-profit organizations that strive to continue building relationships with other nations?
Ultimately, the key phrase is building relationships. In higher education, typically a strong support system for students, partnerships amongst departments and faculty, and working within an institution with a mission associated to your own, can breed a better learning environment for college students. Instead of each country making their own programs and changing them to entice more students, maybe the focus should be cultivating research committees to determine select programs that enable international students to grow more as individuals. In doing so, we could follow students on a year to year basis and see where they flourish, compared students that do not choose to study abroad.
Great blog!
It’s like you knew what would be discussed in Monday’s class! I agree the main question should be, what are students taking away from their study abroad experiences? How does this relate to successes after graduation and how do students articulate their experiences in a way that enhances their marketability. U.S. corporations are looking to position themselves for international competition and the demand for cross-cultural competent employees is on the rise. I read a report that suggested that graduates of U.S. business schools in particular, lack cross-cultural competencies and therefore employers are recruiting elsewhere (https://hbr.org/2005/05/how-business-schools-lost-their-way). I think that colleges should focus on re-connecting with alumni that have studied abroad and invite them back on campus to discuss their take-aways with students that aspire/or are curious about study abroad. I also think that students that plan to study abroad should have mandatory sessions with college advisors to help them begin to map out their experiences. Do they understand what cultural competencies are? – How do they seek it out? How are they implemented in organizations? Advisors should also assist them post-study abroad in translating their experiences on a resume, in an elevator speech, on interviews, etc.