Posted on by Zeline Santana · 2 Comments

W3- U.S and Internationalization in the Middle East

This week’s reading explained the definition of cross-border education and internationalization at home. Cross-border education referenced to the movement of people, programs and research development across borders and how this process aids internationalization through the use of online course work and hybrids-internationally (p.38). The reading explained that cross border education can foster partnerships in the internationalization process and create educational hubs where a “planned effort” and strategic internationalization initiative of engagement in internationalization can be found (p.38). This section also engaged the reader by explaining how cross-border education is meant to encourage the implementation of study abroad programs and regulate its activities. What I found most interesting in this section was United States hopes of starting cross-border education in the Middle East. We can dispute that this won’t be a great idea, however, I have faith that the majority of the Middle Eastern population and those part of the higher education system wish to have peace in their country.

In Jordan, this is the case. Jordan’s universities are in need of joint programs with overseas countries. Personally, I believe the implementation of programs and partnership (with the U.S) may not have an effect on radicalistic activities. Currently, there are 14 European countries who participate in providing partnerships and cross border education in Jordan. Jordan, however, is reluctant to give accreditation for other systems to operate in their country which can be caused by religious tensions and hopes to not increase terror. I believe there are ways that partnership can be created with U.S and Middle Eastern estates. This can be done by assessing policy effectiveness and ensuring the possible outcomes of establishing partnerships with Middle Eastern countries. First U.S must establish what their goals are and make sure those also align with their partners. In addition, the courses and curriculum offered must also align. What I do argue is that there is no motivation in the U.S- politically to make the above happen. This is caused by several differences that have stopped and/or discontinued and challenged their interest.

Lastly, the reading explained that the purpose of internationalization at home is to integrate culture in their curriculum at home. In the reading the policies examples explained that the implementation of linguistics and foreign languages in the U.S were part of internationalization. Even though this is part of internationalization in education (K-12 and higher education) we can argue that it is more so for students to become “global citizens” in their own country rather than expanding their horizons in other countries. The purpose of internationalization at home in the U.S (in my opinion) is for students to understand the U.S diversity and be marketable in the U.S workforce.

Jordan: http://www.mei.edu/content/internationalization-higher-education-jordan
Middle East and U.S challenges: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/08/going-the-extra-mile-for-a-strategic-us-india-relationship

Posted on by Zeline Santana

W2- Readings

This week’s reading was more structured and provided a better understanding of the internationalization process in higher education systems. The reading justified various reasons why internationalization is important. Four categories explained in the reading are the demands in academia, the economy, government policies, and the society. The reading also explained how internationalization in higher education can address global issues like employment and cultural awareness. Similar to last week’s readings the author acknowledges that “motivations vary substantially by country and context” (p.9). It is also explained that governmental demands shift over time. The reading was clear that internationalization is a demand in higher education because it is seen through the creation of study abroad programs which allows international exposure. Due to this exposure, internationalization targets development, advancement, and research for scholars and international relations.

The internationalization process can be influenced regionally and nationally. There are also sub-agencies and quasi- governmental agencies that influence the importance of internationalization. Regionally and nationally European countries seem to place a higher importance to internationalization because of their high interest in higher education. Internationalization in the U.S, however, is enforced by sub-activities providing mobility. The reading explained that the U.S. Department of State administers more than 50 programs to fund incoming- outbound mobility. Incoming mobility is short-term and outbound mobility for U.S citizens seems to provide more long-term goals depending on the work. I concluded that U.S citizen benefit the most of international education in terms of work force development because students can bring international relations back to the states. Could it be that international education in the U.S is seen to benefit more U.S natives (on a work-place stand point)? And do governmental officials see international education as a personal achievement where mobility is provided, but no promises are made for long-term goals?

In the U.S, institutions and sub-agencies enforce internationalization by working around current immigration laws. Sub-agencies can change the level of importance U.S governmental officials place on internationalization if institutions commit to working with sub-agencies recruiting more international students. This, however, can be very difficult due to the low graduation rates in where the U.S Department of Education has invested to improve the K-12 system and bridge the gap in completion rates based on race. Altbach stated in his article “Internationalize American Higher Education? Not Exactly” that “The lack of a national approach to international education may increasingly place the United States in an isolated position”, however, do governmental officials care about falling behind in international education (p. 17)?

Posted on by Zeline Santana · 2 Comments

W1- Introduction & Readings

Hi All!

My name is Zeline Santana and this is my final semester in the Higher Education Administration program. My experience in higher education falls under the Enrollment Management division and Financial Aid. My professional interest at the moment is to excel within my division. I am not very familiar with the history of international higher education, but as a student that was exposed to study aboard opportunities during my undergraduate degree I understand the important of Internationalization.

This weeks reading touched many concerns I had after the Paris 2015 attacks and IHE. Altbach and Wit’s reading “Internalization and Global Tensions” validated my concerns that political forces and peace building wars affect international higher education globally. The reading helped in understanding the importance in how past wars and future global tension mold international education on a global scale.

Overall, in the higher education program we have also learned that U.S faculty members have pushed back on Internationalization and distant learning because of its quality. There are multiple reasons why faculty members may or may not agree with Internationalization, but it is evident that quality is their main concern. Green concluded that the study performed by IAU found the level of importance U.S gives Internationalization is low. I believe this is because the United States feels they are the best in the world, however, I also believe the under development of Internationalization in the United States is caused by political forces that stress graduation rates, low completion rates for different ethnic backgrounds, retention rates, and many other factors that place pressure on the U.S higher ed system. This can also be the reason why Internationalization in the U.S has received low importance due to other factors affecting the system even though they may place a small level of importance in strategic planning.

What caught my attention the most in the Oxford article “International Trends in Higher Education” was the implementation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). I agree that MOOCs do provide a wide access to learning on a global scale, but I do not feel it enforces Internationalization. A 2013 study on MOOCs found that students do not complete the MOOCs programs. I believe this is due to low quality. Free courses at times in my personal opinion can lead students to think that the quality of a course is low or if difficult an easy way out. It will be interesting to see if anyone agrees with me, but I do feel that a leading cause of MOOCs low enrollment is that there is no ramification for students who do not complete the courses. In hopes to find more research that validates my thoughts I found that Welsh and Dragusin article “The New Generation of Massive Open Online Course (MOOCS) and Entrepreneurship Education” agrees that obstacles that face MOOCs are weaknesses in providing assistance to different learning styles, low revenue production, and quality of student learning (Welsh and Dragusin, 2013). To conclude, I feel these obstacles are essential for any program that wishes to have a great level of completion and impact on a global scale.

Outside References:

Welsh, D. H., & Dragusin, M. (2013). The New Generation of Massive Open Online
Course (MOOCS) and Entrepreneurship Education. Small Business Institute, 9(1), 51-65.