Policies and programs that are mentioned in this reading show much more success in internationalization of higher education than I thought. The five broad categories encompass many of the main points that should be touched upon but I also felt that security was a missing factor. The reading does state that there are policies that may have not been mentioned as the main idea was not higher education but a different matter and this could be covered in those policies, but think it would of been worthwhile to include that in this reading. One of the main issues most parents have with study abroad is safety, which could then lead to a bias in which countries work together. I can relate much to the questions posed in the beginning of the reading, such as “does scope matter?” and “how do we deal with failure?” because those were my main concerns in reading this. Also, what is considered to be failure? Is failure that some universities are unable to collaborate, or that one country/institution is seen with more “prestige” than others. The examples or organizations and policies from different countries shows an example of bias that hopefully is broken in the years to come with internationalization of higher education. The Nordic Council influences a group of students from several bordering countries meaning students will be more inclined to study in one of these countries opposed to one that scholarships and tuition is not covered. Will this also pose a problem for the countries who cover tuition for students through taxes and countries who do not, how will the exchange of tuition take place? If students have to pay out of pocket for tuition when normally they do not, I do not believe they will be interested in attending that institution. Internationalization at home covered a concern for me of the institutions and students who may be unable to participate in this by studying abroad or hosting students. It is brilliant to think about changing curriculum to allow students who stay at home to have international exposure and not just in the courses that normally are responsible for this like language but courses like science and psychology. Technology is now allowing for this possibility of students to be apart of this from home which is important to see this effort succeed. Even though the idea is to include everyone, the students who physically go to a different institution in a different country will have a much different experience than the student who stayed home.

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.