For my make up blog post for week 4, I would like to share an article that I read in Inside Higher Ed. The readings from week 13 were both interesting reads but I connected more to IHE- Higher Educations Future because it detailed different perspectives and areas of international higher education and what the future of higher education will look like based on current trends. This got me interested in learning whether or not the make-up of students studying abroad, specifically, students in NY State, will change to include more students of color.

I, Too, Am Study Abroad is a tagline that is being used by the international education office at the State University of New York at Oswego. Their office in alignment with President Obama’s 1000 Strong Initiative and the IIE Generation Study Abroad that we learned about in class, seek to broaden international studies to students that typically would not study abroad. Note: the two initiatives mentioned above have more of a broad scope but can be applied to underrepresented groups as well.

(Prior to reading this article I had never hear about the 1000 strong initiative. It was created to strengthen US-China relations through Mandarin language. We acknowledged as a class the power of language and how crucial it is to cultural emersion when studying abroad. The initiative since 2009 has exceeded its goal however, we cannot say that relations between China and the US have improved. Again and I’ve said this in previous articles, relationship building on behalf of a country is a heavy burden to place on students traveling abroad.)

An Oswego student, Tiana Morris was highlighted in the article because after her experience studying abroad in London, she, an African American, co-organized a panel on race and gender and study abroad after returning to campus. Her panel featured students that participated in study abroad returning to discuss their experiences in areas such as race, gender identity and financing.

Nationally there is a push to increase and diversify the number of American students going abroad. The numbers profiled by the IIE show that study abroad is slowly but steadily growing more racially diverse. This got me thinking about starting the marketing for international education in high school because although college marketing can work, students such as Tiana did not take advantage of study abroad until her senior year. The push to getting students of color to see themselves as international travelers should start earlier. Overall, the common thread in the articles I read is that White students make up the highest percentages of students studying abroad and this is a disproportionate percentage that is being challenged by initiatives and new strategies to reach more diverse populations. It looks as though positive strides are being made, hopefully the data will consistently show the same.

Similarly, working in international education has never crossed my mind prior to joining this class. I went to a few panels on careers in higher education and never was there ever a panelist that represented international education. Now it seems as though positions in this area are popping up consistently. There are two available on CUNY campus right now! Panels such as the one we had were industry professions came in to address our class and the one this week, that I eagerly anticipate are necessary.

The IHE -Higher Education’s Future was a very interesting read because it offered different perspectives on what the future of higher education will look like via short articles from well respected thought leaders in international education. The article that stuck out to me most was, “The Challenge of Effective Teaching” by Andres Bernasconi (p. 6). In this piece he explains how higher education has reinvented itself in modern times to value research over effective teaching. He says that research has “taken precedence over education as the defining feature of excellence and distinction” in the field of higher education.

Some colleges and universities that have been germane to professional and technical education have begun to embrace research missions even if that means they do not do it well. The lure of funding (sciences), institutional prestige, and global ranking can surprisingly change the direction and academic identity of a higher education institution. Faculty are generally only publically acknowledged or renowned for their research accomplishments therefore their commitment to the function of teaching can become secondary. For an institution where research trumps all else, tenure endeavors will focus beyond the classroom.

Bernasconi argues that research will always be an overwhelming focus for institutions that focus on research but what about institutions that are not research based? He foresees a time where the same type of research scrutiny will fall upon faculty and colleges/universities to prove that they are indeed expanding the minds of students and recognition will be bestowed accordingly. I yearn for that time!

Another short article that I appreciated came from Philip Altbach (p. 4) he spoke to the overwhelming enrollment numbers that are expected by year 2020 and questioned how higher education can remain a leader in research while creating greater access to quality tertiary education for this expected influx of students.

Higher education massification in the U.S. has a detailed history after WWII (that I will not get into) through present, yet it is still driven by the pursuit of upward social and economic mobility and overall national economic growth globally and in the U.S. A research article that I read, outlined some of the specific challenges of massification, one being large class sizes where student learning and quality education are negatively affected. I currently work at a small college that has a very comprehensive support system for students in their first year specifically. My fear is that once we scale, that support will no longer be as targeted, as intentional nor as efficient. A key challenge for us and for institutions overall is to ensure that adequacy in research and in student support and learning are equally as supported and drive the institutional mission.

Reference:

http://www.academia.edu/6182729/Massification_in_Higher_Education_Large_Classes_and_Student_Learning

What I found most interesting in reading the AU Global Survey on internationalization of higher education, was the section on page 10 that detailed the aggregate and regional results from the survey question which asked what countries considered risks of internationalization to institutions and society.

As a whole, respondents perceived that the most significant risk of internationalization for institutions was that international experiences would only be available to students that have the financial means to support international education. A whopping 31% of respondents cited this as a major risk. I dug up a couple articles that speak to the actual cost of study abroad and the perceptions amongst many students that believe spending a semester in another country is only for rich people. There are a number of costs associated with studying abroad however the trend towards diversifying the student body populations that study abroad and creating interest in non-traditional study abroad locations is occurring.

What does it really cost to study abroad? College itself is expensive, and after factoring in plane tickets, visas, room and board, meals, new city transportation the upfront cost may seem hard for a student who doesn’t have monetary support from their families. For the 2012-2013 academic year, the average cost of a semester abroad for a student based in the US was $17,785, according to the Institute of International Education. From what I’ve read it seems that this price tag although very expensive, is not necessarily in addition to what you are already paying for college and it could actually turn out to be the same cost that you would spend ordinarily for college, depending on individual college costs.

Regionally, respondents in Africa and the Middle East cited brain drain as the second most important risk for institutions. I had not heard the term brain drain prior to reading the survey but was familiar with the concept under a different name, human capital flight. I thought it was quite interesting that these two countries regarded brain drain as such a huge risk. According to a World Bank Report, there is a growing move of North African migrant to the Middle East and Europe and of these migrants, 2.9 million people where educated and now live in more developed countries.

It is a frightening situation to lose your doctors, engineers, professors and other skilled professionals to other countries; this can cripple a country. The factors for brain drain are wide-ranging and complex and also depend upon the African country itself. One may be forced to leave a country because of war, political, instability, attraction to better pay, or even an appreciation for a different/western way of life. This movement for African countries is most prevalent in the medical field, and the recent Ebola outbreaks highlighted the doctor shortages. “In 1973, there were 7.76 doctors per 100,000 people in Liberia. This dropped to 1.37 doctors in 2008. In East Africa, Uganda has less than 5,000 doctors and 30,000 nurses for a population topping 35 million people, according to World Health Organization data. Societal risks of internationalization differ region to region but resources as seen in the majority of our readings is always a top concern.

References:

https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/16810/WPS6739.pdf?sequence=1

http://qz.com/599140/how-severe-is-africas-brain-drain/

http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.A1444

The article Governance Reforms and University Autonomy in Asia, was very interesting! It detailed 5 case studies of countries that have attempted differing forms of increased autonomy. It was fascinating to see how politics played a role in all for the most part and how each government/country handled the task. My takeaways were that institutions with strong leaders benefited more from autonomy than those with less strong leaders. I guess this makes sense as assuming more power can be overwhelming to a less strong leader and in some cases weak leader.

For example, a college that I worked for had the career services department in the SDEM (enrollment management) division. After a presidential change and lobbying from the director at the time. The career services department was moved to academic affairs. I think the director thought he/she was making a strategic decision to have more autonomy when making departmental changes. In this new classification the office reported to a VP who was busy with other important matters and did not prioritize career services’ needs. The director, who unfortunately was weak, had to lobby for everything he/she needed and failed to do so in a convincing matter. He/she ended up losing almost half the department budget in one year and two full time staff members. An increase in autonomy should be piloted and eased into.

The reading noted that Japan had a strong tradition of collegial decision-making at the university level, where academics assumed a high level of authority within the higher education system. This would require less of a drastic change especially under a strong leader. I also thought it was interesting that it was recommended that the introduction of autonomy should be organized as a process. It was also good to see that some universities established internal quality assurance structures to track whether or not autonomy has led to improvements in the quality of services provided by universities.

In Global Trends in University and Governance, it took a global look at autonomy practices through institutional governance as such detailed in the first reading. What struck me most was probably the most basic question, “who manages the system overall? (p.14)”. We have already learned this but the way that Fielden described it drove it home for me. There are three types of reforms, the delegation of powers by central government, delegation to a specialized buffer body (UK), and delegation direct to institutions itself.  And then there are the central agencies! The logic behind hiring agencies that have a work staff of specialists that come from all sectors. I thought this was smart and a way to devolve influence.

The Global Strategy & Internationalization plan for Ohio University and the Global Education Strategic Plan were both interesting reads, especially since last class we explored the College Global Strategic Plan for Baruch/CUNY. Interestingly, our class basically agreed that it was unclear whether or not Baruch’s strategic plan was a draft and we did not see the vision for the future of global education at Baruch because there were no benchmarks or calculable goals and outcomes.

I enjoyed reading about Middlesex Community College and its detailed global education mission and focus in 4 key areas: 1) Global Curriculum; 2) Global Engagement; 3) Study Abroad, Service, and Global Internships; and 4) Global Recruitment and International Students. In particular, I liked the piece on global internships where students will be placed in international businesses where they can gain internships and cooperative experiences overseas that will build up their global competencies and employability profiles so they can compete in the 21^st century.

The Middlesex Community College’s Global Education Strategic Plan aligns with the overall mission and vision of the college. Being that Middlesex Community College is one of the largest community colleges in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I thought that like many large schools with several stakeholders and large professor pool (that all come with varying ideas and agendas), it would be easy for the college to stray away from its Strategic Plan. However, throughout the reading the strategic plan is continuously referenced and the overarching theme is drilled in. It is apparent that an international perspective, multicultural and global awareness infusion throughout Middlesex is endeavored.

These two higher education institutions and plans for globalization have stark differences to the Baruch global strategic plan. For one, even though Ohio Universities global strategy program is still in draft stage, it has more substance, depth and details next steps which includes, making the document public, presenting it to the student and faculty Senate as well as student groups, departments, campuses and other by request; open forums and retreats. By using various forms of communication and attempting to bring partners on board, it seems they are on track to get everyone to embrace their global strategy and mission. Middlesex uses the SWOT analysis which shows they are analyzing for effectiveness as they improve practices – good sign!

The Conroy reading uncovers the political differences in China, India and Russia that affect higher education which differ so greatly that even though these higher education institutions on the surface share many of the same structures, there are major differences. China and Russia have more leeway and control in making institutional reform whereas India does not. The idea that autonomy can be predicted by level of state or local governance is very interesting.