How to ensure the quality of a Higher Education Institution and why it is so important?
The broad answer is a “skilled workforce” coming from the university. The quality of one’s life is correlated in many ways by the quality of education that one has. Today, many more adults are going back to school for many different reasons, but the common denominator for most is a more secure job with a brighter career path. Many of these students are adults who are eager to learn new skills and they demand results. Within the Higher Ed realm, adult learners are demanding the quality that the institutions are promising and thus the institutions must deliver to this new and increasing clientele who also tend to learn differently from the traditional age college student and require flexibility. Schools need to enhance the quality of its delivery of goods through accountability, improvements, transparency and innovation.
Higher Education Institutions today need to compete for visibility, funding, and partnerships to ensure that they stay competitive in the market. Institutions are a business and the product they are delivering is an education. Just like any other business, the goal is to deliver goods to whomever is buying in Higher Ed, and the students are the buyers.
What is the value of an institution and how is it measured? For Higher Ed, it is graduation rates, degree production, credit accumulation, as well as educated citizens who are successful in the job market thus fostering the reputation of the institution. When companies recruit for students on a campus, it is usually because they have hired a student from that institution previously, who has excelled in their company, helping the company to grow. The company then hires more students and it grows more, to the point where other companies are noticing. The competitors will then look to see where this pool of highly skilled workers are coming from, and recruit at that school themselves. Advertisement for the University will speak for itself by the product that is delivered.

I can say for sure that the depth of internationalization is a lot more than I imagined. From the first week of defining the term, to understanding Cross Border Internationalization compared to Internationalization at home, to National Policy and Marketization of Internationalization, Internationalization is a complex term.

This week’s understanding on partnerships and the difference between a dual degree and a joint degree, it is clear Internationalization is broad, deep, layered and has a wingspan with an infinite range of global partnerships and possibilities. With the vast vision of Internationalization, comes much to be considered outside of the direct benefit to students and schools. This week’s reading from the American Council on Higher Education, International Higher Education Partnerships: A Global Review of Standards and Practices goes through a slew of information that needs to be considered from Language, Accountability, Transparency, Assessments, Cultural Awareness and the importance of Faculty. Without the input and drive of the faculty, internationalization is only a dream. The faculty need to be active in decision making across the board, especially in academic matters. Faculty, from both countries need to have an understanding of each other’s culture, as well as an understanding of each other’s university. Without this respect and understanding, opportunities could be lost.

Because of the depth of this term and program, International Partnership Directors are a new position that is on the rise. If schools wish to compete and build their international programs, the position of an International Partnership Director is needed. Future directors of International Partnerships will need to “wear many hats” as stated in ACE’s study Mapping Internationalization on U.S. Campuses. The Director needs to be versed in “teaching, research, outreach, financial and legal matters” as well as be connected internally to their own institution’s staff to get the job done well.

The OECD states that Internationalization today is important for “student mobility, internationalization research collaboration and education as an export industry”. I have not thought of internationalization in Higher Ed as a commodity that can be exported and imported, but in reality, it is. For student mobility, the intake of foreign students is good for growth of that institution where as the export of foreign students is good for over populated countries who cannot keep up with the demand, such as China. For students, the question is “Where to go to study”? For the government the question is, “Where do we need to have a presence and who can we benefit from”, and for the universities the question is, ”How do we increase revenue, expand internationalization and at the same time, increase diversity”? It is a win-win for all when this is achieved.
Dobbins, et al refers to Higher Ed as being “marketized” and states that “universities function more effectively when operating as economic enterprises within and for regional or global markets” and defines marketization as “policies that are aimed at strengthening student choice and liberalizing markets in order to increase quality and variety of services offered”. If universities are going to be marketized by government policies, how do we ensure quality and which government decides the policy? Is it the home country or the visiting country? And who are the staff? Are they imported and exported as well? Will exported staff achieve the goal of internationalizing our students? Will local staff be able to understand the way the U.S. higher Ed system works?
Cultural differences is one the benefits of internationalization to achieve global awareness. Global awareness is very important today for employers and for students. The lack of global awareness can cause unnecessary situations. I work in a career center with many international students at the graduate level. We were having the discussion of reneging on a job offer and how your reputation is at stake when you do so. The Chinese student who reneged did not understand this because in China if you renege, you pay a fine and move on.

Marketization also seems to follow the trends of today and has changed Higher Ed in many ways. It is suggested in the readings that we follow trends but incorporate them into an already rich historic foundation to make Higher Ed even better today. One way this can be achieved is by being able to reach more students in areas that would not have Higher Ed if it wasn’t for internationalization and Marketization of importing and exporting this rich commodity called education.

Will the United States ever have a national policy on Internationalization? It appears the benefits of such a policy would benefit citizens and employers in the United States to a great extent where all would benefit from becoming more globally aware. Employers want more globally educated people and students seem to want to be more global, but many students lack the finances to make that dream a reality. If there is a need in our economy, and a want in our students, then why is more not being done to bring this dimension of education to a reality? The reading this week clearly states that the desire to get internationalization off the ground in a more profound way is important for many and would benefit many. So what are the road blocks and how do we overcome them? Will we ever be able to overcome them? The answer does not seem to be an easy one. Many initiatives need funding and that in itself is as complicated as the higher education system in the United States is. This is not a negative remark, but rather a compliment to the US Higher Ed system, because it shows that it is not controlled by the government. With that said, initiatives still need funding in order to be successful. A simple solution would appear to be to have a collaboration between government and institutions as well as businesses to produce this funding in a way that all would benefit, which usually comes in the forms of tax cuts. If the government wants the businesses to pay, tax cuts may work, but if the businesses want the institutions to pay, tax cuts may not work. And if the institutions want the government to pay, then taxes will go up for someone.
Another side to the U.S.” in bound” internationalization is the issue with visa’s and job placements for international students studying here. If the idea of internationalization is to find the best of the best worldwide and educate them here, it would make sense that we would want to employ them here or somewhere within American companies. But it seems that many students are unable to stay in the U.S. and that the competition and price for American companies to try and sponsor our scholars is a difficult one. So where is the benefit of internationalization within our own borders if it is not benefiting our own economy? It is coming clear to me, why the U.S. does not have internationalization as a priority.

Cross-border education is a phenomenon in today’s world when one thinks of the many different ways it can be achieved. The definition given by ACE “the movement of people, programmes, providers, curricula, projects, research, and services across national or regional jurisdictional borders” is achieved by both physically being in another country and virtually being in another country. Reports have shown the significant benefits of studying abroad when it comes to being globalized as an individual, but reports have also shown that it is mostly white wealthy individuals who benefit from studying abroad.
Studying abroad ‘virtually’ could reach a larger number of students, thus globalizing a larger number of students, thus increasing the employee pool of globally educated students that American companies are looking for. It has been said that  virtually studying abroad, one will miss out on the true global experience of being embedded in a cultural different from ours. How the hubs in the U.S. will create this global experience is yet to be known. Berkeley Global Campus at Richmond Bay in California is initiating a global campus 10 miles from their main campus. Berkley recognizes that it is a “hefty undertaking… that would take years—possibly decades—and hundreds of millions of dollars to fulfill the university’s vision”
The Ace reports that the one of the issues with international hubs around the globe are jurisdictional boundaries when it comes to policy frameworks and regulations and the lack of academic freedom in another country. International hubs in America could “preserve academic freedom, human rights, political activism, and intellectual property” by being a global campus here in the U.S.
Other benefits of local international hubs on U.S. soil is an alternative to the fear parents have of sending their children abroad because of terrorism. If this trend continues, the partnerships we have now within other countries could diminish. A report’s by EUA’s Senior Adviser Andrée Sursock, warns: “The impressive strides made in international higher education cooperation could be harmed by widespread global conflicts, including those based on religious fundamentalism and resurgent nationalism.”
There are cons and pros to every situation. Cross border education ‘virtually’ is an example of thinking outside the box for alternative ways of reaching more students.