Posted on by c.graziano · 5 Comments

W6 – International Partnerships

The ACE article International Higher Education Partnerships: A Global Review of Standards and Practices brings to our attention common themes and key concepts which are required in order to have successful international programs and partnerships. The article points out how active engagement with the world has become an essential part of a students higher education in order to prepare students to live and work in this interconnected global world. Now that this concept of international education is widely accepted, the issues that we struggle with is HOW do provide this type of education. Based off various survey results, half of Unite States institutions have at least one partnership with institutions abroad and even higher percentages have joint degree programs or dual degree programs with partners abroad. However, with these partnerships, comes an array of challenges.  The article examines the themes the Blue Ribbon Panel identified which fall under two categories: Administration and Management and Cultural and Contextual issues.  The themes include Transparency and Accountability, Faculty and Staff Engagement, Quality Assurance, Strategic Planning and the Role of Institutional Leadership, Cultural Awareness, Access and Equity, Institutional and Human Capacity building, and Ethical Dilemmas and “Negotiated Space”.  I chose to focus my post on the Cultural and Contextual issues these partnerships face.

With any type of international program, whether domestic or abroad, awareness and sensitivity to cultural differences is essential to success. ACE identifies how communication between stakeholders on both ends of the partnership is essential to identifying the possible cultural differences that may cause problems or tensions and explore possible solutions before the start of the partnership.  I had never really thought of this before reading this section of the article and while it makes perfect sense, I had never thought about the important role that stakeholders can play in exploring cultural differences and establishing best practices for cultural acceptance in their program.  I always looked as stakeholders on each end as more of a business transaction, where each explores what this partnership can do for them and working out the logistics of how to make it happen.  It seems that the training of faculty and staff on cultural sensitivity varies greatly from campus to campus and while I know we have discussed that there is no “one size fits all” model for internationalization, I am curious if there could be an educational training model that all schools who wish to internationalize require for faculty and staff.  We have programs like Safe Zone for faculty and staff to become more aware of the issues that face LGBTQ students and how they can better serve this population – lets develop a standardized program that addresses cultural awareness.  I did some research and it seems like there are many resources available for teachers to tap into in order to become a culturally sensitive educator; however, I did not come across one standard or specific program for higher education faculty and staff.  One article from the National Education Association puts it perfectly: “Understanding our culture is important so that we understand how we interact with individuals from cultures that are different from ours.  This understanding helps us see our students and their families more clearly, and shape policies and practice in ways that will help our students to succeed.”  Not only does understanding our own culture help us relate to people from different cultures, it is also important to understand different educational practices in different areas of the world. Teaching style, grading techniques, and evaluation processes are all very different depending on the countries the partnerships are between.  Faculty play an essential role in this process and the ACE article points out an example from a dual degree partnership between Appalachian State University and Universi-dad de las Americas in Mexico.  The two schools sent faculty back and forth to discuss course content, curriculum and what the program would actually look like at each campus.  The faculty were able to collaborate to develop “cultural norms” for the program, which took into account their cultural differences, creating a program that would be accessible for all students involved.  These interactions created a solid foundation for their program and opened the lines of communication for any problems or issues that may arise.

Posted on by c.graziano

W4: U.S. Student Mobility

I chose to focus on the section in the reading pertaining to student mobility as I take a personal initiative in these programs and hope to work in a study abroad or for a student exchange program after completing my masters. I was excited to see the scholarship programs available in the US to international students choosing to study in the United States and particularly happy about the graduate student scholarships, as I wonder if a higher percentage of these students wish to stay and work in the US after receiving their graduate degree. However, I do know only a small percentage of international students receive scholarships and due to the high sticker price international students must pay and their ineligibility to apply for financial aid, studying in the US seems out of reach for many international students.

While reading this document, its clear that the process of internationalization in the US is very segmented, with the government supporting some initiatives, each college and university having very different policies and programs, and influence from non-governmental agencies. Much of the scholarship initiatives for inbound students are only funded by the State Department; however, the scholarship programs for outbound students are much more robust, with funding from the State Department, the National Security Education Program, and the Paul Simon Study Abroad Act which provides $80 million per year for study abroad to individuals and institutions.  In addition to these governmental funding of scholarships, I did some research on private and non-profit organizations that offer funding for students wanting to study abroad.  NAFSA provides a list of search engines to use and the Institute of International Education (IIE) provides and entire search engine website specifically for IIEPassport Study Abroad Funding.  According to the Institute of International Education, a total of 304,467 students studied abroad for academic credit in the 2013-2014 academic year.  According to the National Center for Education Statistics, there were 17.5 million undergraduate students at postsecondary degree granting institutions in the United States in the Fall of 2013.  If these numbers are accurate, that equates to approximately 2% of the entire undergraduate population who is actually “mobile” and successfully studying overseas.  President Obama’s 100,000 Strong initiatives: one from 2009 which aimed to have a national effort to increase the number of students studying in China and another in 2011 which had the goal of doubling student mobility (both inbound and outbound) between the US and Latin America and the Caribbean.  The former program was originally housed by the State Department but now is an independent foundation.  The second program is a collaboration between the State Department and NAFSA- Association of International Educators and Partners of the Americas.   I had not previously heard of these initiatives, so I continued to investigate and it looks like President Obama’s goal was reached in 2014, when 100,000 US students studied in China that year.  In addition, there was a 5% increase in Americans studying in China last year and a 23% increase in Chines students studying in the US last year.  I think these are amazing statistics and proof that a program like this, coming from the President, has the power to reach big goals in only a few short years.  While the document talks about whether an overarching national policy would be truly effective in advancing internationalization in the US, I think this example proves that it may help more than we think.  I think to successfully increase the overall percentage of mobile students,  collaboration from the government, non-profit organizations and the colleges themselves is essential.

Posted on by c.graziano

CNN Article: Americans are moving to Europe for free college degrees

Hi All,

I read this article a few days ago on CNN and thought I would share with everyone since it is sort of relevant to the course. It feels like in almost all of my higher ed courses we have discussed the high costs of tuition and fees in the US and how so many of our students are graduating with debts they are unable to pay back. Here is an example of a few American students who decided to save money by getting their degree abroad. I wonder if this trend will get bigger in coming years? And if it does, is Europe able to sustain their system of offering practically free degrees to non-native students?

http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/23/pf/college/free-college-europe/

Christie

Posted on by c.graziano · 7 Comments

W3 – Internationalization at Home

I found the portion of internationalization at home (IaH) particularly interesting. European Education in the World singled this out as one of the three key institutional priorities of higher education in Europe and I think it should also be a priority of higher education in the United States. For me, I believe this task starts with addressing the “curricular issues” – colleges and universities must work with faculty to infuse global content and viewpoints into their everyday curriculum, no matter which academic subject they teach. In order for this to happen, specific training programs for faculty need to be implemented as well, so they can be prepared to educate our students from a global perspective. While the example in the United States provided in the article, addresses the Department of Educations initiative to set up foreign language centers throughout the US, there is way more we can be doing to internationalize our college campuses in particular. As mentioned in this 2013 Institute of International Education http://www.iie.org/Blog/2013/April/What-Is-The-Next-Big-Thing-in-International-Education, one program IIE funded from 2011-2015 was through a partnership with Hilton HHonors called the Teacher Treks Program, where they sent primary and secondary level teachers abroad for 2-3 weeks to experience the culture and the subject they teach first hand. These teachers than come back with a global perspective they can then instill in their young students. I think a program like this can be adapted to fit the higher education realm. In addition, as partnerships between foreign universities grow, professors teaching abroad and increases in mobility of both students and faculty through partnerships and educational exchange programs would ideally grow as well. I enjoyed reading about Germany’s internationalization policies, specifically where they outline that “staff at all levels speak ‘at least’ English, participate in intercultural training courses, and become acquainted with the practices of higher education institutions around the world.” (p.44).

With support from the government agencies, like the European Commission’s Europe 2020 strategy, it seems education has taken a priority in their strategy. Canada, Finland, Malaysia and the United Kingdom have launched International Education Strategies as well. Support like this, is hopefully going to push these policies and programs forward at a faster rate and hopefully interest will not wane, due to these publicly supported initiatives.

Posted on by c.graziano · 2 Comments

W2 – ACE Internationalization Higher Education Worldwide

When reading over this article, I was intrigued by the section on student mobility.  I had personally never heard of the definitions described, differentiating “degree mobility” and “credit mobility” – while they differ greatly, I had never given much thought to these concepts.  This topic was particularly interesting to me because, just a few weeks ago, I attended and assisted with the International Student Orientation program at John Jay College and learned an array of information about J-1 and F-1 visas, work regulations for international students while in school and post graduation, and how difficult the application process to study in the US can be.   Students are able to work for up to 12 months post graduation through Optional Practical Training, but only in their field of study, which is very restricting.  The US ranks among the worst countries for international students to find work post graduation, especially after the recession http://www.studyabroad.careers360.com/best-and-worst-countries-work-after-study-opportunities.  Australia has seen a resurgence in Indian students applying to their schools because of changes to visa regulations that would allow students who graduate from an australian university to apply for a visa of up to 4 years.  I personally lived and worked in Australia on a work-holiday visa and felt the opportunities to find work as a foreigner were plentiful and they welcomed us with open arms.  I do not feel the same goes for the United States.

 

I also realized that almost 100% of the international students I encountered, planned to be at John Jay for their full term of their degrees. I feel that this differs greatly from American students who chose to study outside of the U.S., as they usually study for a finite amount of time.  The amount of incentives, admissions preferences and financial benefits of U.S. students choosing to complete their full degree makes me wonder why our students do not take more advantage of this?  We constantly hear about how tuition is too expensive and students are graduating with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of debt, yet there are countries who offer free tuition, among other incentives, why would they not take advantage?  Countries like Denmark and Germany offer international students free tuition.  In addition, some programs offer programs for bachelor degrees in 3 years and masters degrees in 1 year.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/6-reasons-american-teens-may-want-to-get-their-college-degree-abroad_us_55f839b9e4b00e2cd5e7f6be  I believe this information is not readily available to our high school students and their parents when they make these important decisions on where to go to college.  Governments should target high schools to make this information more readily available and launch campaigns to provide information on incentive programs and I think we would see an increase in US applicants seeking full degrees abroad.