Search News


Browse Archives

News

Where Multicultural Ed and Internationalization Meet

May 28, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

“Elitist, frivolous, escapist.”

“Divisive, political, provincial.”

Such are some common perceptions of college officials involved in internationalization (see the former colorful set of adjectives) and multicultural education (see the latter) -- perceptions that are among the challenges to cooperation between the two fields, as outlined during an American Council on Education-led session at the 60th annual and largest-ever NAFSA: Association of International Educators Conference in Washington, which kicked off Tuesday afternoon with more than 9,200 registrants.

“It really boils down to the last point, that we’ve had limited interactions and knowledge of each other’s work,” Christa Olson, associate director of ACE’s Center for International Initiatives, said of the gap between internationalization and multicultural education at American colleges.

ACE is leading an initiative, still in its early stages, to "bridge" that gap, and explore the intersection between work on diversity and difference done through domestic and international lenses, respectively. In their presentations Tuesday, Olson and Jarred A. Butto, a program associate at ACE, described the challenges to collaboration between those involved with multicultural education and internationalization, ranging from the theoretical (divergent historical and intellectual roots of the two fields) to the practical (different offices charged with the two endeavors, and different budgets), as well as potential common ground (including a shared student learning outcome of intercultural competence).

ACE chose 26 colleges to participate in an upcoming June symposium -- each college's team including, at a minimum, the chief academic officer, chief diversity officer and chief international education officer -- to further discuss the intersection between what ACE believes are two distinct yet overlapping areas, and to develop action plans on the issue(s).

As of now, however, Olson conceded Tuesday that this intersection between internationalization and multicultural education is an emerging area of interest and that the organization does not yet have a collection of concrete examples of successful practices to share -- at least not beyond general education program requirements at two different institutions described in Tuesday’s session.

Since the mid-90s, the State University of New York at Binghamton, for instance, has had an eight-credit “Creating a Global Vision” general education requirement subdivided into two four-credit components. Each student at Binghamton must take one class tagged under the “U.S. Pluralism” category and another under “Global Interdependencies," said H. Stephen Straight, vice provost for undergraduate education and international affairs. "What we are endeavoring to convey," Straight said, "is that domestic and ethnic diversity in the U.S. is not a unique phenomenon, is not unique to the U.S., that virtually all cultures have become pluralistic." In turn, he said, domestic pluralism has global roots, in immigration and diaspora.

And for three years now, Baldwin-Wallace College, in Ohio, has required that all students take a course designed to address how different cultural perspectives – both domestically and internationally – influence “enduring questions” like “What is human nature?” explained Judy B. Krutky, associate academic dean for intercultural education. One challenge, however, Krutky said, is convincing students, very focused on their majors, of the course's worth. "Students aren't really sure they need this information," she said.

Also on Tuesday, Mexico’s former president, Vicente Fox, gave an opening plenary speech focused on Latin America’s pending rise -- with education as its catalyst -- and, more generally, accountability and the need to ensure equal access to quality education. He thanked the audience for a warm welcome that “more than compensates” for one he’d received navigating U.S. Customs upon his arrival in Washington (“Take off your boots!... Don’t you understand me -- take off your coat!”)

No doubt further conversations on U.S. border control and immigration policy will ensue – as well as conversations on any number of issues related to international student mobility and policy, study abroad, and campus internationalization initiatives -- as NAFSA’s annual conference continues throughout this week.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Where Multicultural Ed and Internationalization Meet

  • Posted by Clive Edward Neal-Sturgess on May 28, 2008 at 5:45am EDT
  • What about the rest of the world?

  • Little Boxes
  • Posted by christopher sharrock on May 28, 2008 at 9:35am EDT
  • I wish US institutions well with this endeavour. The push in the UK has historically been more focused on diversity and widening participation, with internationalisation coming up as a more recent agenda item. But the two things are linked (if distinct). They shouldn’t be kept in separate boxes, one should inform the other (even if they are competing for funds) since what they are both about is people- the students. Keeping them separate may look great on a management structure chart but if you start from a student-centred perspective it immediately looks ridiculous. However, some managers and academics do tend to like their own little empires. But having too many little boxes will weaken the organisation.

    Having a lot of home students from diverse cultural backgrounds doesn’t necessarily make your teaching and learning and research function on a multicultural level any more than having a lot of students from a wide range of international backgrounds makes you an internationalised centre of teaching, learning and research. There’s no automatic shift, that sensitivity has to be built in. Occasionally, greater exposure to a wide range of cultures and nationalities makes academics (and others) retrench more into their own culture. And as Altbach says, “The American [academic] system accepts scholars and scientists from abroad, but only if they conform to American academic and scientific norms.” So even having international staff doesn’t automatically transform the institution.

    Managers need to examine what the function of their university is- to raise cash? to continue to exist? to be a source of teaching, learning and research? Then they ought to look outside of their university and see how they are going to achieve these things. Academics and researchers need to do that thing that they don’t do often enough (because it might make them feel less comfortable) which is to examine how they teach, what they teach, and to whom they think they are teaching it. It isn’t a question of whose cultural background is superior, but more a case of how the differences are ascribed meaning, how this is played out and whether or not it becomes a socially divisive situation. Also, don’t just reflect on the differences between cultures, look at the differences within cultures.

    While I think it is necessary for students to be informed about the cultural diversity on their doorstep and of the global range of difference that exists, it would be worthwhile exploring how to include this in the curriculum as part of the study of their major, rather than as a bolt on. That way there is more likelihood of them absorbing the information and learning.

    Please don’t think the UK is much smarter at this than you. For instance, quite a few UK HEIs are currently trying to find ways of linking research and the academic curriculum… but who separated them in the first place?

  • Cultural integrity or multi what?
  • Posted by R M Dearden on May 28, 2008 at 6:50pm EDT
  • Accepting and acknowledging other cultures is good. Expecting the majority culture to adapt in significant ways to the minor is not, IMHO. Science is science - it cannot really be a cultural artifact rather than a set of observed facts, surely?

    Curious bystander.