Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

International Study Shouldn't Be Elective

December 19, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Every American decade has its archetypes. If you were heading off to business school in the 1980s, you might have wondered – or even worried – you’d end up like Alex Keaton from the hit TV series "Family Ties." Alex scoffed at the Peace Corps past of his parents, and believed he could amass all the wealth and status that he wanted without being too concerned about the political affairs of the world around him -- beyond, perhaps, advocating for lower tax rates on capital gains.

Today Alex would not survive, much less thrive, in a world marketplace where economic events in nearly every developing and industrialized nation can dramatically impact the fortunes of others. Growing affluence in China coupled with the rise of ethanol, for example, has increased the demand for meat, which drives up global grain prices. At the same time, instability in the Nigerian delta directly influences the price of oil in New York, and a small business in Germany could easily be denied a loan from a distressed local bank that has over-invested in mortgages in the United States. Meanwhile, as we’ve seen in just the past few weeks, the implosion of the U.S. financial system continues to send aftershocks to financial markets and economies across the globe.

Unfortunately, too few colleges or universities are preparing students to understand these global dynamics. According to the Center for International Initiatives at the American Council on Education, the percentage of colleges that require a course with an international or global focus as part of the general education curriculum fell from 41 percent in 2001 to 37 percent in 2006. And 27 percent of the nation’s colleges and universities have no students at all who study abroad. But even among the colleges and universities that do promote “semester abroad” programs, most offer these as add-ons to the required course of study, providing students with only a taste of life in another nation and a small selection of elective courses.

A far better approach would be to make international study a core component of undergraduate education in the 21st century -- requiring students to spend a significant portion of their college years abroad (e.g., two or more semesters) and do it while studying in multiple locations. Students would thereby be exposed to the interconnections across multiple countries and cultures, so they have the opportunity to gain insight into the complex economic and political factors shaping our world.

My certainty on the need for this approach has been influenced by 20 years of experience as a business school educator. As a professor at the University of Chicago in the 1990’s, I first observed the prevalence of a “free market ideology” among our first and second year M.B.A. students – a viewpoint that over-simplifies market dynamics and their impact on the social and political landscape. That’s when I first began to think about new models for undergraduate education that incorporate a deeper understanding of global economic dynamics and the interconnection between the private and public sectors.

Now, as dean at the New York University Stern School of Business’s Undergraduate College, I’ve worked with our faculty to create a new bachelor’s degree in business and political economy, designed to foster deeper understanding of the intersections between international business, politics and economics. Our new curriculum not only integrates these perspectives, but requires students to spend three semesters of global study on three different continents, where they experience the course of business in both industrialized and emerging market nations.

During their sophomore year in London, for example, students will study the foundations of economics and politics in Europe’s financial center, under the guidance of faculty from both NYU and local institutions. In Shanghai during the junior year, they will experience life in a developing country where commerce is thriving yet challenged by centuries of strict political rule. From there, they will travel to developing markets in India to gain a first-hand understanding of how a nation strives for capitalistic momentum despite having a large population of undereducated and underemployed citizens -- and how these converging factors of economics and politics will likewise impact India’s strength as a developing nation in the world marketplace.

Through the experience, the students will learn how markets, corporations, governments, religions and cultures converge in nations that are inextricably linked to the success of capitalism in the U.S. – an understanding that cannot be easily replicated without spending a significant amount of time living and learning in these nations.

While I recognize that NYU’s existing infrastructure and history of international education enhance our ability to create this type of experience, there are many other ways for colleges and universities to better open students’ eyes to the convergence between international markets, economies, cultures and governments. They can begin by weaving the subject matter into existing coursework, combining international economics and business courses with politics, sociology and religion courses.

They can also augment their current foreign exchange programs -- going beyond simply having students “visit” back and forth -- by investing in deeper, more elaborated partnerships. For example, colleges from different continents could invest in developing integrated curricula across two (or more) global partner institutions. So that when students study abroad at a partner campus they would have a more seamless academic experience, one that is specifically designed to promote deeper understanding of global economic, social and political issues. These programs could be supplemented by distance learning opportunities and the use of digital technology to connect students across partner campuses for virtual and collaborative learning experiences when back at their home campus.

While these recommendations may sound daunting, I would argue that moving undergraduate education in this direction is a social imperative. Given the ever-increasing connectedness of our complex world, students need to understand how political tensions, conflicting attitudes about globalization and religion, and the ever-expanding reach of free markets will impact worldwide security and the future of the global marketplace. And the best way to make that happen is to send them packing -- inspired and determined to understand the wonders of the world around them.

Sally Blount-Lyon is dean of the NYU Stern School of Business Undergraduate College, and special advisor to the provost for global academic integration at New York University.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on International Study Shouldn't Be Elective

  • Posted by Simon on December 19, 2008 at 9:30am EST
  • This is an ambitious goal, but wouldn't work for many non-traditional older students, especially those with families. The number of students in this group has been growing in university populations, and the addition of such a requirement would place university study beyond the reach of these students.

  • Posted by Lauren on December 19, 2008 at 12:30pm EST
  • I agree with Simon that it is ambitious. However, if it were tied to particular degree programs it makes enormous sense. Non-traditional students may likely seek other degrees that instead of this type of travel requirement would have more electronic collaborations with overseas partners. Those students could even learn a great deal from the students who are traveling if connected through electronic means such as podcasts, blogs and wikis. It may not be quite as rich of an experience as the student with the opportunity to travel, but it will go a long way to improving our current lack of globally educated students. I think the bigger question is how to fund travel for those students who are able to physically go. Building cooperative agreements with partner institutions will need to consider how to make such travel affordable as well as the curricular structure.

  • Posted by Rob Mossack , Director, Academic Advising at Lipscomb University on December 19, 2008 at 1:35pm EST
  • And who is going to foot the bill for this? I would love to have sent my daughter to Vienna for our overseas program during her sophomore year, but I couldn't afford the extra thousands of dollars to do so. I suspect that would be the case with most students and their families.

  • International Study Is Not Valued - Why Mandate It?
  • Posted by Scrawed on December 19, 2008 at 4:10pm EST
  • Regardless of any intrinsic merits of international study (and I would argue that there can be merits), the sobering fact is that neither international study, foreign language study, nor "global awareness" are valued in the U.S. They simply do not enhance one's employability in an environment which claims that such expertise can be hired from abroad, hired among recent immigrants or children of same, or outsourced, or hired on an "as needed" basis.

    In fact, there is substantially more demand for holders of English degrees than possessors of fluency in any given foreign language. Even people with comparative literature competencies don't get hired for those jobs regardless of their levels of literacy and writing skills.

    In areas where one might presume to think that foreign language students or students with overseas study experience would have significant advantages, they in fact do not. Not even the U.S. State Department hires for foreign language competency, and foreign language competency has very little to do with consular appointments.

    Work experience abroad is generally not valued by U.S. employers, whether possessed by U.S. or foreign nationals. Perhaps it's viewed as more difficult to verify. Regardless, it seems to be largely extraneous to employment in this country. It might as well have happened in a dream.

    There are significant problems with this set of attitudes and their ramifications, but no recent graduate is going to be able to change these.

  • Posted by David on December 19, 2008 at 5:50pm EST
  • Actually, in a Very Special Episode of Family Ties, Alex P. Keaton studies abroad at Oxford. A good lede, no doubt, but inaccurate.

  • "Set of attitudes and their ramifications"
  • Posted by Laval , Dr. at U. Amsterdam on December 20, 2008 at 2:45pm EST
  • Seeing the observations of Scrawed is both refreshing (in that indeed someone has forthrightly ventilated them here) and depressing (insofar as they at least also from my experience and perspective would appear to be spot-on).
    It's a gigantic and well attested general *mentality* problem in the first instance, as far as I'm concerned (as an American who's spent most of his working life abroad, after graduate study and teaching at three prestigious H.E. institutions in the USA, and has no plans to return).
    And that mentality factor applies also -- perhaps most of all -- to the question of language learning and *use*. Scrawed properly refers to the language factor a number of times. The article itself doesn't even once, as far as I noticed. That says perhaps enough, in and of itself.

  • absolutely agree
  • Posted by Paula McMillen, PhD , Assoc. Professor, Education Librarian at UNLV on December 20, 2008 at 2:50pm EST
  • Having studied abroad for a year as an undergrad and for a term as a graduate student, I couldn't agree more. Many of the problems this country faces have probably been facilitated by our conscious or unconscious isolationism...geographically, culturally, attitudinally. If we're going to make this a requirement, there also have to be ways to support students financially so that all students can participate.

  • Students have diverse needs
  • Posted by Ben on December 21, 2008 at 8:35am EST
  • I myself studied abroad and enthusiastically agree that it was a transformative experience. Not only was my semester abroad NOT required, it didn't even count towards my degree. The semester was counted as a leave of absence, even though I was enrolled in one of Europe's most prestigious universities through a well-recognized study abroad program (CIEE).

    My concern about making study abroad a requirement is about students who come from different backgrounds. At my university and many others we have students who have to work to put themselves through college. We have students who have children and childcare needs. We have students who care for a family member with special needs. These students should not be excluded from a particular program of study simply because the program requires a study abroad experience.

    I argue that colleges and universities should make study abroad as accessible as possibly by reducing barriers both financial and administrative. Adding requirements to the undergraduate experience will only add to the barriers that already seem impenetrable for many students who come from families without means.

  • International Study
  • Posted by Eric Goldman at Peace Corps on December 22, 2008 at 5:25pm EST
  • As a follow up to your excellent piece on the need for having international study be a core component of undergraduate study, I would like to make note of the Peace Corps' Master's International program. This program combines graduate study with the full 27 months of Peace Corps service, giving students the opportunity to apply their knowledge and skills to helping communities and people overseas meet basic needs. More information is available at www.peacecorps.gov/masters.

  • Sounds Great But....
  • Posted by Mike on December 29, 2008 at 4:20pm EST
  • I have noticed more and more students who are being pushed by the university for a "semester abroad" and many seem to consider it the cornerstone of their undergraduate education. Unfortunately, most of these students have absolutely no real-world experience in their majors so the fact that they spent several months grooving in Europe does nothing to make them more employable - it only adds further to the mountain of debt they must try to service with a $30,000 a year job (if they are lucky) upon graduation.

    I suspect that part of this racket is that the professors want to create their own opportunities for semester-long faculty exchanges. I know several who have bragged about spending months in the Italian countryside while "teaching" a course of two. An adjunct takes their place while gone.

    So the message we are sending to students and their families now is that not only must you fork over huge tuition, you must also pay for "green" dorms, "locally-grown" dorm food, state-of-the-art workout facilities, outrageously-priced textbooks and now an extended stay in one of the world's most expensive cities like London. These are all amenities that most of the families who pay the bills have never enjoyed themselves.

    How is all this being paid for? - by oceans of debt, just like the real estate bubble. Academia loves to scoff at Wall Street, but they are engaged in exactly the same kind of bubble mentality that caused the Crash of 2008. The Higher Ed Crash is coming soon.

    It is time for families who are paying these bills to simply say no - these kinds of add-ons are unnecessary and financially unsustainable. Students would best spend their money by getting a undergraduate degree in three years, working for a year or two and then investing in a good master's degree.

  • Reply to Mike
  • Posted by Amy on January 6, 2009 at 1:55pm EST
  • I have to disagree that faculty members are the ones pushing this agenda. In my experience, faculty members are the last people to desire any level of participation in study abroad. I've worked at several universities, and faculty have been very resistant to the idea that experiences abroad can enrich the educational experience for students.

    I think, however, that Mike has a valid point about financing all of this. Indeed, a university education has gotten so expensive that young people are leveraging themselves so much financially. It is no way to start your adult life with so much debt from school. There has been a bill passed around Congress for years now that proposes to appropriate federal funds to support study abroad (Paul Simon Study Abroad Act). The bill has a "leveraging" requirement which would in essence require the institution to also contribute university monies to support an increase in study abroad. Programs can also be designed in such a way that students can use their existing loans to pay for their study abroad experience. There are already universities that require study abroad of all its students (Goucher College comes to mind). However, I think the key to this is flexibility and providing options for non-tradtional students. Clearly, a student with a job and a family can't go abroad for a year, but they may be able to do a short-term program for two or three weeks.

  • Posted by Julie Crothers on January 8, 2009 at 5:35pm EST
  • Global partnering is the key to keep a degree like this working. It's a wonderful idea but could not be mandatory for the simple reason that many just could not afford it. At the University of New South Wales in Australia, the international degree is a 3+1 degree where the fourth year must be taken overseas. Great idea for those who can afford it.
    Julie

  • Posted by Michael Houston on January 9, 2009 at 4:55pm EST
  • Here at the University of Minnesota’s Carlson School of Management we read with interest both Dean Blount-Lyon’s position on requiring international study as part of a degree program and the variety of reactions it generated. The Carlson School of Management has a long history of offering quality international learning experiences. Our undergraduate degree program requires all students to have an international experience and we're actively pursuing a variety of opportunities to expand the entire School's international commitment. We have already taken the bold step that Dean Blount-Lyon calls for, and we recognize all of the issues raised in the reactions. We are addressing virtually every drawback mentioned in the resulting comments, most of which are valid concerns.
    The first thing to recognize about international study is that it cannot, and should not attempt to, fully equip a student to effectively operate on the global scene, whether in business, politics, or whatever direction the student heads. Rather it should be transformational and motivate the individual for the immediate and distant future to continuously improve his or her global competence. This experience should occur as part of a curriculum that provides the mental model to guide the individual’s future excursions into different cultures and provide a framework for understanding the economic, political, and social aspects of a country or region.
    We immediately recognized that a “one size fits all” approach is not appropriate. We receive a mix of students that vary in a number of ways—readiness to go abroad, financial means to make it happen, family obligations faced by, for example, nontraditional students, etc. Consequently, we offer a variety of opportunities ranging from full semesters at a partner school, which in some instances have zero or even negative incremental costs over staying home, to rigorous, short-term programs of 2-6 weeks. The added cost of the requirement is being addressed with an effort to generate a substantial pool of financial aid funds to fully or partially support students at different levels of financial need. Also, for students who absolutely are unable to go abroad (and our intent is for this group to be quite small) we will work closely with students to develop a meaningful self-designed experiment, perhaps including some of the activities mentioned by Lauren.
    Two issues in the reactions deserve special comment. First, our experience is that international study programs are not motivated by faculty seeking their own opportunities. While our faculty obviously do not oppose international study since they voted in the requirement, many of them face constraints that do not allow them to spend time abroad. Second, and most important, our decision to require international study has been hailed by the local business community. Contrary to Scrawed’s point of view, our experience is that it is valued. For the moment, however, let’s assume this point of view is valid. What better way to begin to increase its value then by populating business and government with individuals who have the international experience and understand its value?

    Michael Houston Associate Dean of International Programs Carlson School of Management University of Minnesota

  • Lip Service Isn't Everything
  • Posted by Scrawed on April 18, 2009 at 9:45pm EDT
  • @ Michael Houston - My experience has been that the business community can and will pay lip service to the importance of international education, but then makes decisions that fly in the face of its verbal affirmations. They tend to actually hire people without international education experiences and/or foreign language skills. Where language and cultural competencies come into play, they will either hire international student graduates, recent immigrants, hire locally for overseas operations, outsource, or offshore-outsource. Have you found there's been a statistically significant increased rate of out-of-school hiring for undergraduates by this same business community, as a result of mandating international education for them?
    In the U.S., positions where foreign language competency is a primary factor in hiring decisions tend to be in - early childhood education (K-12, community college, colleges and universities tend to have strongly preferential hiring for native speakers), some freelance translation jobs where the foreign language is the source language and English is the target language, and shipping clerk positions. Lip service doesn't pay the bills.