Prominent university says government's proposal to deregulate tuition will allow it to give scholarships to a third of its students; critics say Sydney's plan will help it cream students from other universities.
U.S. colleges and universities face choppy waters ahead. Navigating institutional direction these days requires not only a clear grasp of what the domestic challenges are but also demands a good global positioning system.
Domestic challenges and global positioning intersect at the need for a steady revenue stream of fee-paying students. The past five years have seen an exponential growth in the business of recruiting international students, especially undergraduates, to U.S. campuses. The search for tuition revenue from abroad has happily converged with a rising middle class around the world that is attracted to U.S. higher education. This intersection has its risks and calls for careful steering.
Colleges and universities that view these students as principally a revenue fix and confuse their mere presence on campus with internationalization are ultimately headed for stormier seas. It’s time to check the GPS.
We’ve already heard that some campuses are experiencing problems retaining international undergraduates. This can begin with recruitment and whether exaggerated promises have been made. Setting the right direction here requires knowing what your recruiters are doing and the standards they employ.
Successful retention can be further compromised by the way international students are integrated — or not — on campus. Housing them in an international dorm completely disconnected from the center of campus life is just the wrong thing if you want happy graduates and a loyal alumni network around the world.
And, too often we hear presidents say, “We’re international, we have international students!” Really? How do those students contribute to the internationalization of your institution? If your answer is: “We have an international week every year filled with food and folk dances,” you are in big trouble. When presidents can more carefully address the question, we have moved past simple revenue production to an understanding that students from abroad are an important aspect of internationalizing a college or university. However, their presence, even a well-integrated one, is not enough.
In the U.S., we have a significant import-export gap, and it starts at the institutional level. If 20 percent of your students are international, do you send a similar percentage of your homegrown students to study abroad? If not, you should actively recalculate that quotient. Exacerbating this gap, U.S. students generally are on shorter term study abroad programs, while their international counterparts are mostly enrolled for degrees .
But study abroad alone will not be enough to declare a victory for internationalization. Why? Because while student mobility should be encouraged, it will not work for everyone. Consider that most college students no longer fit the profile of an 18- to 22-year-old residential student. A single mother attending part-time classes at a community college while holding down a 40-hour-a-week job is not going to do a semester in Bahrain.
Colleges and universities are going to have to spend more time and energy on curriculum design to reach large numbers of such students. It really matters to ask how your students, no matter their origin, will come away with a broader and deeper sense of the world in which they will pursue their personal and professional lives. Ultimately, you have to focus on the curriculum and the faculty who are its stewards. This is the center of the map when it comes to internationalization.
A well-tuned GPS will be all about creating an institutional learning environment that is consciously cross-national and cross-cultural. We have a term for this at the American Council on Education: comprehensive internationalization. Here is what it includes:
You have articulated institutional buy-in: Your mission statement and strategic plan show a commitment to global education, and there’s a road map for how you’re going to get there.
Senior leadership is on board with a holistic vision of connecting what may be separate international activities and, importantly, someone is assigned to wake up every morning thinking about ways to connect the dots as a core element of institutional direction.
Your curriculum, across disciplines and schools, reflects that you want your students to develop global competencies, whether they are majoring in East Asian studies, engineering or art.
Faculty members play a critical role in this work — so they are recruited and rewarded in part on their international engagement. In this domain, you may need to invest further in their global experience and development.
U.S.-based students are encouraged to go abroad, but also supported appropriately — whether financially or in cultural orientation. And international students, as noted above, are supported by systems too.
Global partnerships, an important part of the internationalization picture, are pursued thoughtfully, maintained with integrity and mutuality, tracked and evaluated on a regular basis.
Through the work that we do with many different types of colleges and universities, we have found these elements to be a winning combination. They set the GPS coordinates for deeply embedded internationalization, as opposed to one-off initiatives, and serve a wide array of institutional best interests, most importantly better outcomes for all students.
Patti McGill Peterson is presidential adviser for global initiatives at the American Council on Education.
The University of Zimbabwe has banned students from kissing on campus, BBC reported. While the university has not detailed its rationale for the ban, students are objecting. "In this age to say I'm no longer allowed to kiss or hug someone ... is unreasonable," said Tsitsi Mazikana, a student.
Swiss universities are reporting significant drops -- of between 11 and 38 percent -- in the enrollment of European students from outside the country, The Localreported. The European Union denied Switzerland continued participation in a system that permits European students easy access to universities throughout the continent after Swiss voters approved tougher rules on immigration.
Japan's government is starting a grant program that will provide support for up to 10 years for 37 universities in the country to seek to become more globally competitive, The Japan Times reported. Thirteen of the universities are being urged to develop plans to reach the global level of Harvard University or the University of Oxford. The other universities are being encouraged to improve, but without those aspirations. The funds will be used to recruit more faculty and students from outside Japan, and to boost rankings.
Lasell College, in Massachusetts, has suspended its service learning trip to Uganda out of a commitment to gay rights as well as concerns about terrorism and the spread of Ebola.
In a statement, the college said that “the dangerous situation in Uganda for the LGBT community is repugnant to our community and safety of our students would be overly compromised.” The statement cited several reasons for canceling the trip, including the persecution of LGBT individuals following the passage of a harsh anti-gay law last February; the possibility that the law, since nullified, could be reinstated; travel advisories from other countries, including the United Kingdom, on the threat of terrorism in Uganda; and the spread of the Ebola virus in African countries. The U.S. Department of State has not posted a warning against travel to Uganda, although it does rate the country as being at high risk for terrorism. Uganda has not had any cases of Ebola during the current outbreak.
Lasell had sponsored two trips to Uganda in the past two years.
Israel's universities will shift admissions policies so that one-third of students may be admitted without considering of their scores on a national psychometric exam, The Jerusalem Post reported. Instead, those students will be admitted solely based on achievement in high school. Education Minister Shai Piron explained the change this way. “Some view the psychometric exam as a tool suffering from cultural bias. The financial investment in preparation and the structure of parts of the exam may discriminate between students, and turn into a wall that prevents many students to enter the gates of academia.”