Internationalizing Higher Education and Student Affairs

I have just repatriated to the United States after working in the Middle East for seven years. I worked for Qatar Foundation as it launched partnerships with eight United States and European universities to bring their best academic programs to Doha. These programs are offered on the shared campus of Education City (the physical location for all the higher education partnerships) to a mixture of Qatari nationals as well as international students who hold passports from approximately 100 other countries, from North Africa through the Middle East and on to south Asia. Through the rich and complicated experience of working abroad, I acquired a deep passion for increasing international understanding. I have also become concerned that many of today's students do not understand the international implications of politics, economics, culture, and innovation that will so profoundly shape their lives.

Working abroad changed the way I view the transforming potential of higher education. Students who would not typically have had the opportunity to experience deep intellectual pursuits and holistic student engagement flourished because Qatar Foundation established partnerships with leading institutions and because it encouraged them to fully replicate their academic experiences and institutional culture in Qatar. Seeing student transformation of this magnitude, working with diverse colleagues, and struggling to relate across culture required personal change that has made me fundamentally different than I was seven years ago.

Being back in the United States, I see people on the subway, notice their dress and language, and am eager to strike up a conversation if they appear to be international. I miss not being greeted when I catch the eye of a stranger, confident that my “safe elder” persona will allow us to connect as it does in cultures where responsiveness is a demonstration of respect. I yearn to stumble through language barriers, knowing that grammar doesn't really matter that much when compared with the chance to know someone. I cherish memories of going to the gym to work out with athletes of all ages from South Korea, the Philippines, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, China, Qatar, Palestine, Syria, and Egypt, among others, and knowing that we will all be part of a collective community striving for the same goal.

Both my professional and personal experiences compel me to encourage others to move beyond the valuable diversity perspectives advocated in the United States by using these insights to embrace a broader, even more inclusive, international community. An international mindset that embraces the shrinking geography of our world takes off the cloak of national or regional familiarity and engages curiously with other people and places for the joy of it, and increasingly, for survival. Surviving and thriving in the 21st century will depend on each citizen's ability to engage with appreciation and respect and without the security of cultural privilege.

As the original and subsequently updated 2010 Millennium Development Goals adopted by the United Nations indicate, improving life conditions for people around the globe includes a number of factors, several of which depend on the provision of education. Internationalizing higher education has a foundational role to play in bringing a better future for all into being, and it requires informed and dedicated advocates. By sharing my own experiences and referencing observations and insights I've gleaned from numerous thoughtful exchanges with other international educators, I hope to broaden your view of what internationalization encompasses and I hope you will see how your views and actions can enhance the international focus of your institution and the wider higher education community. While I've learned a lot about internationalization, I have also come to realize that we can't know where advocating for more substantial internationalization will take us. The conditions and environments we will encounter are unfamiliar, but there is no question that internationalization has the potential to enrich us and allow us to contribute to the making of a better world.

Global or International?

The terms global and international are used a lot in education, business, politics, and other circles. As a result, many of us assume the terms are roughly synonymous. After serving on a consulting team working with another university in the Middle East focused on fostering leadership and entrepreneurship, I came to realize how important it is to differentiate these terms. The university for which we were working was in a broader geographic area that was energetically pursuing a reputation as a global hub for finance, entertainment, and tourism. After reviewing the focus of the university and assessing the dynamics of the surrounding community, we determined that the core obstacles to cultivating entrepreneurism were more related to the local cultural context than the global aspiration of the university and community. For example, the country was a monarchy that invited input from citizens yet still retained high formality and deference to authority in decision making. In addition, the country was a rentier economy (one dependent on commodity extraction that offers little other productive contributions to society) with the majority of the country's nationals guaranteed jobs in the government sector funded by commodity revenues. Lastly, the people who were native to the area were from many cultural backgrounds but were bound together in a relationally based culture where things happen as an outcome of appealing to family, tribal, and other associational loyalties. The dynamics of monarchy, a rentier economy, and authority–deferent culture all undermined the self–efficacy, risk–taking, and confidence necessary for entrepreneurship to thrive.

In Internationalization of Higher Education in Asia Pacific Countries, Jane Knight and Hans de Wit define globalization in higher education as “the flow of technology, economy, knowledge, people, values, [and] ideas… across borders. Globalization affects each country in a different way due to a nation's individual history, traditions, culture and priorities” (p. 6). With this definition, one can see that globalization assumes some degree of ubiquity and growing uniformity across settings. Products that have become globalized are found nearly everywhere—Coca–Cola, McDonald's, Toyota, Google, Apple, Samsung, to name a few. This list of products, in fact, makes the point that globalization is essentially an economic phenomenon; one that Rui Yang and others believe is enveloping education and is making it an object of trade.

On the other hand, Jane Knight later describes a process of integrating an international or intercultural perspective into a variety of functions or delivery systems in post–secondary education in the article “Internationalization Remodeled: Definitions, Rationales, and Approaches.” Understanding internationalization as a process (i.e., “ization”) versus an ideology (i.e., “ism”) is key, assuming that the process is respectful and mutual. If it is not, the imposition of an ideology could result in perceived or real acquiescence without true, shared benefit. The previous issue of cultivating entrepreneurship demonstrates the difference: although the aspiration of the city and surrounding area was to be global (an economic and political motivation), the problem of cultivating entrepreneurship was international (addressing multiple national and cultural perspectives and the dynamics of each). This international perspective required the university to first understand the uniqueness of its own nationals and the variables within the local culture that encouraged or discouraged entrepreneurial risk taking. Then it needed to advocate a variety of approaches to entrepreneurship and the support systems and policies required to be effective in fostering it with the multinational students and community members who were their potential target population.

Like this example, there are many issues that higher education will seek to tackle in the 21st century that have international and global dimensions. However, understanding that there is a difference between globalization and internationalization, and advocating an approach that will have a higher likelihood of protecting unique cultures, is likely to be an approach that the broader world community will more quickly embrace. Internationalization with this purpose will preserve cultural and national dignity while at the same time embracing the inevitable—a shrinking planet with growing shared reliance on each other. For students, learning that there is value in preserving unique cultures, seeking to grow more aware and respectful of others, and developing comfort in the emerging international community will allow them to be more effective in both personal and work life.

Recommendations for Sources on Internationalization

Understanding the world in which we live and acquiring the knowledge and skills to engage with it has long been advocated as one of the core purposes of higher education. John Dewey's advocacy in Democracy and Education captured this sentiment and purpose, one that is likely more important today than it was when he advocated it in the early 20th century. This is the knowledge gap about which I am most concerned, a gap that widens every day as many more nations and regions increase in political, economic, and cultural importance. If educators and students do not understand their place in the world and do not have ways to positively engage with those from other nations and cultures, isolation and growing irrelevance are their inevitable destiny.

Madeline Green, Senior Fellow for the International Association of Universities as well as the National Association of Foreign Student Advisors offered several reasons for institutions to pursue internationalization in her article “Universities Must Be Clear and Honest About Internationalization”:

From ACE's Center for Internationalization and Engagement's Model of Comprehensive Internationalization

Green's rationale demonstrates that internationalization in higher education makes sense for a variety of reasons—practical, personal, economic, diplomatic, and more. It makes practical sense because it prepares students for the world in which they will work and live. It makes personal sense because international understanding cultivates greater comfort and dexterity in a world where encounter with other nationalities and cultures will be routine. It makes economic sense because it improves both individual and institutional capacity and productivity, a finding reported by David Mathews from a compilation of nearly 100 studies reviewed by the British Department of International Development. Finally, internationalization of higher education makes diplomatic sense and can be enhanced when higher education leaders are more deliberate and aware of the consequences of their actions, a conclusion reported by Jason Lang and Kevin Kinser from a Rockefeller Institute of Government meeting. In the minds of many educators and decision makers in higher education, students are the most important beneficiaries of internationalization. In Peta Lea's report of the International Association of Universities’ 4th Global Survey of 1,300 educators, 32 percent of the respondents saw increasing students’ knowledge of international issues as the most important benefit of the push for internationalization.

Options for Internationalization

With the above and perhaps other purposes for internationalization as a foundation, the question then becomes, what is available to fulfill these purposes? Jane Knight's “Concepts, Rationales, and Interpretive Frameworks in the Internationalization of Higher Education” encouraged educators to carefully consider their purposes and proposed that there are numerous options available to disseminate people, things, and ideas in order to achieve their goals. These can be sorted into two broad categories—those to be implemented at home and those that are cross–border.

Knight's analysis reveals a variety of options for at–home internationalization (available without leaving the immediate campus or community) that can be offered through curricula, teaching/learning processes, research and scholarly activity, co–curricular and extra–curricular activities, and liaisons with local community based cultural/ethnic groups. Using the at–home curriculum as the structure and research or scholarship as the process, a university might require students to complete at least one experience (research, paper, or service) delving into a national or cultural setting different from their own. Students in Qatar have no choice but to engage international culture through their everyday experience. However, deliberate strategies are still put in place in both the curriculum and co–curriculum to enhance the prospects of students learning from the international dynamics that they encounter. Examples include everything from the fact that residence halls mix students according to nationality and area of study, intercultural and inter–faith student organizations are encouraged, and many course–based assignments or research projects relate to internationalization in Qatar and the region.

Knight's suggestions for cross–border internationalization include strategies to take people, programs, providers, projects, and policies to another place. Some examples include short–term or full degree programs, field/research work, internships, sabbaticals, and consulting pursued abroad; these programs can be offered through various means. Some will be based on articulation or validation agreements made in advance while others are actual joint or double degrees that acknowledge each cooperating institution. Branch models provide full degrees from a home campus in another setting, similar to the branches in U.S. state systems or private institutions. Projects can include research, curriculum, capacity building, or other educational services.

Take, for example, students studying and faculty teaching abroad. My first international experience was teaching abroad through Miami University's Dolibois European Center. It was immediately evident when I arrived in Luxembourg that students varied greatly in their motivation; some were ready for rigorous study while others were more excited about the opportunity for international travel. It took skilled faculty and student affairs support to encourage students to make good choices, demonstrate dedication in their academics, and engage in travel that went beyond tourism. Some of the faculty colleagues in Luxembourg planned long weekend trips to historic locations and built their courses around preparing for and debriefing those weekends. I taught a course in leadership that included attendance at the International Leadership Association conference in Amsterdam and required reflection papers based on the experience. Journaling, guest lecturers, and trips to cultural events were all added as co–curricular elements to encourage more seriousness.

Another example involves branch campuses or programs that are offered in another country. Stephen Wilkins and Jeroen Huisman indicate that the number of international branch campuses has expanded rapidly, with more than 200 worldwide. Branch campuses are particularly robust as an internationalization option because they can fulfill multiple purposes at the same time; they can host study abroad, foster research cooperation, serve as a sabbatical destination, and offer a variety of options in degree structures. The potential of these campuses will fall short unless decision makers realize that offering such programs requires more than just coursework.

Education City, the physical location of Qatar Foundation's eight branch university buildings and campus infrastructure, is an example where student affairs’ contribution to the student experience has been essential. The degree programs completed in Qatar include the same curriculum as the home campus as well as similar, but adapted, student experiences in the residence halls, student center, sports, clubs, and student organization involvement. Achieving the comparability of the student experience, including exposure to home campus traditions and full engagement in learning, has not been easy and has required assertion of the importance of student development throughout the process of commitment, launch, and maturation of Education City.

The above examples only scratch the surface of the potential breadth of internationalization efforts. Some of the examples are derived from my work abroad but the issues they address and the resources they utilize are not limited to educational settings outside North America. The point of posing them is to trigger the imagination of the myriad ways that internationalization could be adopted by any higher education institution. Higher education institutions seeking to integrate internationalization dimensions at home and cross–border are best served by offering multiple strategies across disciplines and appealing to various faculty and student interests. Several organizations have begun to offer recommendations for greater internationalization within higher education (see Exhibit 1) that offer flexibility and breadth through comprehensive planning.

Partnerships

Most internationalization will require partnerships in order to launch substantive and varied initiatives like those I propose. But “partnership” is easier said than done when dealing with multiple institutions, countries, and cultures. In “Higher Education Across Borders: Models of Engagement and Lessons From Corporate Strategy,” Tim Gore proposes a partnership model that has potential relevance for many forms of internationalization—at home or across borders. I have slightly modified his original list of principles and added three others that would ease both planning and implementation efforts: •

Cultivate shared purpose and community among partners

To these I would add: •

Embrace disruptive and rapid change

With something so dynamic and potentially complicated as internationalization of higher education, these are the “deal–breakers” that all parties–to–partnership should consider. A view of internationalization that captures the essence of these conditions was articulated by Patti Peterson and Robin Helms in “Challenges and Opportunities For the Global Engagement of Higher Education” when they wrote “Knowledge is not a zero–sum game in which some win and others lose.” Indeed, internationalization is a “tide that lifts all ships” (p. 6). As Gore recommends, and my experience working with an international host country confirms, internationalization must be pursued with respect, shared purpose, value coherence, and cultural responsiveness.

An example that may help to demonstrate Gore's principles relates to how families are involved with their children's lives. The idea of controlling or appeasing “helicopter parents” in the United States has become quite popular. With Qatar's United States–based undergraduate programs, seeking to establish greater autonomy from parents to avoid the “helicopter parent” dynamic was therefore an instinctual reaction when we began to formulate strategies to work with families. As we grew more deeply aware of the needs of the Middle Eastern and Asian students who attended our universities, we became aware that nuclear and extended family were a very important part of students’ lives and that to resist their involvement was both culturally inappropriate and alienating to important stakeholders. When we realized this, we decided that, instead of resisting family interest, we would invite family involvement while still advocating the importance of students being able to think and act in ways that were more self–determining. This adaptation required collaboration among the university partners and Qatar Foundation that assumed shared purposes, incorporated continuous institutional learning, helped retain families as important and supportive stakeholders, and recognized the legitimacy of different approaches among our partners. Incidentally, Qatar's approach may be more appropriate for some cultural groups and institutions in the United States as well, particularly related to retaining family systems that contribute to student success.

Turning to the first of the three principles I added to Gore's, internationalization partnerships frequently represent disruptive and rapid change for the host setting, and they may plant the seeds of change among students. If the partnership involves hosting students from cultures that do not embrace the same traditions of freedom of expression and individual empowerment typical of many western settings, these students will return to their native environments as disruptors of the prevailing social order. The responsibility for recognizing and managing education as a source of disruptive change has to be acknowledged and shared by the partners.

Two of the programs in Qatar are the Georgetown School of Foreign Service and the journalism and communication programs of Northwestern University. Both of these programs have social justice questions built into their curriculum, and the Northwestern journalism program is substantially based on the idea of freedom of expression that is part of a United States way of viewing the press. Many of the students who attend these programs come from countries where ideas of social justice and freedom of expression are delicate, and sometimes dangerous, issues to advocate. These university partners have maintained their curriculum but adapt it by integrating issues that are locally relevant and by doing research in the region.

An example of managing disruptive change while fostering a commitment to social justice was student research and design of programs to improve the economic welfare of immigrant workers in Qatar. Immigrant worker conditions have been very controversial and have been highlighted in the build–up to the 2022 World Cup Football Tournament. Student research found a gap in financial literacy among workers, so a pilot program was launched by students to help the workers learn how to save money for the benefit of their families back in their home countries. While there are many other issues for immigrant workers in Qatar beyond learning how to manage money, this project dealt with one aspect of their experience and was implemented in a way that was comfortable in the local community.

The delicacy of the previous example relates to the local culture and its political dynamics. The second potentially contentious issue relates to the use of resources—particularly the resources provided by the cross–border partner. There is no question that some internationalization ventures are revenue sources for one or both parties to the partnership. In the world “market” for higher education, it would be naïve not to accept this reality. On the other hand, imbalance in benefit among partners and/or lack of stewardship of resources are ready sources of discontent. Particularly in an environment where brand value and prestige may be a factor, exploiting the partnership for financial gain may be a temptation. If this occurs, the seed for disillusionment in the partnership has already been planted, perhaps even before the “partnership” is launched.

In partnerships where the host culture has different standards of hospitality or luxury, it is very important that facilities and programs reflect the sensibility of the local environment. Particularly in settings where the local expectations of luxury are higher, as is the case in the Arabian Gulf, many of the trappings of hospitality and event management that are considered standard would be luxurious by most standards. However, in order to not appear frivolous in the use of precious resources, relative modesty still needs to be observed.

I italicize the third point because of its simplicity and importance—offer choices, not prescriptions. I learned this point in my early days in Qatar when, in conversation with a Qatari national colleague, I advocated that male and female students should have more freedom in their interactions outside of class. I explained that this would improve their comfort in workplace environments of the future. My Qatari colleague's response was very telling and I have never forgotten it. He said that he welcomed the opportunity to learn about American values and practices but that choices about what would be adopted had to be made with a full understanding of the local cultural belief system, a belief system that required propriety, modesty, and reserve among males and females. Learning this lesson has been very important, especially working in a region where many countries had been previously colonized. Educators whose countries were previous colonies may demonstrate ambivalence by welcoming some contributions from other cultures but actively or passively resisting others. Those from other countries and cultures therefore need to carefully monitor their own potential blindness as they propose, recommend, or implement practices across borders. The potential of cultural or educational colonialism is very real in internationalization efforts and remembering to offer choices rather than prescriptions may go a long way toward avoiding a new, and perhaps equally pernicious, form of colonization to that of the past.

The Promise of Internationalization

Whether you are a decision maker, faculty member, or a student affairs educator who is a citizen of the United States working in a domestic setting, a citizen of the United States working abroad in higher education, or an international working in the United States or around the world, your contribution to the internationalization conversation is essential. You have a perspective about the student experience that is fundamental to providing high quality and empowering education that embraces the increasingly internationalized world in which we and our students must be prepared to live.

In order to contribute positively to the internationalization conversation, we must first acknowledge what needs to be learned which will vary based on where you sit. If you sit in the United States, the learning may include the growing realization that the most positive influence often comes from sharing the journey of enhancing student learning rather than directing it. When a particular perspective is privileged, such as in the case of disseminating United States’ higher education practices in international settings, there is a tendency for those viewed as experts to assert too strongly and for recipients of this knowledge to defer to their perspective. Joining in the search for best practices among all partners is much more likely to result in the best outcomes. When it comes to higher education, there is much to be learned by approaches that are found throughout the world, some of which add to, or are potentially superior to, models available in the United States. The documented evidence on international higher education practices is not well developed and this is a challenge to both the potential donor and host partners.

The April 2014 Journal of College Student Development is a wonderful example of the commitment ACPA has made to internationalize the articles it publishes. Kristen Renn, G. Blue Brazelton, and Joshua Holmes document that only 5 percent of the articles in eight higher education and student affairs journals from 1998 to 2011 addressed issues relevant to international higher education. To the credit of the ACPA Editorial Board, the April 2014 volume included not only this critique of the lack of international content but offered three additional articles relevant to those working in international settings.

Research and literature about internationalization of higher education is often written by scholars from Europe or North America. Part of building capacity in emerging higher education environments is partnered scholarship between established Western scholars and emerging scholars around the world. A specific example of this is the New Directions for Higher Education book, Enhancing Student Learning and Development in Cross–Border Higher Education. This book will be edited by Susan Komives and me and will be published in 2016. The content will discuss student affairs as one of the many ways that students’ experiences can be improved, include the contributions of educators throughout the world, and call for partnership in achieving the best possible quality of education across nations and cultures.

Determining what is researched and who is published is only a piece of adopting a truly international perspective. There are many other things that assume a U.S. perspective, such as the topics and speakers included in annual conventions, the dates and times that videoconferences and meetings are scheduled, all the way down to the very content itself. The content included in many forms of communication reflect such things as assumed financial/economic distress, legislative or legal issues, and public and family conditions that are unique to the United States but referenced as if they are universal. The issue is not that these dynamics should be excluded or ignored but that they are referenced as if most or all those in the audience (present or reading) encounter the same thing when the reality is that they do not.

Faculty, student affairs educators, and other institutional staff all have very important roles in leading their institutions toward authentic internationalization. We need the resources, consuming that of others or creating our own, in order to add to the momentum that is now underway. Being part of this positive change requires first taking a critical look at ourselves and then engaging seriously with colleagues who also want to make a difference.

North American and other international higher education associations are posing important questions and are potential strategic partners in the pursuit of internationalization. A knowledge–base that few student affairs educators know is available is comparative and international education. This area has a long history and evolving literature that should be used to frame how higher education and student affairs engages the internationalization I have advocated.

It wouldn't take much effort to tweak our approaches, our speech, and our writing to include an international perspective. Including an international perspective will not only reflect the broader dynamics of the world in which we live but, in some cases, will correct prevailing misinformation. The evidence suggests that the United States will be best served by being a global player not just in products and entertainment, but also in offering quality educational opportunities to help other countries develop from the inside out. Real inclusion will be evidenced by a declining assertion that U.S. educational (and student affairs) practices are the world standard, when reference to historic events and personalities include examples from diverse nations and cultures, and when “we” and “our” as a point of reference truly embrace the broader international higher education community. Most importantly, educational opportunity needs to be offered in partnership and with mutual benefit clearly at the center of the work. Being respectful and engaged partners will cultivate a growing international perspective among citizens of the United States and the greater educational exposure of other national and cultural groups to the United States will hopefully bring the prosperity and peace to which all aspire.

Urgent Need

I will miss being reminded that I lived somewhere other than my passport country by hearing the Muslim call to prayer and seeing the array of national dress I observed every time I walked through the Education City campus. Listening carefully to another human being, striving to understand our shared journey regardless of the difference and inadequacy of language was sometimes hard and emotionally draining; now it is something I actively seek. These experiences and so many others have helped me to escape the complacency of familiarity and released me from striving for control that offered only false comfort.

I lived in and visited many other unpredictable and mysterious places, only to realize that almost all of the circumstances I feared were more comfortable and supportive than I anticipated. I also discovered that many of the circumstances I used to find comfortable are more unsettling than I could have ever imagined. Students throughout the world will encounter these kinds of revelations and more as they travel, study, and work in the 21st century. Having first experienced culture shock in moving abroad, and now reverse culture shock in returning to the United States, I know that there are perspectives, approaches, and ways of being that will allow our graduates to be more effective in the highly internationalized environments that they will face in the future. Urging our institutions to adopt a more encompassing and comprehensive understanding of internationalization, and seeking to create pervasive ways for students to encounter the reality of their emerging world is essential if they are to curiously and respectfully engage our ever more interconnected and interdependent world.