From Splendid Isolation to Global Engagement

Front matter

From Splendid Isolation to Global Engagement

Exploring Internationalization in Higher Education

E S Techno wbv

Contents

Larry Moneta From Splendid Isolation to Global Engagement: Reflecting Global and Domestechänges are N Choe ae a ah 7

Birgit Wolf, Tobias Schmohl, Larisa Buhin & Michael Stricker From Splendid Isolation to Global Engagement: Exploring Internationalization

Kristin O’Rourke, Carolin Kreber Understanding Implications and Considerations for International Students at a Canadian Universe. er 23

Foreword

LARRY MONETA

Studies indicate that nearly 6 million students enroll in colleges and universities outside their home countries. While a relatively small percentage of the overall college student body of approximately 225 million, the impact of international students’ presence at institutions of higher education is significant. Every aspect ofthe college experience offers the opportunity to engage international students as learners or, conversely, to widen the divide between their domestic student counterparts. For an international student, simply navigating institutional housing, dining, healthcare, and recreational processes can be daunting and discouraging. Fortunately, many institutions offer support through dedicated offices and services directed specifically at addressing these needs. However, admitting international students into a college or university hardly ensures a truly integrative and engaging experience - one where international and domestic students authentically learn from each other’s experiences and environments.

As uncomfortable as it may be for international students to adapt to the cultural, logistical, and educational differences associated with study in a foreign country, necessity is, according to the proverb, the “mother of invention” requiring international students to adjust as needed, generally with some help from the institution, in order to survive and advance. Domestic students in most countries may avoid all forms of discomfort, often choosing paths of least resistance through their post-graduate studies and beyond. A truly global and internationally focused education stretches the mind, enables experiences beyond the sheltered norm and encourages exposure to alternate viewpoints, challenging conditions, and cultural diversity.

International and domestic students are often too sheltered from the life experiences of others. Both will benefit from understanding the plights of first-generation students, students with various immigration backgrounds, gendered perspectives, religious and racial differences, sexual orientation, and other identity characteristics. To be sure, designing a curriculum and pedagogical practices that can effectively introduce identity, cultural, and environmental differences spanning local and international perspectives is complex and daunting. Yet, it is this very challenge that makes this book and the work of Wolf, Schmohl, Buhin, and Stricker even more compelling.

Over my nearly 50-year career in higher education, both as a faculty member and an administrator, I’ve rarely seen effective approaches to truly internationalizing the

1 https://timeassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/TIME_Association_International_Mobility_Report.pdf

8 From Splendid Isolation to Global Engagement: Reflecting Global and Domestic Changes collegiate experience. International students are generally expected to adjust to local rules and rituals with fairly significant disregard for confusing and stressful cultural conditions and expectations. As a result, international students often bond only with other international students and avoid or are uninvited to connect with domestic students.

Equally suboptimal are the international exposure and content offered to domestic students. For those who can and opt to study abroad for a semester or two, the international experience can be meaningful and illuminating. This is especially true for students who seek opportunities outside their comfort zones and choose international venues where culture, history, and conditions require substantial acculturation and reconditioning. Unfortunately, educational tourism often influences the choices of host countries and institutions.

Internationalizing a curriculum requires heightened sensitivity to a host of critical factors. Global challenges and conditions influence pedagogy and course content; local political processes and contexts, including national immigration policies and conflicts as well as racial, gender, and religious conditions (among other identity concerns), influence teaching and learning; and regional circumstances and relationships (e. g., European, Pan-Asian, and Latin American distinctions) greatly influence educational priorities, perspectives, and environments. Thus, curricula and pedagogy are always in flux and subject to forces within a country’s context and history as much as they are shaped by external influences such as visiting international students and scholars.

But nowhere is the opportunity for genuine internationalization of the learner more likely and currently under-realized than in the classroom. Internationalizing the classroom experience requires new and effective approaches to teaching and learning in both didactic and experiential forms. An internationalized curriculum should contextualize learner outcomes in varied and global circumstances. Problem-based learning that features cases and scenarios grounded in world-wide crises, conditions, and characteristics will transcend narrower local perspectives. Experiential elements of a course that embed students in multinational and international challenges should stimulate far greater creativity, reflection, and understanding of life beyond domestic borders and invite more intensive and fulfilling engagement with students who bring different experiences and expectations to the institution.

All this is to simply affirm the timeliness and critical need for this book. By focusing on the teaching mission of colleges and universities, Wolf, Schmohl, Buhin and Stricker have provided a set of chapters, each of which addresses key opportunities for genuine internationalization of instructional processes. Readers are invited to draw from these texts a variety of innovative approaches to inform curricular development, the integration of experiential techniques to complement formal teaching methodologies, and the application of technologies that permit both asynchronous and synchronous learning on a campus and everywhere in the world where their students are likely to be found.

This book will inspire enhanced approaches to assessment of learning outcomes, the development of competencies, and consideration of the multicultural, multilingual,

Larry Moneta 9 and identity diversity ever present in all classrooms. Suggestions are grounded in theory, offered with evidence of efficacy, and featured with considerable flexibility to meet the needs of institutions across the globe. The chapters address the internationalization of the liberal arts as well as of pre-professional education.

“From splendid isolation to global engagement: exploring internationalization in higher education” offers unambiguous advocacy. To avoid democratization and internationalization of the classroom is to stay rooted in outdated and ineffective models of teaching with diminished outcomes. For the next generation of leaders to be properly prepared for the challenges ahead—all of which have global implications—colleges and universities must dramatically alter their educational efforts. Wolf, Schmohl, Buhin and Stricker provide a roadmap and a wide variety of tools for innovation in teaching and learning, which will inspire institutional leaders and faculty to rise to the occasion.

Larry Moneta, Ed.D

Vice President for Student Affairs (retired) Duke University

From Splendid Isolation to Global Engagement: Exploring Internationalization in Higher Education — A Comprehensive Perspective

11 The Evolution and Impact of Internationalization in Higher Education

In the modern academic milieu, internationalization has emerged as a vital aspect and objective within universities around the globe. Originating in the 1960s, this phenomenon has witnessed significant transformation, including the escalating recruitment of international students, the integration of global perspectives into curricula, and the expansion of research collaborations. These shifts have empowered students to tap into career opportunities overseas, thereby augmenting their employability and, for some, even serving as pathways to immigration (OECD, 2022).

In general terms, internationalization refers to the “infusion of an international or intercultural dimension into teaching, research, and service through a combination of a wide range of activities, policies, and procedures” (Knight, 1999, p.15). As characterized by Teichler (2017), the concept includes, among others, the following six main aspects: the global transfer of knowledge through various media; physical mobility across countries involving students and staff; international cooperation and communication among countries and educational institutions; international education and research fostering intercultural learning and understanding; international convergence and similarity; and the pursuit of international reputation and quality.

Teichler adds, however, that these classifications are not rigoros. For instance, the Bologna Process in Europe (Curaj etal., 2015) highlighted additional factors such as student mobility flows, internationalization as a catalyst for change in higher education, intercultural competence, strategic international cooperation, funding for internationalization, and a quality review of internationality. These aspects align with the OECD’s (1999) definition of internationalization, which encapsulates the infusion of an international or intercultural dimension into a university’s core functions such as teaching, research, and service.

Knight (2006) aptly distinguishes between Internationalization Abroad (IA) and Internationalization at Home (IaH). IA refers to the mobility of students, faculty, and staff, whereas IaH signifies the process of diversifying and globalizing the curriculum and pedagogy in order to appeal to both international and non-traditional domestic students (Sa & Serpa, 2020). IA and IaH, while distinct, interact synergistically to enhance internationalization. For example, the internationalization of home curricula aug-

12 From Splendid Isolation to Global Engagement: Exploring Internationalization in Higher Education ments the experience of students studying within their countries while simultaneously attracting more international students.

The global crisis induced by the COVID-19 pandemic underscored the need for technology-supported activities (de Wit & Altbach, 2020), triggering the inception of a third paradigm, Internationalization at a Distance (IaD):

“a rising number of technology-supported activities have created new opportunities for university internationalization. For example, students can now remain ‘at home’ while using technology to study with an institution or program that is simultaneously located ‘abroad’. We have conceptualized these activities as a new third category called Internationalization at a Distance” (Mittelmeier et al., 2020).

IaD encompasses all forms of cross-border education where teaching and learning processes need to be facilitated by technology because students, personnel, and institutional resources are geographically separated (Mittelmeier et al., 2020). The current discourse in this context is geared towards exploring the development of students’ intercultural competence and its implications for online collaborative international learning pedagogy (Liu & Shirley, 2021).

1.2 _ Internationalization at Home and its Implications for Higher Education Our discussion within this book focuses on IaH, which encompasses initiatives aimed at amplifying the international and intercultural dimensions of higher education within the domestic campus:

“Internationalisation of the curriculum is the incorporation of an international and intercultural dimension into the content of the curriculum as well as the teaching and learning processes and support services of a program of study” (Leask, 2009, p. 209).

From our viewpoint, IaH extends to curricular and co-curricular activities such as introducing international themes in the curriculum, hosting international speakers, cultivating intercultural competencies, and collaborating with international partners in research and educational projects (de Wit, 2020). Given its potential to prepare students for becoming global citizens (Cottong et al., 2018), elevating institutional prestige, generating research, addressing global issues, and contributing to the internationalization of the local communities (Almeida et al, 2018), this manifestation of internationalization has gained strategic significance in higher education research, policy, and practice.

Leask (2015) and Beelen and Leask (2011) underscore that IaH should not be restricted solely to the presence of international students. Rather, it should be leveraged as an opportunity to cultivate diversity within the classroom by expanding the definition of culture to encompass elements such as gender and social class. This approach holds particular promise for institutions aspiring to promote IaH but lacking a substantial international student body.

Empirical evidence illustrating the efficacy of IaH in fostering global, international, and intercultural (GII) competencies has been provided by Soria and Troisi (2013). Their study, conducted across nine large public research universities in the United States, demonstrates that IaH activities significantly amplify students’ cross-cultural and global competencies, thereby shaping them into globally competent graduates and citizens. Concurrently, Baldassar and Mckenzie (2016) advocate the integration of diverse pedagogical approaches in IaH activities to facilitate cross-cultural engagement, emphasizing cultural immersion, perspective-taking, critical reflection, and community involvement as instrumental in achieving the anticipated benefits of IaH.

The COVID-19 pandemic has paradoxically catalyzed and impeded IaH, inducing temporary reductions in mobility, increased use of teleconferencing, and modifications to curricula, pedagogy, and assessment (Jensen, Marinoni, & van’t Land, 2022). These changes could potentially become permanent, fostering greater participation and diversity in higher education. Simultaneously, the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation poses substantial challenges to globalization, affecting crossborder flows of technology, economy, knowledge, people, values, and ideas. The consequent implications for higher education continue to evolve.

2 _ Internationalization in German Higher Education: The Paradox of “splendid Isolation”

The term “Splendid Isolation”, coined by Wildt (2013), a well-known expert on German higher education, aptly summarizes the prevailing condition in the country: despite a myriad of educational initiatives being undertaken, a tangible disconnect from the global pedagogical community exists. Supporting this assertion, staffing statistics from German universities (DAAD, 2023) reveal that the share of international staff in the total of 427,698 academics at German universities is a paltry 13.9 % (Fig. 1).

Total international academic staff and international professors at German universities by region of origin in 2021 by region of origin total academic staff, in % professors, in %

7,1 0,2

U Western Europe Central & Southeastern Europe H Eastern Europe & Central Asia

North America = Latin America total total number number 59.337 3.721 North Africa & Middle East Sub-Saharan Africa WB Asia & Pacific 6,1 EB without regional classification 7,8 66,2

Figure 1: Figure based on data provided bythe German Federal Statistical Office (university personnel statistics) and the data preparation in DAAD (2023, p. 17)

14 From Splendid Isolation to Global Engagement: Exploring Internationalization in Higher Education

The proportion shrinks even further for foreign professorships: ofthe 59,337 academic and artistic personnel with foreign citizenship, a mere 7.4% (3,721) are professors (Fig. 2).

International and german scientific staff at German universities in 2021 total scientific staff at German universities a 2

U 13.9 % from abroad professors in Germany

3.726 E 7.4% from abroad scientific staff that are professors

| 46.539 427.698

3.721 U 0.87 % international professors 10.9 % German professors

Figure 2: Figure based on data provided bythe German Federal Statistical Office (university personnel statistics) and the data preparation in DAAD (2023, p. 17)

Additionally, the “international” staff turns out to be mainly from Western Europe, which is the primary region of origin for foreign academic employees, contributing 34% of all foreign academic staff and 66 % of foreign professors in Germany. A significant number of these foreign academics hail from German-speaking countries such as Austria (19%) and Switzerland (9%).

This striking dearth of international pedagogical engagement stands in contrast to the ongoing trends of globalization and regionalization, which typically reshape national landscapes and inherently influence higher education systems (van der Hijden, 2014). This stark divergence between the nationally focused educational approach and the evolving global milieu, characterized by increased migration and a rising demand for international education, not only curtails the development of global citizenship and authentic intercultural exchanges but also constrains the potential benefits for universities and their increasingly diverse student communities.

3 The Evolving Role of Higher Education in Internationalization: A Deep Dive into Our Publication Against this backdrop, our publication serves as a humble attempt to probe into the role of higher education in bolstering internationalization—more specifically: IaH— with an intention to magnify the global facet of the three central missions of higher education: teaching, research, and societal service. Such integration culminates in the enhancement of education and research quality for all students and staff, thereby making a significant contribution to society (de Wit, 2020, p.ii). In this context, we find Hudzik’s (2011) expansion of Knight’s definition of “comprehensive internationalization” especially relevant as it encompasses the curriculum, the learning outcomes, and the ethos of higher education.

Our publication is divided into two interconnected domains. The first field scrutinizes responses to the changing and diverse classroom environment that results from IaH. These contributions focus on curriculum adaptations meant to cater to an increasingly student body (Sa & Serp. 2020), taking into account incoming international students as well as societal shifts such as immigration influx. The second area focuses on educational goals with an international outlook, particularly the development of intercultural and social competencies deemed crucial for higher education graduates and prospective global citizens.

The chapters in this book are primarily written by educators and researchers who strive to address the social dimension by adjusting their curricula and teaching methodologies in highly international and intercultural higher education institutions. We believe that the cross-disciplinary nature of the chapters will demonstrate that internationalization and interculturalism in the classroom are vital considerations across all academic fields.

As acommunity of educators, we share the conviction that higher education transcends the mere transmission of information and the facilitation of learning. It also has a growing duty to prepare a workforce capable of meeting the demands of an increasingly industrialized, technologically advanced, and globalized world. In response to this, higher education must keep pace with developments in various industrial and technological sectors.

In compiling the chapters in this book, we seek to foster a pioneering spirit of transformation and evolution in the sector of higher education, pinpointing ways to increase the accessibility and advantages of higher education to the wider public. It is incumbent upon educational institutions to not just educate but also to foster an inclusive environment advocating for equity, diversity, and responsiveness to local community needs. We argue that integrating internationalization across institutional structures and operations is crucial. By nurturing a campus culture that esteems and promotes intercultural exchange, the international potential of the student body can be fully realized, resulting in a more socially conscious and diverse university. We trust this book will offer readers insights and guidance on how to navigate the changing landscape of internationalized higher education at home and provide practical approaches to teaching and learning for future global citizens.