ED 350 892

AUTHORTITLE

INSTITUTION

SPONS AGENCY

REPORT NOPUB DATECONTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

HE 025 868

Pickert, Sarah M.Preparing for a Global Community. Achieving anInternational Perspective in Higher Education.ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 2, 1992.Association for the Study of Higher Education.; ERICClearinghouse on Higher Education, Washington, D.C.;George Washington Univ., Washington, DC. School ofEducation and Human Development.Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED),Washington, DC.ISBN-1-878380-15-X; ISSN-0884-004092RI88062014

NOTE 112p.; For a related ERIC Digest, see HE 025 989.AVAILABLE FROM ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports, George Washington

University, One Dupont Circle, Suite 630, Washington,DC 20036-1183 (Single copy prices, including 4thclass postage and handling, are $17 regular and$12.75 for members of AERA, AAHE, AIR, and ASHE).

PUB TYPE Information Analyses ERIC Clearinghouse Products(071) Reports General (140)

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

ABSTRACT

MF01/PC05 Plus Postage.College Administration; College Faculty; CollegeSecond Language Programs; Cultural Awareness;Curriculum Development; Educational Objectives;Educational Planning; Exchange Programs; ForeignCulture; Foreign Students; *Higher Education;*International Education; *Multicultural Education;*Student Mobility; *Study Abroad; UndergraduateStudy

This report discusses the response of colleges anduniversities in the United States to the need of graduate students tobecome equipped to make personal and public policy decisions ascitizens of an international society. Curriculum changes are showinga tightening of foreign language standards in schools of highereducation and, throughout the curriculum, faculty are includingmaterial from other countries and advances in computer and satellitecommunication to enhance the international experience without leavingthe classroom. Additionally, the international focus on highereducation has been boosted through a major U.S. initiative thattripled federal spending on undergraduate study abroad. The UnitedStates is also cooperating with foreign representatives in workingwith the Economic Community and the United Nations Educational,Scientific, and Cultural Organization to standardize educationalcredential reporting, licensing, and certification. Governments arealso looking with increased regulatory fervor upon joint educationalbusiness ventures. Steps that faculty and administrators can take toimprove international education on their campuses are explored,including widening the curriculum to expose students to othercultures, widening opportunities for international contact, andevaluating organizational structures that help or hinderinternational activities. Contains approximately 200 references andan index. (GLR)

PREPARING FOR AGLOBAL COMMUNITYACHIEVING AN INTERNATIONALCA

00 PERSPECTIVE IN HIGHER EDUCATIONCD SARAH M PlCKERT

Raf MT Two - 1992 ASHEER1C HIGHER Em REMR7S

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOtke of Educational Research and ImprovementEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER (ERIC)AMS document has been reproduced asreceived tram the person or organization

Or[gerlattrIg rt

Minor changes have been made to ImprovereprOduCtOn quality

Points ot new or opinions stated rn thrs doCumem CIO not nefeSSafily represent othc.a'0E131 PoSition or policy

BEV COPY MIME

Preparing for a Global Community:Achieving an International Perspective in Higher Education

by Sarah M. Pickert

ASHE -ER!C Higher Education Report No. 2, 1992

Prepared by

ERICIn cooperation with

Clearinghouse on Higher EducationThe George Washington University

Association for the Study

1-1* of Higher Education

PrtbItsbed by

TheetorgesningtonniversityWASHINGTON DC

School of Education and Human DevelopmentThe George Washington University

Jonathan D. life, Series Editor

Cite asPickert, Sarah M. 1992. Preparing for a Global Community:Achieving an International Perspective in Higher Education.ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 2. Washington, D.C.:The George Washington University, School of Education andHuman Development.

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 92-85442ISSN 0884 -004(iISBN 1-878350-15-X

Managing Editor: Bryan HollisterManuscript Editor: Alexandra RockeyCover design by Michael David Brown, Rockville, Maryland

The ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education invites indi-viduals to submit proposals for writing monographs for theASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report series. Proposals mustinclude:1. A detailed manuscript proposal of not more than five pages.2. A chapter-by-chapter outline.3. A 75-word summary to be used by several review commit-

tees for the initial screening and rating of each proposal.4. A vita and a writing sample.

(ERic) Clearinghouse on Higher EducationSchool of Education and Human DevelopmentThe George Washington UniversityOne Dupont Circle, Suite 630Washington, DC 20036-1183

This publication was prepared partially with funding fromthe Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S.Department of Education, under contract no. ED RI-88-062014.The opinions expressed in this report do not necessarilyreflect the positions or policies of OERI or the Department.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

With the world integrated by economics, communications,transportation, and politics, Americans increasingly see thatthey live and work in a global marketplace of goods, services,and ideas. Policy makers and the public want educationalprograms to reflect the international ties that hind peopleas they bind nations. Colleges and universities must producegraduates who know other cultural histories, languages, andinstitutions. American institutions must work harder tobroaden understanding of world events by offering the per-spectives of other cultures.

The challenge to educators is to deliver graduates who arecompetent not only to function professionally in an inter-national environment, but who are equipped to make per-sonal and public-policy decisions as citizens of an interna-tional society.

American higher education is meeting this challenge inmany ways. Some institutions include their goals for international education in campuswide strategic plans. Othersincorporate comparative and international assessments intoindividual disciplines. Core curricula are being altered toensure that all students know more about the languages andcultures of other countries. Faculty-development opportunitiesare being created to help implement these changes. Americanstudents are being encouraged to study al,-oad, and foreignand American students with international experiences arebeing asked to bring their backgrounds to the fore.

Administrators are devising new structures for coordinatingincreased international activities. Many institutions are joiningconsortia to work on international projects with local,national, and international businesses and organizations; suchprograms increasingly are planned and assessed in a mul-tinational, comparative context.

For consistent reference, the term "international highereducation" represents international relations (study of relations among countries), area studies (study of particularregions of the world), foreign languages and cultures, conparative and international approaches to individual disciplines.and environmental, global, or peace studies, which examineissues affecting more than one nation. These education effortscan extend to every discipline and professional school, wearing together academic institutions, private nonprofit entities.businesses. local and national governments, and public andprivate international organizations.

Preparing fur a 6filbal iii

In the 1990s. higher education has had to adjust to a morecompetitive world economy, increased access to and interestin the world at large, and globe-spanning electronic databasesand computer networks. The decentralized nature of Americanhigher education allows state and private institutions to makecontact with educators abroad, bring curricula into conso-nance with job requirements, and devise ways to carry outthe international aspects of institutional missions.

But other nations view international education differently.Shaped by geography and history, national concerns guidethe responses of these countries to the content and form ofinternational education. As colleges and universities world-wide expand joint educational endeavors, they influence oneanother's views of and participation in this field.

How Is International EducationIncluded in Curricula?Once focused on improving the international expertise oflanguage majors and foreign- affairs experts, American collegesand universities now strive to teach all students about othercountries and cultures. Language is not being ignored; standards for language proficiency are being tightened, andrequirements for I;nguages and study or work abroad arecropping up in professional programs (Lambert 1989). Onthe wider scale. institutions are revising general-educationcourses; for example, nonwestern countries get broadercoverage in history and civilization courses. Depth andbreadth of curricular applications vary, but this trend is evi-dent among two-year, four year, and graduate programs.

hmughout the curriculum. faculty are including materialfrom other countries -books, films. videos, music, newspa-pers, even live satellite broadcasts. A few institutions makeacademic experience gained abroad part of the domestic curriculum by requiring enrollment in seminars, research work,or demonstrations of bilingual proficiency. Some offer cer-tificttes or joint degrees to students who complete a seriesof such courses.

It also is possible to have an international experience with-out leaving the classroom, thanks to advances in computerand satellite communication. American students now can interact directly with their counterparts throughout the world.Efforts to merge educational databases might improve accessto research or curricular activities in other countries.

it

More faculty members are imbuing their teaching with aninternational perspective, but too few incentives are offeredto encourage this approach. Faculty members who wouldlike to see more international content in their work can usecollections of course descriptions with international elements;these are published by single-discipline and professionalorganizations (Groennings and Wiley 1990).

Who Studies Abroad?More students in higher education are studying outside theirhome countries. In European Community nations, studentmobility is increasing; an ERASMUS project goal is to enableby 1992 at least 10 percent of EC students to acquire academictraining in another member state. Educators and adminis-trators at U.S. institutions want to match this goal, increasingthe diversity of students who participate and the number ofcountries offered as choices (Burn and Smuckler 1990).

In a major U.S. government initiative, the National SecurityEducation Act of 1991 tripled federal spending on undergrad-uate study abroad. The law provides more money for overseasgraduate research and grants to support programs in inter-national and area studies and foreign languages.

Analyzing study abroad from a cross-national perspective,institutions can compare the experiences of American studentsabroad with study-abroad programs sponsored by other coun-tries (Bum, Cerych, and Smith 1990; Carlson 1990; Opper,Teichler, and Carlson 1990).

The United States draws more foreign exchange studentsthan any country, but the numbers and destinations of foreignstudents are shifting (Chandler 1989). Asian students, whomake up the majority of foreign students enrolled in U.S. insti-tutions, are being wooed with some success by Australia,Japan, and other nations.

How Is International Education Administered?Amid dramatic budget reductions, U.S. campuses are fieldingdemands for a curriculum more deeply infused with inter-national and multicultural components, for greater accessto study abroad, and for closer cooperation with multinationalbusinesses. Institutions are deepening ties to institutions inother countries, coordinating programs through international-studies offices or campuswide committees, and cooperatingwith state and regional consortia (Anderson 1988).

Preparing for a Global Community

0 40

At the international level, U S representatives are workingwith EC and United National Educational, Scientific, and Cul-tural Organization (UNESCO) authorities to standardize edu-cational credential reporting, licensing, and certification. Ina gesture likely to bring more students across more borders,these bodies are trying to ease student mobility acrossnational educational systems and develop databases to facil-itate exchange of needed information (European Center forHigher Education 1987). The EC leads efforts to create a com-prehensive structure to administer international higher edu-cation (Luttikholt 1987). As higher education follows otherindustries into the global market, governments are lookingwith increased regulatory fervor upon joint educational busi-ness ventures (Chambers and Cummings 1990; Stein 1990).

How Can Faculty and AdministratorsImprove International Education?The first step is to define the term. Clarify its meaning On yourcampus. Raise the concept on campus; see if "internationaleducation" as you understand it is backed by institutionalpolicies toward international and foreign-language studies,foreign students. and faculty development.

Curriculum. Consider the extent to which your institutionexposes students to other languages and cultures. Are inter-national elements available even in professional schools? Dostudents acquire the foreign-language proficiency demandedin their chosen fields? Do all students get the chance to studyabroad and to use that experience in later course work? Com-pare your institution's offering with those of colleges anduniversities in other countries.

Participants. Widen opportunities for international contactby reducing barriers to foreign study created by schedulingand academic requirements. Bring foreign students andteachers to the t tnited States, and use international satelliteand telecommunications in the classroom. Examine your ownprogram in light of the efforts of other countries to send andreceive students from abroad.

Administration. Evaluate structures that help or hinderinternational activiti 2s. Does a campuswide strategy exist topromote such effots? Does a comprehensive document reportthese activities? A:e measures of progress adequately com-municated to the campus? Are course offerings, faculty likings.and grant proposals coordinated with other institutions in

ti

your community, state, or region? Consider how other coun-

tries administer programs and how you might coordinate your

efforts on an international scale.

Pr (Ikatag fa, a Glabal lfl

oao

ADVISORY BOARD

Alberto CabreraArizona State University

Jay L ChronisterUniversity of Virginia

Carol Ever ly FloydBoard of Regents of the Regency Universities SystemState of Illinois

Elizabeth HawthorneUniversity of Toledo

L. Jackson NewellUniversity of Utah

Barbara TaylorAssociation of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges

Preparing fora Global Community ix

V

J

CONSULTING EDITORS

Philip AltbachState University of New York-Buffalo

A. Nancy AvalcianMetropolitan State University

Paula Y. BagasaoUniversity of California System

David G. BrownUniversity of North Carolina-Asheville

Barbara B. BurnUniversity of Massachusetts-Amherst

Jay L ChronisterUniversity of Virginia

John W. CrewelUniversity of Nebraska-Lincoln

Clifton F. ConradUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison

James CooperFIPSE College Teaching Project

Richard A. CoutoTennessee State University

Donald F. DansereauTexas Christian University

Peter FrederickWabash College

Virginia N. GordonOhio State University

Wesley R. HableyAmerican College Testing

Michael L. HanesWest Chester University

John L. HowarthPrivate Consultant

Joan IsenbergGeorge Mason University

GregJohnsonHarvard College

Preparing for a Global Community xi

I I

Margaret C. KingSchenectady County Community College

Richard D. LambertJohn!, Hopkins University

Joseph LowmanUniversity of North Carolina

Jean MacGregorEvergreen State College

Richard MorrillCentre College

R. Eugene RiceAntioch University

Richard RobbinsState University of New York- Plattsburg

Carol F. StoelAmerican Association for Higher Education

Susan StroudBrown University

Stuart SussCity University of New York-Kingsborough

Mari lla D. SvinicldUniversity of Texas-Austin

Janice WeinmanThe College Board

William R. WhippleUniversity of Maine

Roger B. WinstonUniversity of Georgia

XII

r.

REVIEW PANEL

Charles AdamsUniversity of Massachusetts-Amherst

Louis AlbertAmerican Association for Higher Education

Richard AlfredUniversity of Michigan

Philip G. AhbachState University of New York-Buffalo

Marilyn J. AmeyUniversity of Kansas

Louis C. Attin.asi, Jr.University of Houston

Robert J. BarakIowa State Board of Regents

Alan BayerVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

John P. BeanIndiana University

Louis W. BenderFlorida State University

John M. BraxtonSyracuse University

Peter McE. BuchananCouncil for Advancement and

Support of Education

John A. CentraSyracuse University

Arthur W. ChickeringGeorge Mason University

Shirley M. ClarkOregon State System of Higher Education

Darrel A. ClowesVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

John W. CreswellUniversity of Nebraska-Lincoln

Deborah DiCrocePiedmont Virginia Community College

Preparing for a Global Community xili

ch,

Richard DuranUniversity of California

Kenneth C. GreenUniversity of Southern California

Edward R. HinesIllinois State University

Marsha W. KrotsengWest Virginia State College and University Systems

George D. 1(11hIndiana University-Bloomington

Daniel T. LayzellArizona Legislature

Meredith LudwigAmerican Association of State Colleges and Universities

Mantha V. MehallisFlorida Atlantic University

Robert J. MengesNorthwestern University

Toby MiltonEssex Community College

James R. MingleState Higher Education Executive Officers

Gary RhoadesUniversity of Arizona

G. Jeremiah RyanHarford Community College

Daryl G. SmithClaremont Graduate School

William TierneyPennsylvania State University

Susan TwomblyUniversity of Kansas

Harold WechslerUniversity of Rochester

Michael J. WorthGeorge Washington University

X11'

CONTENTS

ForewordAcknowledgmentsWhat Is International Higher Education? 1

Historical and Comparative Context 1

Current Issues in the U.S. 6International Education and the Rest of the World 7

Curriculum Reform 11Curricular Change at American Institutions 11

Foreign-language Requirements 12

Core Courses 14

Infusion Across the Disciplines and New DegreeStructures 15

Disciplines 17Interdisciplinary Approaches ?c,

Professional Schools 22Simulations 24International Baccalaureate 24Curricula for Foreign Students 25Academic Achievement and Curriculum Evaluation 25Summary and Research Needed on International

Curricula 27

Educational Mobility: Study-Abroad and ForeignStudents 29

Study Abroad 29Faculty Development 36Foreign Students 37Coordinating Educational MobilityThrough International Organizations 41

Summary and Research Needed on EducationalMobility 44

Administering International Education 47International Program Models in the U.S. 47Inters rationalization Indexes 49Using Consortia to Carry Out International Education 50Strategies for Promoting International Education onCampus 52

U.S. Programs in Other Countries 55International Attempts at Self-Regulation 56International Administrative Arrangements 57Summary and Research Needed in Administration 58

Summary and ConclusionsCurriculum Reform

Preparing for a Global Community

6162

XV

Studj, Abroad and Foreign Students 64Administering International Education 65Promoting an International Perspective 66References 69Index 81

XVI

FOREWORD

In the face of the breakup of the Soviet Union and China'spreoccupation with internal affairs, the implicit demand onAmericans to increase their international proficiencythusstrengthening our national securityhas lessened. But withthe decline of communism come other intemational changes,including the lowering of trade barriers, European economicunification, increased worldwide presence of the Pacific Rimcountries, and a greater demand for free flow of peoplebetween countries, that might prove a far greater challengeto the welfare of the United States than any military threatyet experienced in this century.

It is important to realize that these changes are not separateentities; they interrelate in a system of dynamic dependenciesthat eventually reflect on every citizen in the United States.The impact of this interrelationship is not immediate, how-ever; therefore, individuals are not keenly aware of the needto develop the sophisticated skills necessary to understandand cope with these changes.

In Peter M. Senge's recently published book, The Fifth Dis-cipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization(1990), he stresses the importance of seeing events in aninterrelational or systems pattern:

Business and other human endeavors are also systems. They,too, are bound by invisible fabrics of interrelated actions,which often take years to fully play out their effects on eachother. Since we are part of that lacework ourselves, it's dou-bly hard to see the whole pattern of change. Instead, wetend to focus on snapshots of isolated parts of the system,and wonder why our deepest problems never seem to besolved (p. 7).

Because of the academic discipline and department controlover higher education curriculum, colleges and universitiesare especially susceptible to this pattern of focusing on "snap-shots of isolated parts of the system." Students predominatelyconcerned with the short-term goal of graduation and begin-ning their first job fail to have as an element of their educationstrategy a vision of the factors that might influence their 40-or 50-year career. Consequently, the need to develop a greaterinternational perspectiveone that permeates the highereducation curriculumcontinually is underemphasized. For-tunately, many notable examples prevail in which higher edu-

Preparing for a Global Community

cation curriculum has integrated international education.In this monograph, Sarah M. Pickert, associate professor

of education at The Catholic University of America, firstreviews many key curriculum reforms emphasizing interna-tional education. She then examines the dynamics and impli-cations of the increase both in study-abroad programs andthe number of foreign students studying at U.S. institutions.Last, Dr. Pickert focuses on the myriad administrative concernsof internationalizing an institution's curriculum.

We increasingly recognize the importance of internationalliteracy or education in higher education; however, the valuehas yet to become integiated within the framework of theentire curriculum. It is the intent of the author to providethe background as well as specific examples that will helpfoster international proficiencies within every higher edu-cation institutionfor every student.

Jonathan D. FifeSeries Editor, Professor, andDirector, ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education

AS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Barbara Turlington, Madeleine Green, Richard Lambert, andPerry Pickert encouraged me to pursue a long-held interestin international education and acted as mentors in this en-deavor The education faculty at The Catholic University ofAmerica offered advice and support and gave me time tothink. Lisette Wright, Bharati Patel, and Christina Bo let spenthours organizing .-.1(1 checking the bibliography. Marcia Annis,Zita Kelly, and Dot Kane helped type, proofread, and printthe document. Norma Mc Burney made phone calls to trackdown missing information. Students in an international andmulticultural education course commented on a first andsecond draft. Anonymous reviewers offered helpful criticism.Michael Dolan provided invaluable editing assistance. Finally,the ASHE-ER1C office helped steer the document throughthe publishing process and into its final form. Many thanksto all of these people and to many others left unmentioned.

Preparing for a Global Community xix

WHAT IS INTERNATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION?

For colleges and universities in the United States and abroad,the concept of international higher education has evolved(and continues to do so), fueled by the interaction of indi.viduals, institutions, nations, and international organizations.As referenced in this book, the phrase "international highereducation" includes the study of relations among nations( international relations), particular regions of the world (areastudies). foreign languages and cultures, comparative andinternational approaches to particular disciplines, and theexamination of issues affecting more than one country (envi-ronmental, global, or peace studies).

The concept can take root in every discipline and profes-sional school and is fostered when participants come frommore than one country and when institutions have exchangeprograms, branch campuses, or other foreign affiliationswhether through academic programs or the increasingly denseweb of transnational connections linking academic institu-tions, private nonprofit bodies, local and national govern-ments, and public and private international organizations.

The goals of this field are different and Jrange continuouslyas colleges and universities strive to improve students' knowl-edge of other cultures and their histories, languages, and institutions. One widely embraced goal is to produce graduateswho not only are aware of the interconnections amongregions of the world, but are willing to consider national perspectives other than their own. These people embody the con-cept of international higher education in their capacity tofunction competently in an international environment andin the'r ability to make personal and public policy decisionsas responsible citizens of an international society (Hayden1982; K]itgaard 1981).

Historical and Comparative ContextOne definition of international education holds it to he "avariety of activities and programs designed to encourage theflow of ideas and people across cultural and geographicboundaries" (Encyclopedia of Educational Research 1982).Accepting this interpretation permits the roots of the conceptto he traced hack to the 336323 B.C. reign of Alexander theGreat, who established universities and libraries throughouthis empire (13ozeman 1960), or to the reign of Emperor Asokathe Great of India (273.232 13.G. ), who founded the Universityof Taxi la (Wickman 1965).

These peopleembody theconcept ofinternationalhighereducation intheir capacityto functioncompetentlyin aninternationalenvironment

Pnparing for a Global Conammily s';1

Modem highereducationbegan in the 13th century with

the foundingofuniversities

at Bologna,Paris. Montpellier,

and Oxford. In creating these institutions,their

founders set

the basic worldwideuniversity

model still extant,with mod-

ifications,today (Aithach

1991).

At the early universities,scholars sometimes

segregated

themselvesby language

and ethnic group, but the commonly

held goal ofadvancinguniversal

knowledgerendered

their

institutionsinternational.

Since 1648, when the Treaties ofWestphaliarecognized

the

EuropeanStatesystem ofsovereign,

independent,and equal

states, internationalhigher education

hasdevelopedwithin

national contexts.During the infancy

of the Americanrepub-

lic, their Europeanforebears

exerted a heavyinfluence on

the new nation's collegesand universities.Students

routinely

traveledabroad to receivedoctoral training. to learn medicine,

and to acquire a taste for Europeanculture (Veysey 1973).

But nationalismled some Americans

to look askance at

study abroad. Manycivic leadersobjected to the habit ofsend-

ing young Americansoff for a European

educationaconcern

voiced by ThomasJeffersonin a letter toJ.B. Bannister.

"An American,coming to Europe foreducation,

loses in

his knowledge,in his morals, in his health,

and in his habits,"

Jeffersonwrote (Brickman

1965, p. 29). ButJeffersonwas not

concernedabout adopting

the Europeanmodel in his own

state; he sought French advicewhen planningthe College

ofWilliamand Mary

and theUniversityofVirginia.

The first collegesin the U.S. offered instruction

in compar.

ative languagesand cultures, now considered

a part of inter-

national studies. Initiallyfounded to recruitand train men

for the religiousministry,

these institutionsemphasized

coursework on the Middle East and languages

of the Old and

New testaments.Forexample,

shortlyafter its founding

in 1636, Harvard

College was offeringclasses in three nonwestern

languages:

Hebrew,Aramaic,and Syriac.

Partly to stem the flow to Ger-

many ofAmericanspursuing

doctoral degrees,Yale University

establisheddoctoral programs

in 1861 (McCaughey1984).

Internationaleducation

has a farbrieferhistory ifconsid-

ered as the role educationplays in international

relations.

With the establishmentof the League ofNations afterWorld

War I, politiciansand academics

hoped todevelop a science

ofinternationalrelations

that had a role for education(Scan-

,

I

Ion 1960). In 1922, France and Belgium convinced otherLeague members that education ought to he elevated froma domestic concern to a legitimate interest of internationalorganizations, and the League created a Committee on Intel-lectual Cooperation (Kandel 1944; Scanlon 1960; Zimmem1939).

The establishment of that panel helped international edu-cation expand to include such activities as improving theworking conditions of intellectual workers in Central and East-ern Europe and supporting international exchange of teachers,artists, scientists, and authors. Other elements of this effortincluded international exchange of scientific publications,funding of research, and promotion of copyright agreements.

Eventually League funding proved insufficient, so the Com-mittee came under French sponsorship. The body moved itsheadquarters to Paris and then to Geneva, reconstituting itselfas the International Bureau of Education (IBE). It now issponsored by the United Nations.

The r.S. government did not play a leading role in inter-national educational exchange until after World War L How-ever, private American support for such activity dated to theturn of the century, when philanthropic foundations estab-lished by such industrialists as Andrew Carnegie, Daniel Gug-genheim, John D. Rockefeller, and W.K. Kellogg endowedscholarships underwriting tbreign study and internationalexchanges (Butts and Cremin 1953). Between 1920 and 1940,private funding continued to figure prominently, as founda-tions provided the seed money to create centers for the studyof specific areas of the world, and international educationbecame organized into area studies programs (McCaughey

98-+ ).

Before \X'orld War II, a few foreign students attended Amer-ican institutions. After World War 11, however, students fromother countries began coming in greater numbers and theNational Association for Foreign Student Affairs was formed(Klinger 1965). It is known today as NAFSA: The Associationof International Administrators.

With the signing of the treaties that ended World War II,sentiment again ran high in favor of finding an internationalsolution to war. The founding of the I inited Nations andI NESCO brought hope that a world community wouldreplace the nation state system ( Morgenthau 1967). UNESCOhad as its goal the enhancement of international collaboration

Preparing fr,r a Global COM 3

through education, science, and culture in order to". . further

universal respect for justice, for the rule of lawand for the human rights and

fundamental freedoms whichare affirmed for the peoples ofthe world . .." (Goodrich,Hambro, and

Simons 1969,pp. 387-88).Although it did not join

UNESCO until 1957, the U.S. dis-played a kindred spirit as it helped

rebuild and develop Euro-

pean and Japaneseeducational systems that had been de-

stroyed by World War 11.International education became

associated withgovernment

foreign-aidprograms such as the

Marshall Plan in Europe and thereform-oriented U.S. occu-

pation ofJapan.Upon joining UNESCO, the US. spent nearly 30 years as

a partner in thatprogram's work to improve

fundamental edu-

cation, literacy, health, and agriculture around the world.American colleges and

universities were enlisted to adviseother nations on education

systems. establish technical andagricultural schools in

developing countries, and investheavily in teacher training.

International education becamespecifically associated with assisting developing countries(Laves and Thomson 1957).The U.S. withdrew from UNESCO in 1984 over ideological

differences, but individual Americans remained involved inUNESCO-affiliated

educational efforts. Outside the UnitedNations

framework, the U.S.supported educational programs

and research by theOrganization of American States (OAS)

and theParis-based

Organisation for EconomicCooperation

andDevelopment (OECD).World War II radically

increased demand forinternational

studies specialists, both in the short term for wartime service

and in the long term forpeacetime national security and

reconstruction. In 1944, for example, the Rockefeller Foun-dation underwrote expansion by Stanford

University and theUniversity ofCalifornia at Berkeleyas well as the

University

ofWashington of its Far East and Russian studies programs.

Similar support came from the FordFoundation and the Car-

negieEndowment.

After hostilities ceased, private Funding swelled in supportof graduate

and researchprograms.

International educationcame to

mean advancedtraining for

specialists in fields vitalto American

security. With private funding on the rise andthe Cold War heating

up, internationalstudies enterprise took

off(McCaughey 1984).

4

a

Official programs began to proliferate within the U.S. gov-ernment. Along with the State Department, the U.S. Agencyfor International Development (USAID), and the U.S. Infor-mation Agency, efforts to foster international higher educationflowered at the Department of Education, the National Endow-ment for the Humanities, and the Peace Corps (Frankel 1965).

Congress stirred. The Fuibright Act of 1946, its purviewwidened by the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948, authorized federalexchange programs for American and foreign teachers andstudents. Not every such law arose wholly out of idealism.The Russians launched their Sputnik satellite in 1957; a yearlater, the National Defense Education Act was passed. TitleVI of that act, which specifically supports language and areastudies programs at American colleges and universities,remains an important source of funds.

As federal activities expanded, international education inAmerica became synonymous with these U.S. government-supported activities. The government awarded technical-assistance contracts to universities for work in developingcountries, funded the hiring of English teachers and agricul-tural experts, financed foreign-student scholarships, and estab-lished higher education programs for use by U.S. military anddiplomatic personnel stationed abroad. The 1961 foundingof the Peace Corps to send American volunteers to many partsof the world as teachers capped 20 years of increasing gov-ernment support.

Expansion of American involvement in international highereducation stopped with the war in Vietnam. As that conflictwas souring the national outlook, Congress retracted fromits formerly aggressive stance in creating new programs. TheInternational Education Act of 1966 was passed but neverfunded. Federal involvement in international education beganto decline (Coombs 1985).

Government's withdrawal was mirrored in the private sector, as the Ford Foundation rotated away from internationalprograms to concentrate on domestic issues. American highschools, colleges. and universities reduced foreign-languagerequirements. Between 1967 and 1987, the ranks of languagemajors shrank by half.

The tumult that gripped the U.S. in the sixties and early seventies echoed around the world, as revolution and invasioncut off support for foreign exchange students attending Amer-ican schools. The U.S. academic agenda was racked by conflict

Pnparingfor a Global Conommio, $

over allocation of resources and access to higher educationfor minorities. International education eventually re-emerged,its focus expanded to include the issues of multicultural sen-sitivity, crosscultural understanding, and the environment,but much ground had been lost.

In 1979, President Jimmy Carter's Commission on ForeignLanguage and International Studies painted a bleak pictureof American students' competency in languages other thanEnglish and their dim knowledge of world affairs (Pike, Bar-rows, Mahoney, and jugeblut 1979). This report helped rekin-dle interest in international higher education, as did America'sdeclining position in the world economy.

Current Issues in the U.S.In the 1980s, a U.S. government eager to encourage privatesector involvement used Title VI to create a means of forminghigher educational partnerships with the business community.Title VIB grants fund Centers for International Business Edocation and other higher education-business cooperativeefforts.

U.S. universities often operate multiple programs in a singlecountry. These activities can become disjointed because theyare funded by different government agencies or by othersources. In 1990 USAID established the Center for ItniversityCooperation in Development to foster relationships amongAmerican colleges and universities and those in developingnations, as well as to overcome fragmentation of effort.

The Center, which aims to broaden the areas in which U.S.higher education contributes to development, is studying theconcept of creating a network linking institutions in developing countries to the U.S. Another project is the creation ofenduring partnerships among USAID, American universities,and developing countries.

The end of the 1980s saw Congress resume its activiststance with regard to international education. Calling ignoranee of world cultures and languages a threat to the nation'sability to lead the world, Congress passed the National Security Education Act of 1991, which increases the opportunitiesfor American undergraduates to study abroad and increasessupport for training specialists in languages and area studies.

The law is timely: In 199I, fewer than 2 percent of Americanundergraduates studied abroad. The law also is a welcomesource of funding; its $150 million trust generates enough

6

income to triple the number of scholarships for undergrad-uates to study overseas, to provide additional curriculumgrants to colleges and universities for international and areastudies and foreign languages, and to increase graduate fel-lowship funding by 40 percent.

The American states also are taking action, prompted byinternational economic competition. State governors endorseinternational education as a way to bring more jobs andincome, by enabling workers to produce goods that are sal-able on the world market. Governors want students to he lit-erate, mathematically competent, fluent in a second language,and knowledgeable about the cultures of America's tradingpartners (National Governors Association 1989: Southern Gm.ernors Association 1986).

At the same time, states are strapped for funds, forcing col-leges and universities to look to private enterprise as a bolsterfor shrinking or vanishing government support. Their argu-ment is that students who are better able to work in a mul-ticultural and international environment constitute a soundinvestment. And, as higher education follows other :ndustriesinto the global marketplace, the entire field is coming to beseen as an international commodity offering the chance forprofits to countries and to individuals.

International Education and the Rest of the WorldThese changes are occurring around the world, altering institutional priorities in international work. Trends include diversification of admission criteria, curricula, and types of degreeawarded (Cer ch 1991). As higher education institutionsembrace the concepts of decentralized management, privat-ization. institutional autonomy, and a tidal pull toward greateraccess, all of these trends are influencing the national andinternational relationships of institutions (Clark 1983).

For example, as different kinds of diplomas gain acceptanceas valid entry into colleges and universities, educators mustassess the impact of vertical articulation, in which more sec-ondary students proceed to higher education. They also mustdeal with horizontal articulation, or the shifting ties betweenuniversity and non-university sectors (Neave 1989).

Higher education institutions play a critical role in promoting internationalism, but that function is not prominentin national goals set by most countries for their education systems ( Eurich 1981).

Nepal-fag fiff a GlObal Col111117a1/11'

Sweden is one of the few nations to have an official policyon international education. The Swedish Commission onInternationalization of Higher Education has as its goalsawareness of global interdependence and importance of inter-national understanding; building up of international solidarityexpressed in the efforts and resources devoted to financialand other assistance to developing countries: and acceptanceof the Western pluralistic value orientation (InternationalEncyclopedia of Education 1985).

Since 1952, the Netherlands has made it a priority toaddress the urgent needs of developing countries, creatinga special institution to educate foreigners. The NetherlandsUniversities Foundation for International Cooperation(Nt WIC) makes recommendations to Dutch organizationson international credential equivalencies. encourages aca-demic mobility, and advises both Dutch nationals wishingto study abroad and foreign institutions seeking informationabout the Dutch system (Van Dijk 1985). Since 1970, NUFFIChas focused on a few developing countries (Enklaar 1985).Its NATURA network, based at Wageningen Agricultural Uni-versity, provides a setting in which students from Third Worldnations can monitor development- related agriculture topicsvia satellite links and video (bit! Bulletin August 1990).

Although Canada ranks internationalism among its six prior.ities for higher education, the international responsibilitiesof Canadian universities arc limited to supporting externalaid programs. Nodding in the direction of internationalismin their higher education laws. France and Germany mainlyreflect European Community policy encouraging cooperation;those two countries regard their "Europeanization" effortsto coordinate their higher education systems as a form ofinternational education (Cerych 1991). In Japan, internation-alization includes opening Japanese universities to foreignstudents and teachers and accommodating Japanese studentswho have studied abroad ( Kitamura 1983; Mashiko 1989; Ehu-chi 1989).

Although countries operate within national historical andpolitical frameworks, each one encounters common inter-national pressures: competition for the best students, callsfor improvement in academic program quality, demands forhigh technology with which to conduct research and com-municate, and the push for higher education institutions thatcan respond to international and global concerns.

8

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

:46

American institutions face serious practical challenges ininternational education. The tasks involved include creatinga curriculum capable of making all students more knowledge-able about the world; rewarding faculty who develop exper-tise in international issues; providing a high-quality educationfor foreign students that also enriches the campus at large;preparing Americans to learn and work in international andmulticultural settings; and imposing coherence to disparateinternational activities.

Pnparing for a Global CommlaillY 9

CURRICULUM REFORM

Americans agree that students need to know more about othercountries, but no consensus exists regarding the form sucheducation should take at postsecondary institutions.

Institutions once concentrated on educating internationalspecialists for particular professions (Newell 1987). NowAmericans believe every discipline and career is affected byevents around the world. This awareness has moved inter-national topics from the academic ghettos of foreign language.area studies, and international relations into business, engi-neering, and many other fields.

However, despite a professed interest in other nations,American educational journals have been lax in addressingother countries' efforts in specific disciplines and in cross-disciplinary activities. These gaps are being filled: The aron-icle of Higher Education does a good job of covering generalcurrent events, and some institutions are subscribing to moreforeign periodicals such as the London Times Higher Edu-cation Supplement, the European Journal of Education, andthe UNESCO journal, Higher Education in Europe.

Curricular Change at American InstitutionsIt is no easy task to change a curriculum at an American col-lege or university to enhance its international aspects. Besidesthe inevitable internecine wars among disciplines and a frequent lack of faculty with sufficient expertise on internationaltopics, the administration often lacks the strength or will toguarantee the faculty a hiring, tenure, and promotion systemthat rewards work in international activities. Even so, manycolleges and universities are developing exciting programs.

A useful frame described by Tonkin and Edwards (1981)reflects the administrative structure of most American highereducation institutions. Existing structures often can hechanged by increasing the number or types of requiredcourses by requiring a foreign language, for example; by infus-ing international elements across all courses, such as by inter-nationalizing reading lists; by altering extant majors, perhapsby introducing new courses or new emphases within a dis-cipline; and by creating new majors, such as global, environ-mental, or peace studies, possibly reflecting an internationalperspective other than that which has prevailed.

in 1987. more than 7S percent of America's four-year institutions and almost half of its two-year institutions stated theyare including some international component in their general

It is no easytask to changea curriculumat anAmericancollege oruniversity toenhance itsinternationalaspects.

Preparing fio. a Global Cortimitni!y 11

education requirement (Anderson 1988). The most commonelements are foreign-language requirements; courses withan international Orientation; western history or civilization;world history, civilization, or comparative culture courses;and nonwestern history, civilization, or culture (Lambert1989).

Course offerings vary greatly by type of institution. A tax-onomy of 1972-84 unuergraduate transcript data compiledby the U.S. Education Department shows sizable differencesin the proportions of students enrolled in area studies, foreignlanguage, and international relations courses by type of insti-tution (Adelman 1990). Students took area studies, interna-tional relations, nonwestern government and politics, and for-eign languages most frequently at doctoral andcomprehensive universities; the exception was advanced Jap-anese. German, and classical Greek, which had substantialenrollments in liberal arts colleges.

Many possibilities for introducing an international perspec-tive into the curriculum appear among the innovativeapproaches funded by the Education Department's Fund forthe Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE), theIndergraduate International Studies and Foreign-LanguageProgram (Title VI of the Higher Education Act, and Title VIB,Business and International Education Program), and theNational Endowment for the Humanities. Many such projectsand others are described in more detail elsewhere (Pickertand Turlington 1992).

Foreign-Language RequirementsDuring the seventies and early eighties, foreign-language pro-ticiency among American college and university studentsdroppedthe belated impact of an earlier movement amonghigh schools and postsecondary institutions to reduce or elim-inate the foreignlanguage requirement. Between 1967 and1987. the number of language majors at American collegesand universities fell by nearly half ( Chronicle of Higher Edu-cati(m, p. ASS). A 1983 survey of entering freshmen reportedthat only 64.2 percent had Si tidied at least two years of a for-eign language before arriving at college (Actin et al. 1983).In the late 1980s. institutions revived the language require.ment. By 1987, 73.4 percent of entering freshmen were report-ing that they had enrolled in a foreign language during highschool (A.stin et al. 1987).

U

At the higher echelons of education, language studies havenot proved as renascent. Today, only 7.8 percent of U.S. col-lege students are enrolled in foreign-language classes. Lam-bert notes that colleges and universities have not respondedto the often improved proficiency of entering students, con-tinuing to offer most language courses at the elementary level.However, results of placement examinations administeredto entering freshmen suggest that many students who studiedforeign languages in high school still perform at beginner lev-els; of those who do enroll in postsecondary languagecourses, most do not continue beyond the beginner level.Even when they do continue, most do not become proficientlanguage users. Most institutions do not offer enough instruc-tion for students to work through the Foreign Service Insti-tute's estimated hours of instruction needed to reach fluency(Lambert 1986). Many students who have become bilingualwithout formal instruction are not included in these studies.

With no comprehensive national plan for language studies,American instruction in this arena suffers from discontinuitiesamong elementary, high school, and higher educational offer-ings (Lambert 1986). The Joint National Committee for lan-guages reports shifts in language entrance and exit require-ments, increasing requirements for students wishing tobecome language teachers, language-teacher incentive pro-grams, and support to institutions that assist local residentswho speak several languages (Draper 1989).

Each state sets its own foreign-language requirements forpublic educational institutions; 17 have postsecondaryforeign-language entrance requirements, and some now useas criteria not course work but proficiency. Some states, suchas Colorado, require that applicants for foreign-languageteaching positions pass oral proficiency exams.

Most institutions requiring a second language offer options.Students may exempt themselves from the requirement bydoing well on the College Entrance Board's achievement oradvanced placement language tests or by offering evidenceof having attended a high school at which the language ofinstruction is not English. Other alternatives include studyabroad, learning technical applications of a language, enroll-ing in linguistics courses on language learning, and masteringthe ability to read a second language in a content area. Whenproficiency in a technical area is the goal, some institutionsready students for language examinations prepared in other

Preparing for a Global Community 13

countries. Students in Clemson University's language andInternational Trade major prepare for certificates in businessFrench issued by the Paris Chamber of Commerce and Indus-try and in commercial Spanish issued by the Madrid Chamberof Commerce and Industry (FIPSE 1986).

The Language Learning Course, a Boston University-designed cognitive approach, emphasizes second-languagereading skills for learning-disabled students who have dem-onstrated through interviews and questionnaires that theywould have difficulty completing a four-semester foreign-language requirement (Demuth and Smith 1987). The coursegoal is to help students develop an understanding of grammar,improve their ability to analyze language as an abstract system,and apply it to language learning situations.

As students study phonetics. morphology, and syntax, theyare encouraged to consider applications to language learning.As a result of this experience, students report improved con-fidence in language learning situations and demonstrateincreased language proficiency as measured by pre- and post.Modern Language Aptitude Test scores.

Some institutions do not consider foreign.language requirements the sole avenue to an international perspective. Ratherthan hire teachers for introductory language courses and insiston rudimentary language proficiency from all students, facultyat Lehigh University's College of Arts and Sciences recom-mended hiring more teachers in Chinese and Russian, addingupper-level offerings in other languages for students inter-ested in advanced study, investing in a media resource centerfeaturing satellite reception of foreign-language programmingfrom around the world, and infusing international elementsinto courses throughout the university. A National Endowmentfor the Humanities grant helped Lehigh toward these goals( Pankenier 1990: National Endowment for the Humanities1988).

Core CoursesCore courses are the heart of an institution's concept of whatit means to he an educated person. Because these coursestouch or should touch-- all students, changing their contentor angle has the greatest possible impact of any curricularreform initiative. After 20 years, many American postsecondaryinstitutions are reintroducing core courses. including thosewith international content. Community colleges, criticized

1I

for pros inciality of course offerings, are introducing international elements in their general education requirements andcoordinating foreign language courses with four-year insti-tutions so their graduates can continue their studies at ahigher level ( Greene 1985).

Using a "great books" or "great ideas" approach, historyand literature courses can introduce international issues intothe general-education core. The challenge to these courseshas always been to treat key events in sufficient depth andcontext while offering a broad-enough perspective to widena student's view of the world.

Rothney ( 1987) attempted this task through "Critical Issuesof the 20th Century," a team-taught course that satisfies anOhio State University history and society core requirementby following five themes: the world as an interdependent sys-tem ( international); the heightened confrontation between"culturally conservative" and "change-oriented" societies(societal I: the history of political institutions (political): thedevelopment of technology ( economic): and the search forvalues for survival (cultural history). To adumbrate the tra-ditional lecture format, professors developed laboratoryassignments that included discussions of assigned fiction andfilms, interactive slide presentations, simulations. and debates.

Lewis and Clark College in Portland, Ore., links overseasstudy to a core curriculum. By participating in an "Interna.tiunal Education Core linkage Project" incorporating several"inquiry courses" and by satisfying a writing requirement.undergraduates can satisfs- core requirements while studyingabroad (Burn 1991 ). This approach ties foreign study expe-rience more closely to the rest of the curriculum and encour.ages all faculty to consider the role of overseas study in a stu-dent's overall program.

Infusion Across the DisciplinesAnd New Degree StructuresFacially can add an international element to traditional coursesby adopting a foreign-language and culture component. Whenthey are nut language teachers themselves, sonic professorsteam teach a course with a member of the foreign-languagefaculty or add non-English-language material to reading lists.Earlham College in Richmond, Va., has introduced foreignlanguages in several disciplines. including literature, philosophy, and history (,lurasek 1988). Four courses constituting

Pripelling .ft)1' el (dolled 0/1?1,11111lity /5

a Peace and Global Studies Series come from anthropology,political science, economics, and philosophy, and preparestudents for study abroad by honing awareness of culturalperspectives, global dynamics, and the necessity for makingresponsible choices about issues facing the world community(Jurasek 1991). About 65 percent of Ear lham students takeat least one such course prior to departure for study abroad.

Brown University also integrates languages across its cur-riculum. French is taught in international relations; Spanish,in political science and Latin American Studies; Portuguese,in History and Afro-American Studies; and Russian, in SovietStudies. Students concentrate on vocabulary and concepts spe-cific to these fields. An alternative offered at Brown allowsstudents enrolled in a French language course to learn dis-course strategies useful in international relations and politicalscience (FIPSE 1990).

Sony two-year institutions introduce cultural concepts andtechnical vocabulary specific to their programs. Students atJoliet Junior College in Joliet, Ill., enrolled in courses relatedto the fashion industry learn differences in cultural attitudestoward fashion and color as well as specialized French, Span-ish, and Italian vocabulary (Title VI 1989).

Other institutions create international education modulesor units to he added to existing courses or taken separatelyby students from different majors and at several levels of lan-guage proficiency. The two-person language faculty at the Col-lege of St. Scholastica in Duluth, Minn., constructed a seriesof one credit language and communication modules usingFrench and Spanish in cultural settings. Units included interviewing native speakers, studying Hispanic films and songs,playing computer games in another language, and participat-ing in language-immersion weekends (FIPSE 1989).

It also is possible to concentrate on one area of the worldand treat it across disciplines. At the University of North Caro-lina at Charlotte, faculty from Engineering, Education, andBusiness Administration collaborated to revise their coursesto focus on Japan. These efforts took place in conjunction withother institutional initiatives aimed at introducing Japaneseinto the University's foreign-language program and establish-ing agreements with a Japanese university (Title VI 1989).

Oregon State University is implementing one of the mostambitious programsone that eventually will infuse eachdepartment with an international perspective by tying course-

l6

work to an international degree earned in conjunction witha traditional degree program For example, a student earninga B.S. degree in forestry might elect to earn a B.A. degree ininternational studies in forestry. Encouraged by responsesto a student survey, the university created an option for under-graduates in even,' field of study.

To obtain the international degree, participants must com-plete 32 quarter credit-hours beyond the required coursesfor the major, demonstrate foreign-language proficiency equiv-alent to that obtained at the fourth-year college level, spendat least one 10-week term in study, research, or work abroad,and complete an integrative senior project showing compre-hension of global issues and the international dimensionsof the student's major field of study.

The Oregon State program was successfully adopted in partbecause it does not infringe on the structure of the traditionaldegree. When Eiculty are not ready to endorse a completeinfusion model, this approach might be an alternative. Thestudents viewed the program as an enhancement of their credentials and future job prospects.

DisciplinesAnother way to add international focus to the curriculum isthrough individual disciplines. This can he a beginning pointfor efforts to internationalize a campus: Before they can con-struct a program with an international perspective, faculty firstmust see how their own fields are influenced by internationalevents and how researchers from other parts of the world viewtheir disciplines.

In a National Council on Foreign language and Interna-tional Studies sponsored project. Groennings and Wiley( 1990) invited professional associations to solicit from scholars representing several disciplines articles on what under-graduate students in those fields should learn about the world.The resulting essays have been edited into a collection oninternational perspectives in geography, history, political science, sociology. psychology, philosophy, journalism, and masscommunication. This publication constitutes a good overviewof changes in these disciplines, and the following entriesinclude sonic observations of those colleges.

Social sciencesPolitical scientists frequently provide an international perspec

Preparing for a Global Community

r0

17

tine in courses comparing politics and relationships of variousnations with other countries. However, Keohane (1990) sug-gests an inextricable link between international issues anddomestic politics as well. He stresses the need for politicalscience courses to be presented in a way that permits studentsto inquire about fundamental issues such as survival, war andpeace, inequality, poverty, and powerall issues with sig-nificant implications for domestic anc: international politics.Only when students learn to resolve ethical issues such asdefining the conditions legitimizing one nation's interventioninto another's internal affairs can an international educationbe achieved.

Psychologists add cultural insight into explanations of indi-vidual and group behaviors by describing the impact of cul-ture on cognition, perception, motivation, and interpersonalrelations (Cole 1990). For psychologists interested in learningwhat is available, Torrey -Purta (1990) compiled an annotatedbibliography for materials to include in developmental andsocial psychology courses. Sociologists pay special heed tocomparative applications of that discipline and concepts illus-trating the interdependence of social systems (Tiryakian 1990;Wallerstein 1990). The American Sociological Association pub-lished a collection of sociology course syllabi with an inter-national component (Goodman, Armer, and Carlson 1991).

Foreign languagesLanguage departments now integrate culture into their instruc-tion (Crawford-Lange and Lange 1984), incorporating discus-sion of relevant topics such as geography and political andlegal systems (Leaver and Stryker 1989). These departmentshave increased their emphasis on oral and written proficiency(Freed 1989) and redesigned the curriculum for foreign-language teachers (Moeller 1989).

The cultural content of language courses typically appearsas notes, pictures and illustrations, literature (including prose,poetry, and proverbs), games, songs, films, and role-playingexercises. Crawford-Lange and Lange (1984) argue that inmost language classrooms, the differences in cultural attitudesand conventions remain a peripheral goal. They urge that lan-guage be taught in the context of a cultural issue familiar tostudents.

For example, by exploring the themes of assessing chancesfor employment or attending school in another culture, stu-

18

0

dents can deal with statistics on minimum wages, rules aboutschool discipline, and attendance codes. After discussing theirinitial perceptions of these themes, students can considerwhat they need in terms of language function, structure, syn-tax, registers, and vocabulary to continue discussing the sub-ject. In this way, the theoretical meets the practical. For exam-ple. as one who is looking for work in France, how do youaddress a potential employer? Next, students examine the cultural differences they have uncovered and discuss the reasonswhy those differences exist. With this approach, instructorsevaluate students on proficiency in both language and culturalunderstanding by requiring conversations and written materialin the target language.

Some institutions use computers, videodiscs, and satellitetechnology to enhance language learning. "In the FrenchBody," a course created with a computer program and a video-disc. helps students concentrate on nonverbal aspects of com-munication such as facial expression and gesture as well asgrammar and vocabulary. Students enrolled in "Body" watchtapes of 60-second unscripted conversations between nativeFrench speakers. and then act out these conversations (FIPSE1990).

Many institutions would like to use direct satellite broad-casts in language instruction, but often these require supple-mental material that is difficult or costly to obtain. "France-TV,- a monthly language and culture video magazine com-piled at the University of Maryland's Baltimore County cam-pus. covers cultural, political, and current events usingexcerpts from French broadcasts. Complete transcription andteaching materials on was to use the broadcasts supplementthe videos (FINE 1990).

Physical and natural sciencesScience and mathematics pose the greatest challenge to advo-cates of the international perspective in higher education.Some institutions incorporate language into science courses.encouraging study abroad and offering certificates for enrolling in a sequence of designated courses oriented to international topics. At St. Olaf CA Alege in Northfield, Minn.. mathematics and natural and behavioral science majors earn anApplied Foreign language Component certificate b cornpteting an advanced foreign series. Certificates are grantedto students completing two of the following: a regular course

Preparing for a (11(4411 Community 19

in which approximately half the readings and other assign-ments are in a foreign language; a disciplinary guided readingcourse in a foreign language; an internship abroad thatrequires a second language; or a science course taught in aforeign language on campus or as part of a foreign-study pro-gram. Math and science majors also can opt for an English-only or a foreign-language track. On the language route, halfthe text material is in French, Spanish, or German, with a quar-ter of class sessions conducted by a language teacher in theforeign tongue (FIPSE 1989).

Interdisciplinary Approaches

Area studiesAn international perspective can evolve by focusing on a sin-gle geographical region with a distinct culture. Reports onteaching about particular countries, such as a German MarshallFund study of contemporary Germany in the U.S., or a studyof the teaching of Japanese in the U.S., help reveal the statusof teaching and research of a particular region or country.These reports describe the state of course offerings about thatnation in language, history, social sciences, and professionalschools (Janes and Scher 1987; Japan Foundation 1989).

Sometimes an interest in area studies emerges at an insti-tution because of location or students' cultural backgrounds.Cultura e Commercio, a program in language, liberal arts, andcommerce developed at State University of New York StatenIsland, focuses on Italyan inherently appealing subject inlight of the ancestry of many students at this institution. Stu-dents gain fluency in Italian, then declare an Arts and Sciencemajor in art, economics, English, history, international studies,or political sciencesubsequently enrolling in a sequenceof international-business courses and spending part of thejunior year in Florence. Seniors participate in program-arranged internships with Italian or Italian-American firms(FIPSE 1987).

International relationsSome in this field claim American social science conceptualframeworks dominate the discipline, but others deny a skewtoward the U.S. or any other country. A Ford Foundationreport covering studies in Britain, France, Germany, Nether-lands, Sweden, and Italy illustrates the extent to which inter-

20

pretations vary on the scope of the subject and its method-ology (Ford Foundation 1976). Researchers agree that inter,state relations now are only one of many systems of interna-tional relations being studied (Palmer 1980). However, it isdifficult to summarize trends in this arena, since faculty inmany countries have individual research agendas, frustratinganalysts.

Global educationA grass-roots movement dating to the late 1970s, global edu-cation has become a catchphrase often used synonymouslywith international relations, area studies, and peace and worldorder studies, or with single issues such as world hunger andglobal warming (Vocke 1988).

Most global educators say the growth of international eco-nomic and political systems, demographic shifts, and a de-clining American hegemony have accelerated global inter-dependence. They urge academicians, politicians, businesspeople, and citizens to see past national borders and prepareto deal in world terms (Anderson 1991).

Peace studiesIn 1984, the U.S. moved to expand knowledge about thenature of war and peace by establishing the United States Insti-tute of Peace (Lewis 1989). In 1989, the American Academyof Political and Social Science dedicated a special issue to the40th anniversary of peace studies in the U.S. (Lopez 1989).This field continues to focus on causes and consequencesof violent conflict; ways to manage, reduce, or resolve violentconflict; and values, norms, and institutions for buildingpeace. Collections of curricular guides on courses coveringpeace and world order show how faculty address these issuesin individual courses (Wien 1981).

Comparatively speaking, peace education is central to theFinnish concept of internationalism. There, peace studies asa topic is blended into courses on political science, sociology,social psychology, communications sciences, history, andteacher training (Kyllonen 1984 ).

Ethnic/multicultural studiesInternational and multicultural educators share an interestin educating students about cultures of the world and in crosscultural understanding. Current publications encourage faculty

Internationalandmulticulturaleducatorsshare aninterest ineducatingstudents aboutcultures of theworld and incross-culturalunderstanding.

Preparing for a (Aka Community 21

to broaden the scope of course material in this direction. Thetendency of Black Studies courses to focus on the Pan-Africanworld, for example, means that the wider Third World, whichalso has cultural ties to African Americans, sometimes is over-looked (Edmondson 1984). Georgia Southern University isstrengthening its African and African-American Studies pro-gram beyond a traditional focus on sub-Saharan Africa to offerCaribbean and African Literature in French (1991).

Institutions desiring to incorporate the multilingual andmulticultural expertise of students into international educa-tional efforts sometimes turn to local refugee and immigrantcommunities. California State University at Stanislaus engagesuniversity students from anthropology, education, nursing,and social work in a set of field-work experiences with Cam-bodian refugees. A language and cultural immersion courseis taught at the field site, using native speakers as tutors. Stu-dents also may enroll in a course on intercultural commu-nication (FIPSE 1990).

Professional SchoolsBusinessUrged on by professional accrediting organizations andencouraged by new federal funding, business schools areincreasing their international curriculum by revising courses,establishing new majors, and creating centers for internationalbusiness education. Accounting courses now include instruc-tion on analyzing foreign financial statements and calculatingforeign currency conversions (laribee 1988; Ramaglia 1988).Finance courses offer practice in analyzing international finan-cial markets (Garg 1987).

In 1989, the U.S. Education Department began Title VIBprograms to encourage cooperation among business schools.other university segments, and the business communitythrough Centers for International Business Education (CIBE).The University of Michigan School of Business Administrationestablished one of 16 such centers. Acting as a regional andnational resource for the academic, business, and professionalcommunities, it sponsors faculty seminars that bring togetherbusiness and nonbusiness faculty, also providing outreachprograms to the community and collaborating on projectswith community colleges (Title VIB 1990).

Education and social workEducation majors are among the least likely of students toenroll in courses with an international emphasis (Lambert1989). Like other professional schools, some education pro-grams encourage students to engage in practical internshipexperiences in other countries. Some programs permit stu-dents to complete their student teaching in English-speakingschools located abroad (West 1985). Case studies of teacher-education programs that are especially active in global activ-ities describe numerous approaches to making the disciplinemore international (Florida International University: Lafayette1985; Indiana University: Ochoa 1986; Northern Illinois Uni-versity: Gueulette 1987).

However, in a 1990 survey of schools of education that pre-pare high school social-studies teachers to teach with a globalperspective, many programs were found not to emphasizea historical approach to international topics. They also omitteddiscussions of worldwide environmental issues (Merryfield1991).

The internationalization of social-work practice requiresthat social workers be famf*. tr with other countries' political,legal, and social-welfare systems, as well as U.S. policies onsuch topics as i-ternational adoption and settlement of ref-ugee minors.... 2sponse, social-work professional groupsproduced a manual to help faculty incorporate internationalcontent into their courses (Healy, n.d.). Curriculum modulesintroduce students to global aspects of poverty and hunger,children's rights, and intercountry adoption.

Mining and engineeringAware that 70 percent of engineering services provided in the

encounter international competition, the Colorado Schoolof Mines moved to prepare its students for the real work bycreating a department of global systems and cultures and aminor in international political economy within its engineerMg school. Students enroll in social science courses that focuson Latin America or Asia, studying the language of the countryin which they will complete a field practicum as practicingengineers. While travel costs restrict student participation inforeign internships, the school has identified private and state-owned enterprises to underwrite the cost of room and hoardand to provide a small stipend (FIPSE 1989; Goodwin and'yacht 1991).

Pnpararg for a Global Connnimio. 2.3

The ITniversity of Rhode Island adds an internationalapproach to engineering by encouraging students to completetwo degrees: the first a B.S. in any of the traditional engineer-ing areas, the second a B.A. in German that requires intensiveGerman language courses and an advanced engineeringcourse taught in German by engineering faculty. An interna-tional engineering internship program enrolls participantsin intensive German language courses for engineers prior towork with -a German engineering firm (FIPSE 1990).

SimulationsFor many years colleges and universities have used simula-tions, role-playing activities, debates, and similar means toencourage student involvement in many disciplines. Telecom-munications advances now make it possible for simulationsto cross national boundaries, making their membership asell as their content international. These encounters partiallymake up for gaps in the experience of students who do notgo abroad and who lack substantial academic contact withpeople from other countries.

In simulations, high school and postsecondary studentscommunicate electronically with partners in other countriesthrough such exercises as a month-long program coordinatedby the University of Maryland. Called ICONS, this project linksteams of students from many U.S. institutions with each otherand with students in Argentina, Germany, and Japan. Usingsimulation software, students use personal computers andmodems to gain access to communications networks suchas Telenet and NSFNET, then debate international issues suchas arms control, European economic unification, the MiddleEast, human rights, Third World economic development, andthe global environment (Wilkenfeld 1983).

International BaccalaureateFew educators advocate a curriculum that could be acceptableworldwide. One exception is the International Baccalaureate,used in high schools around the world and accepted as equiv-alent to one year of postsecondary education in many coun-tries (Freeman 1987; Peterson 1972; Fox 1985). Establishedin 1960 to meet the needs of expatriate students who attendedsecondary school in one country and higher education inanother, the curriculum is divided into languages. the studyof man, experimental sciences, mathematics, and the arts.

L

4

Graduates must pass a comprehensive examination. The Inter-national Baccalaureate Organization (IBO) responded to crit-icism that the curriculum was too heavily western by allowinginstitutions greater flexibility in the courses they offer.

Curricula for Foreign StudentsDiscussions of international-studies curricula rarely addressthe appropriate form and content of a curriculum for foreignstudents in U.S. institutions. American colleges and univer-sities want to broaden the intellectual horizons of all students,but many believe that of itself an American education is suf-ficiently international for foreign students. Classes offered spe-cifically for foreign students generally introduce these studentsto the American political and education system and instructthem in English as a second language (Will 1980). Througha USIA-funded program, NAFSA encourages institutions to pro-vide ways for foreign students to participate in communityactivities and many other projects to learn more about theU.S. and teach Americans about their native lands.

Important questions remain about the curriculum for for-eign students. Many have come to the U.S. seeking specifictechnical and professional knowledge. Should foreign stu-dents he required to learn about countries other than the U.S.?Must they he encouraged to enroll in study-abroad programs?Do they need to he integrated into advanced language coursesor offered special classes for themselves?

Academic Achievement and Curriculum EvaluationInterest in assessing college students' knowledge of and atti-tudes about people in other countries began in the 1980s,when the Educational Testing Service and the Council onLearning constructed the college-level Survey of Global Aware-ness (Black and Bonham 1981a). Scholars from the disciplinesof world history, sociology, international economics, andinternational relations composed questions on historical periods and geographical areas. The instrument was not fullyimplemented, but the pilot data from 3,000 American fresh-men and seniors was disappointing. Subjects typically an-swered correctly on only half of the 101 test items.

'lb gauge knowledge of language and international affairsgained in high school language and history courses, ETSturned to its advanced placement exam format. The firm alsois developing test items for a political science examination

Preparing for a Global Community 25

(FIPSE 1989). As advanced placement tests are more widelyrecognized as measuring mastery of college-level material,they become the measure of what Americans believe collegestudents should know about these subjects.

Save for its informal demonstration ofAmerican studentignorance on international issues, the original ETS Survey ofGlobal Awareness has not been used widely, but Japaneseresearchers expressed an interest in a comparative study usingthis test. In the .1980s the instrument was modified, translatedinto Japanese, and hack-translated to assure accuracy. Afterrequesting background information on respondentssuchas foreign-language proficiencythe test asked students toagree or disagree with statements about human rights, worldgovernment, cooperation, and war, and then posed questionsto measure participants' interest in other parts of the world.Finally, participants were tested through multiple-choice ques-tions on their knowledge of the world. Cogan, TomerPurta,and Anderson (1988) administered the test to some 1,300 Jap-anese public university freshmen and senior education majors.

Japanese students enter the university relatively moreknowledgeable about the world than American freshmen, buttheir knowledge increases only slightly over four years. Jap-anese freshmen had higher test scores than their Americancounterparts, but by senior year these differences had dis-appeared. American seniors knew as much as Japaneseseniors, whose scores were only slightly above their freshmansample.

On attitude items, Americans were far more likely to agreewith the statement, "Studying a foreign language can beimportant for me because other people will respect me moreif I have knowledge of a foreign language." Concerning warand human rights, about half the American students agreedthat "under some conditions war is necessary to maintain jus-tice," compared with less than eight percent of the Japanese.Only 13 percent of American students agreed that "Peopleshould refuse to engage in any war, no matter how seriousthe consequences to their country," while 78 percent of Japa-nese students agreed.

At the national level, more interest abounds in collectingeducational achievement measures through internationalorganizations and joint national projects (TOrney-Purta 1990:Walherg 1990). To publicize expectations of other countriesabout what their students should know about world history

26

`-±

and geography, the National Endowment for the Humanitiespublished examples of questions taken from national testsfor the French baccalaureate, the General Certificate of Sec-ondary Education for England and Wales, the German Ahitur,and the European baccalaureat examination for EuropeanCommunity schools in Brussels.

European students seem to be required to know muchmore about world history than students in the U.S. TheNational Endowment questioned whether American studentscould pass the French test on US foreign policy or a Britishtest requiring a detailed understanding of American progres-sivism. Similarly, the Endowment wondered whether Amer-ican teachers require their students to know the history ofother countries in the same detail that other countries do(National Endowment for the Humanities 1991).

The evaluation of individual courses for their internationalcontent depends on the objectives for each course. To assistteachers who use common frameworks, Tbrney-Purta (1989)created a format for evaluating five approaches to world stu-dies: world history. western civilization, historical cultures,world geography, and international relations. She suggeststhat evaluators decide if a curriculum actually has been implemented. then assess knowledge and skill acquisition specificto the approach used (criterion referenced, multiple-choice,and open-ended tests). Torney-Purta discusses secondary-school curricula, but the evaluation strategies have generalapplication.

Summary and Research Needed on InternationalCurriculaAmerican strengthsCurricula in American higher education institutions carry ahigh value worldwide, evidenced by the number of foreignstudents who come to the U.S. to study. Paradoxically, whenasked to define an international education curriculum. manyinstitutions voice doubt about the adequacy of today's offerings. Asa result. colleges and universities are introducinginformation about other countries into individual courses andint-using international components across the curriculum inevery major and at every level. A lack of consensus on howto proceed permits institutions to match curricular changeswith students' perceived needs, such as increasing demandli r spoken proficiency in two languages and knowledge about

Pr.paring for a Global Commie mir 27

,45

parts of the world as they relate to future careers.Advances in telecommunications and computers permit

creation of courses in which students in the U.S. communicatedirectly with people elsewhere without traveling any fartherthan a telephone, computer terminal, or television.

American weaknessesBecause no unified approach to curricular change exists inAmerican higher education, many gaps remain in course andprogram content and quality. Relatively little information onhow other countries approach the topic or even on the cur-riculum for foreign students in American institutions isapplied practically. This difficulty stems partly from Americaneducators' lack of proficiency in languages other than English.

Research neededAt the local level, how does curricular change affect the aver-age college or university student? What have foreign studentslearned in the U.S.? What is the impact at the national levelof curriculum improvement projects on career choices, facultyresearch, or program offerings? What knowledge about theworld do American students lack that college and universitystudents in other countries possess? Are there ways the federalgovernment could help American institutions use technologyto improve interaction with institutions and data banks inother countries?

At the international level, what curricular activities do international organizations promote and how can American insti-tutions use them successfully?

ax

,46

EDUCATIONAL MOBILITY: Study-Abroad and Foreign Students

Study AbroadAfter language instruction, study abroad is the most commonfeature of international-studies programs on American cam-puses (Lambert 1989). Many governments view study-abroadprograms with favor, since their existence implies that theinstitution involved is committed to overseeing the visitingstudent's experience.

Study-abroad experiences vary widely by type of student,participants' purposes and destinations, and the nature ofstudies undertaken. Such programs serve students' pragmaticinterests, combining travel with a recognized, legitimate formof study likely to count toward a degree. Thus, a Europeanor Asian sojourn need not postpone entry into the labor mar-ket (Burn, Cerych, and Smith 1990).

American participants in a study-abroad program listed astheir predominant motivations the desire to travel, to expe-rience a new culture, to improve their skills in a foreign lan-guage, to gain another perspective on American life, and toobtain a deeper understanding of their host countries. Stu-dents expressed hope that the experience would prove usefulin their careers, but did not emphasize the importance of theexperience as a means of improving career prospects (Carl-son, Burn, Useem, and Yachimowicz 1990).

Study abroad also serves the mission of individual insti-tutions. For example, Catholic colleges and universities oftenestablish programs in Rome to study a source point of thatfaith. A Rome-based program organized by the University ofDallas attracts about 80 percent of that Jesuit college'ssophomore-level students. Participants learn about theirGreco-Roman heritage, then study European history, art andarchitecture, philosophy, theology, and Italian language(Goodwin and Nacht 1988).

Like students, schools can have pragmatic reasons behindtheir interest in foreign study. Study abroad sometimes costsless on the administrative level than does keeping studentson the home campus. If a significant portion of the studentbody attends classes in another country, home-campus class-rooms and lecture halls can accommodate additionalenrollees.

Study-abroad programs also respond to the needs of facultymembers, permitting them to travel and engage in contractualarrangements beyond their home campuses (Goodwin andNacht 1988). Institutions that alone cannot afford to support

Preparing for a Global Community 29

cag

study-abroad programs often join consortia geared to sucharrangements (McLean 1990).

By the year 2000, 10 percent of American college and university undergraduates should have a significant educationalexperience abroad befbre completing their studies, urged aNational Task Force report on undergraduate educationabroad (Burn and Smuckler 1990). That task force was estab-lished by NASFA: the Association of International Educators,the Council on International Educational Exchange (CIEE),and the Institute of International Education (HE).

Why the sudden need for American students to go abroad?One reason given is the loss of America's competitive positionin the world. Adherents of this analysis say that because citi-zens of other countries are learning to live and work in aninternational environment, they will find and develop markets.exacerbating the declining economic position of the U.S.(Southern Governors Association Advisory Council on Inter-national Education 1986 ). According to this position, studyabroad is essential to regain and maintain economic viability.

The task force's goal of 10 percent of students in study-abroad programs echoes a 1992 target set by the EuropeanCommunity, whose members have begun an extensiveexchange program to improve the European market fromwithin. EC nations differ sharply from the United States, however. so it is not clear whether the identical goal is simply apolitical reaction or a carefully reasoned position.

Either way, indications from surveys of entering Americanfreshmen suggest that the U.S. will meet the 10 percent goal.In 1986, 10.4 percent of first-year students indicated that theywere likely to study abroad while enrolled in college (Astinet al. 1986). To make that figure concrete, American studentsand institutions will have to change; in 1988, only two percentof American undergraduates were studying abroad for aca-demic credit (Zikopoulos 1989).

Institutions are responding to student interest in studyabroad by offering more program options. During the 1980s,66 percent of four-year institutions queried in a Higher Education Panel survey of 541 representative institutions said theyhave increased opportunities for American students to studyabroad (Anderson 1988).

Who actually goes abroad for study? By discipline, the highest proportion comes from the liberal arts (18 percent). Ianguages ( 16.7 percent), social studies (13.7 percent), and busi

Uu

ness and management (10.9 percent). Least represented areeducation (4.1 percent), physical and life sciences (3.8 per-cent). health sciences (1.7 percent), engineering (1.6 per-cent ), and mathematics and computer sciences (1.3 percent)(Zikopoulos 1988).

Participation varies greatly by institution. The San Diegocampus of the University of California system has inaugurateda Fifth College in which all students are strongly encouragedto study abroad. On other campuses, organized study abroadis restricted to the few. Some students do not go abroadbecause they do not see its curricular relevance or they feara delayed graduation (Carlson et al. 1990). And while manyfaculty support the theory of foreign study, they are reluctantto have students in their disciplines study in another country.Often, concern about the quality of courses available abroaddrives faculty advisors to urge students who do participatein foreign study programs to take elective courses while inanother country. In a Ford Foundation Study Abroad Articulation Project of deterrents to study abroad encountered byAmerican undergraduates at eight institutions, students citedlack of faculty encouragement as an important reason for notparticipating (Burn 1991).

Authors in this field emphasize the need to expand not onlythe numbers, but the kinds of student who do course workin other countries. Enrollees at baccalaureate institutions aremost likely to go abroad; community college students areleast likely to do so. Many more women (64 percent ) thanmen study abroad in U.S. programs (Zikopoulos 1988).

American skeptics who argue that professional specializations such as engineering, business, or law cannot accom-modate foreign sojourns should note that in European pro-grams, 60 percent of participants major in science.engineering, or other professional fields (Carlson et al. 1990).But unlike U.S. students in these professions, European stu-dents are prepared to do course work in the language of thehost country. Currently, American students must he satisfiedwith courses offered in English by the home campus or withhost country language and culture offerings (Burn 1991).

Ilow does study abroad affect students? Researchers seekingto gauge psychological benefits find it difficult to isolate, mea-sure, and trace attitudinal outcomes specifically to a foreigneducational experience. Some reports document substantialpersonal difficulties among participants in foreign-study pro.

. . . studentscited lack offacultyencouragementas animportantreason for notparticipating.

1Tc /,rrriuq Jar (I (ikillt Coll! 111111111Y

IBM COPY AVAiLLILE

$/

grams. Cultural and academic dissimilarities, constrained insti-tutional and governmental budgets, and discontinuitiesbetween a student's reasons for foreign study and a country'sreasons for encouraging such visits contribute to these nega-tive results (Barber, Altbach, and Meyers 1984; Lulat and Alt-bach 1985).

Other reports say study abroad generates a positive attitudetoward world affairs, enhanced knowledge of the world,greater maturity and interpersonal skills, and reluctance toperpetuate cultural stereotypes (Detweiler 1984). Newerresearch on study abroad employs crosscultural collaborativeapproaches to include several home and host countries. Ina 1990 survey, foreign-study programs offered by 51 institu-tions in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and the U.S.were assessed for their organizational arrangements andimpact on participating students (Bum, Cerych, and Smith1990; Opper, Teich ler, and Carlson 1990). The authors ana-lyzed a range of programs, gauging their success in achievingtheir goals and deciding if particular outcomes could be attri-buted to program features. They also surveyed students beforeenrolling in study-abroad programs and after completion tomeasure the impact of study abroad on foreign-language com-petence, academic performance, knowledge and perceptionof host and home countries, and career choice.

Both compulsory and voluntary, the programs assessed alsovaried greatly in number of participants, duration, and degreeof linkage to individual disciplines (with American and Swed-ish institutions typically serving students from many fields).The study found that no specific aspect of an organizationwas associated with program success or failure. Theresearchers concluded that study abroad could take manyorganizational forms and still function successfully.

The chance to learn firsthand about another culture wasmost frequently cited by students as the reason for enrollingin the programs. Similarly, fewer than 20 percent ofprogramsstudied gave a high priority to the academic dimensions ofthe experience. However, successful programs that empha-sized academic objectives also had a high degree of curricularintegration and were designed to reduce the time neededfor practical matters such as arranging for housing.

In terms of organization, the U.S. models differed fromthose in other countries in that they had a designated admin-istrator with primary responsibility for study abroad. Other

32

countries more often assigned the task to a faculty memberin exchange for a reduced course load.

How organized should study-abroad programs be? Americanand British program directors suggested that student supportwas important in reducing insecurity and calming fears aboutisolation. But German directors said a high degree of orga-nization support encourages passivity and reduces students'chances to master crosscultural situationsa primary goalof those programs.

Should study-abroad programs be reciprocal among nationsand institutions? Most programs are characterized by suchsymmetry; EC member nations strive not only for joint studyprograms, but for a single course of study. In some cases, boththe home and host institution grant degrees upon completionof the program.

More high school students are studying abroad, a trendworth noting by those in higher education. Programs suchas Youth for Understanding and American Field Service con-duct much of the better research on the impact of this expe-rience. Their surveys use control samples of nonparticipantsof the same age, gender, and educational background as thestudy-abroad sample.

Some researchers want to know how returnees value thechanges brought on by participation in an exchange program.In one study, 661 German and American participants wereinterviewed and answered questionnaires about their home-stay experiences abroad, some of which had been as long asone academic year (Bachner and Zeutschel 1990). Bothgroups indicated that the key reasons for becoming anexchange student were a desire for increased independence,greater foreign language proficiency, the honor of the role,and an increased sense of uniqueness.

Students experienced more difficulties in areas that hadgiven them concern prior to the exchange. The more positivea student's relationship with the host family and the longerthe student's stay in the host country, the more likely a studyparticipant was to feel that the exchange had been successful.Nearly all Germans reported studying and using English uponreturning home, but only 71 percent of Americans reportedthe same experience with German. 01 the other hand, amongthe program's early participants, more Americans than Ger-mans sent their own children on exchanges to the former hostcountry. More respondents than German respondents

I'reparaig jar a Global calimaaair .3.3

declared that the exchange experience had a greater impacton their educational and professional directions.

To prime students for the experience abroad, GeorgetownUniversity designed an orientation course contrasting the edu-cational systems of the U.S. and modem Europethe areato which most Georgetown exchange students choose to go.To prepare students for differences in academic culture, thecourse is modeled on the European 'approach, in which fac-ulty generally are not available for extended advising, forcingstudents to find resources on their own. Involvement in thecourse carries past a student's actual time abroad, concludingwith an assigned paper in the senior year in which the studentreflects on the foreign-study experience (Cressey 1991).

At Earlham College, students can avail themselves of analternative called a bridge activity (Jurasek 1991). In advanceof their time abroad, students are encouraged to contact a fac-ulty member from whom they will be taking a course in thetwo terms immediately following their return. Student andteacher collaborate to define an activity to he conducted whileabroad that will have an- application to that faculty member'scoursenot a typical classroom-oriented task like supple-mental reading, but an inquiry into some aspect of the hostcountry's culture that might not be covered in the course. Thisroutine is not mandatory; Earlham faculty members fear thatmaking it so would transmogrify the experience into a burden.

Students do not always know how much they have learnedwhile studying abroad. To help gauge the breadth of thismasked knowledge, the University of Colorado tests inter-national relations majors before and after study abroad tocompare their knowledge and attitudes about the host countrypre- and post facto (Delaney 1991). This examination groupsquestions around program goals:

To increase familiarity w ith the host country's cultural,historical, economic, and social background (W1-iat cul,tural activities can you participate in that are unavailablein the U.S.?):TO learn firsthand the issues being debated in the hostcountry (List the five most controversial topics beingcovered in the news of the host country);To be more sensitive to nations' differing political objectives (Name an issue in which your host country Opposesthe U.S. stance);

it

To recognize the ambiguity in international relations(Describe two different positions held by competingpolitical parties on an issue in your host country);To he able to converse with citizens of the host country(Describe a concept that is easily expressed in the lan-guage of your host country but not in English); andTo develop critical thinking skills and an ability to reasonin the host-country context (Name three assumptions thatyou held because of your American background that havebeen challenged by your stay abroad).

This activity involves the faculty in establishing and measur-ing the degree to which program goals are attained since thequestions reflect them, shows students what they havelearned, and responds to state legislature requests to identifythe outcomes of study-abroad programs.

Since most American students do not go abroad, what canbe (lone for them? Those who stay at home might encounterstudents and teachers from other countries, but the experi-ence is not always positive. In the U.S., engineering and com-puter sciences programs enroll the greatest number of foreignstudents but send the smallest proportion of American stu-dents abroad. In addition, these programs are not designedto take advantage of the way in which foreign students couldenhance the international knowledge of their American coun-terparts. In fact, the limited English of many foreign-hornteaching assistants at American institutions might he a sig-nificant factor in American students' sometimes negative atti-tudes about people from other countries.

What can be done to prepare for and build on study-abroadexperiences? Institutions trying to increase the quality andparticipation in study-abroad experiences are finding newways to inform students about such opportunities and tryingto use the expertise of returning participants. However. muchremains to be done in this regard; one study of eight Amer-ican institutions found that only half of foreign-study partic-ipants had been told about this option before enrolling inthe institution. Kalamazoo College in Michigan was the excep-tion; most students at that institution reported knowing aboutand participating in study abroad programs. Among studentswho did learn in advance of foreign study options, most saidthe information in question was general and not related toa particular major (Carlson et al. 1990).

twparing for a Global Community i5

Atinstitutionssuch as Brown

University inProvidence, RI.,

non-language-departmentseminarsoffered in

languages other

than Englishchallengestudents

returning from abroad to use

theirimproved

foreign-language skills. But fewdisciplines

require fluency in a foreignlanguageat a level

needed to par-

ticipate in acollege-level class, so these

courses are the excep-

tion rather than the rule.On othercampuses, students and facultyare

encouraged

to discuss theways inwhichtranslation affects the

understand-

ing ofconcepts. This exercise doesnot require

familiaritywith

anotherlanguagebut

provides anopportunity to illustrate

howlanguages reflect cultural

differences.FacultyDevelopmentAny serious

curriculum revision requires faculty support; to

encourage thatinvolvement in

adiustinginternational dimen-

sions ofcurricula,

Americaninstitutions use

numerous strate.

gies(McCarthy 1986). These include aiding faculty

members

instudyingabroad

themselvesas ameans of

enhancing inter-

nationalawareness and

languagecompetence.

Undergraduate

liberal artsinstitutions such as Goucher,

Earlham,Kalamazoo.

andDickinson have createdspecific

programs to this end.

Campuses with existingprograms in other

countries use

thoseprograms to help

faculty improve theirlanguage skills.

Dickinson sent much of its faculty topartneruniversities in

Spain, France,Germany, and Italy for

languagestudy(National

Endowment for theHumanities 1984).

Government-funded

faculty-exchangemechanismssuch as the

Fulbright Program

figuresignificantly in

assisting faculty to gaininternational

experience.On some

campuses, recentimmigrantsas well

as foreign

students provide the impetus forinvesting in faculty

study

abroad.AlthoughTexas A&I

University inKingsville enrolled

manyMexican-American

students, most facultymembers

lacked a sufficientfamiliarity with this

studentpopulation's

language, culture, and learning styles. 'lbcompensate, the uni-

versityoffered facultymembers the chanceto

participate in

interdisciplinaryseminarson

Mexican-American history. cul-

ture, andlanguage,as well as annual

symposia onMexican

American issues and athree-week

Spanish-immersion summer

program inMexico (FINE 1990).Most

institutions do not rewardfaculty

members forpar

ticipating inactivities related to foreign

study or forworking

PP

with foreign students. For example, few campuses attachmuch value to advising students about study abroad, partic-ipating in on-campus activities related to international issues,or serving as a program director in another country; some-times the trip itself is perceived as sufficient reward (Burn1991). Faculty members who do not travel abroad in connec-tion with an institutional program sometimes resent thosewho do. To get more teachers involved in international activ-ities, reward systems on most campuses must change.

Foreign StudentsAware that graduates will he working in multicultural if notinternational settings. many institutions now acknowledgethat their students need opportunities to interact positivelywith people of other countries and cultures. Therefore, foreignand American students who can teach languages other thanEnglish are valuable resources for U.S. colleges and univer-sities, which are finding ways to enlist the help of such indi-viduals. On some campuses, foreign students can register fortranslation internships or are paid to provide conversationpractice in foreign-language courses (Henderson 1983;Laroche 1985). At Ramapo College in Mahwah, NJ., foreignstudents help translate live satellite transmissions in severallanguages for course use. Stanford University has a programin which Hispanic students teach Spanish to English-speakingpeers (Hubner, Bartolome, Avelar.lasalle, and Azevedo 1989).At institutions in which no faculty member has a specific lan-guage expertise, language mentors from the local communityassist students under the supervision of faculty on campus( Marshall 1987).

American institutions enroll foreign students out of thesame meld of idealism and pragmatism underlying argumentsfor sending Americans abroad to study. Foreign students areexpected to contribute to the intellectual strength and inter-national perspective of American campuses, enhance insti-tutional income, and become globlly inclined individualswho will increase the prospects for world peace (Jenkins1983).

However, the extent to which these goals are being methas not been measurably demonstrated. Until the 1960s,

research on Americans studying abroad and foreign studentsin the U.S. reflected a post World War 11 view of foreign study

eparing for a Global Community 37

as an individual crosscultural experience (Barber, Altbach,and Meyers 1984). When federal funds for international edu-cation became tied to foreign policy regarding Third Worldnations, research tended to evaluate the impact of foreign edu-cation on economic conditions in sending countries.

For many industrialized countries, foreign graduate studentsprovide much-needed human resources in advanced scientificand technical fields, simultaneously causing a "brain drain"in sending countries. Of Britain's complement of graduatestudents in engineering and technology, nearly 66 percentare from other countries. In France, foreign graduate studentsoutnumber French nationals two to one. At some institutionsin Japan, foreigners constitute nearly half the science and engi-neering enrollment (Chandler 1989).

Other nations' policies on foreign students influence U.S.decisions to admit foreign students. In 1990, more than400,000 students from other countries were studying at Amer-ican educational institutions, making the U.S. the largestreceiving country. it hosted nearly one-third of the almost1,130,000 students who studied abroad around the world in1988 (Zikc )uios 1991). However, these numbers will notremain static as other nations revise their stances. Foreign-student enrollments continue to increase in the U.S., but therate is modest when compared with the growth of other lead-ing host countries.

The traditional goals of American exchange programs inbringing students and teachers to the U.S. are to foster mutualunderstanding; to build cooperative international networksof individuals and institutions; to strengthen Americans'understanding of other regions and nations of the world; toaid developing nations; and to encourage current and futureleaders' understanding of U.S. values and culture throughdirect exposure to U.S. institutions (Liaison Group for Inter-national Educational Exchange 1989). But immigration rules,not educational policy, regulate the number of foreign students and teachers on American college and universitycampuses.

Next to the I J.S., France accepts the largest number of foreign students, completely subsidizing the 125,000 who studyeach year in that country. All students, foreign and domestic,have equal rights and identical requirements for universityadmission and achievement. As in the U.S., universities inFrance have the final authority to make decisions regarding

5 0

enrollment (Chandler 1989; Zikopoulos 1991).Two approaches to foreign-student policy are emerging in

France. The more traditional view is to offer courses to stu-dents from North Africa, Europe, and the Middle East whoshare a common language to help them return and work intheir native lands.

French advanced engineering, technical, scientific, and man-agement schools endorse a second approach, seeking tieswith industrialized countries, particularly in the EuropeanCommunity. Their objective is to help students learn how toconduct scientific and technical research and to engage inmultinational and international endeavors. Nearly 70 percentof the foreign students in these grandes ecoles come fromNorth and South America and Europe; only 30 percent arefrom Africa. Asia, or the Middle East.

In 1989, Germany received 77,445 foreign studentsmostof whom received government subsidies. That country alsoruns a competitive scholarship program through the GermanAcademic Exchange Program (DAAD). Applications fromabroad for study in Germany generally declined in the late1980s, despite impressive exchange scholarships and a rep-utation for high-quality science programs. Lick of familiaritywith the German language and educational system mightexplain this decline. The impact on foreign-student enroll-ment of German reunification is not yet clear.

France and Germany underwrite the cost of higher edu-cation for all students, but Britain--the next largest receiverof foreign studentshas a different approach. In 1979. theU.K. began subsidizing only a small proportion of foreign students and began trying to recruit those willing to pay theirown way. These efforts have increased the overall numbersof foreign students in Britain; not surprisingly, fewer studentsfrom developing countries are coming to the U.K. Servicesfor foreign students, now considered Britain's future tradingpartners and diplomatic allies, have improved markedly.

Traditionally a society averse to other cultural groups, Japannow has a national commitment to international education.A reform agenda begun in the 198es encourages Japanese tostudy abroad; during 1984-89 the number of Japanese studentsdoing so rose 291 percent, and many came to the 11.S.

Japan also is working to recruit foreil.,n students; a government target of enrolling 100,000 foreign students in Japaneseinstitutions by 2000 is likely to be met (Ehuchi 1991). Reach-

Pa/ ring for a Global Community 39

ing that goal would make Japan the third-largest receivingnation for foreign students. Most foreign students travelingto Japan come from other Asian countries. Echoing programsin Egypt, India, and Australia, Japan is carving a large nicheas a new nonwestern destination for foreign students.

Japanese education is opening up in other ways. For exam-ple, Japan now permits foreigners to hold university tenure-track positions (Chandler 1989; Kitamura 1983; Mashiko1989). However, efforts to internationalize Japanese campusesrun afoul of scarce housing, cumbersome financial aid rules,an academic year that begins in April rather than September,language harriers, and the perceived low quality of some aca-demic programs.

Throughout the 1980s, Australia debated and changed itsforeign-student policy; like Britain, that country moved fromsubsidizing foreign students to requiring that most pay theirfees in full. Debate intensified when institutions short onspace for Australian students began admitting more foreignstudents, and domestic minorities redoubled their demandsthat Australia erase cultural and language barriers that keepthem from receiving a higher education.

Australia's gradual elimination of subsidies for foreign stu-dents heightens competition among universities there for for-eign students and the income they bringin 1989, that sumexceeded $300 million in U.S. sums. Even with a sharpenedtuition policy, Australian higher education is a relative bargainfor Asian students interested in high-quality undergraduateprograms in English but unable to afford to travel to Britain,Canada. or the U.S.

Canada is the only major receiving nation that saw foreign-student enrollments decline consistently during the 1980s.Because its overseas students come primarily from a fewstates--Hong Kong, the U.S., the People's Republic of China,Malaysia, and SingaporeCanada is especially vulnerable toenrollment shifts resulting from economic conditions andforeign-policy decisions. Some Canadians voice alarm at theheavy concentration of Asian foreign students, fearful thatmany will remain and apply for immigrant status. At the endof the 1980s, Canada increased recruitment. provided moretraining for students from developing countries, and relaxedimmigration requirements regarding student work on campus(Chandler 1989}.

40

Coordinating Educational MobilityThrough International OrganizationsInternational organizations are helping to provide the admin-istrative structure as more students and teachers move fromone country to another. The EC hinges its economic survivalon the integration of higher education across national bordersand so employs transnational mechanisms to coordinate andsupport study abroad (Luttikholt 1987).

Of four EC activities that bear scrutiny, two deal with studyabroad: the European Community Action Scheme for theMobility of University Students (ERASMUS), a program for uni-versity students within the EC; and the Trans-European Mobil-ity Scheme for University Studies (TEMPUS), which extendsthe ERASMUS program to non-EC nations.

The other EC programs administer credit transfers for stu-dents completing course work in another country. The Euro-pean Community Course Credit Transfer System (ECTS) estab-lishes transnational credit equivalencies within the EC. TheTrans-Regional Academic Mobility and Credential Evaluation(TRACE) project extends credit equivalency evaluationbeyond the EC.

The EC promotes the "Europeanization" of its higher edu-cation and research efforts. ERASMUS, housed in the EuropeanInstitute for Education and Social Policy, has several goals:

To promote cooperation among universities in memberstates;To enable 10 percent of students to acquire training inanoCier member state by 1992;To increase the mobility of university faculty;To strengthen citizen interaction; andTo provide direct experience in intra EC cooperation.

To receive ERASMUS grants, institutions must establish contacts with teaching staffs abroad, be prepared to reorganizetheir curricula and to receive foreign students, and meet theirforeign-language instruction needs.

TEMPIN extends F.RASMI IS to other Western Europeancountries (Austria, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, andSwitzerland), Eastern European countries (Poland, Hungary,Czechoslovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria), and other Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD)

The EC bingesits economicsurvival on theintegrationof highereducationacrossnationalborders. . . .

Prcparing for a Global Community 41

t./

members (Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand. and theU.S.).

TEMPUS projects require participation with at least one Cen-tral European university and two postsecondary institutionsin EC nations. The U.S. Education Department Fund for theImprovement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) offersgrants to American colleges and universities for projects fittingTEMPUS guidelines.

As part of efforts to holster educational cooperation, theEC endorsed the ECTS, a pilot project that enables studentsto receive credit for studies they complete in one countryfrom an institution of higher education in another EC country.Variations in standards and regulations are worked out byestablishing credit equivalencies among existing courses.Standardized academic transcripts report academic perfor-mance. Begun in 1987, the six-year experimental and volun-tary program includes business administration, history, medi-cine, chemistry, and mechanical engineering.

Along with computer advances, EC progress in standard-izing reporting of educational credentials has encouraged sup-port for project TRACE. Formally established in 1989, TRACEis creating a decentralized worldwide data network providinginformation by computer to local, national, regional, and international organizations interested in academic mobility, cre-dential evaluation, and recognition of degrees and diplomas.

TEMPUS will store continuously updated information inEnglish on higher education institutions and systems, as wellas credentials granted by higher education institutions.

TRACE is coordinated by the International Association ofUniversities (1AU ) in Paris and supported by representativesfrom 23 countries and 12 international and nongovernmentalorganizations. American contributions to TRACE are beingled by the National Liaison Committee on Foreign StudentAdmission of the United States, composed of representativesfrom the Council for Graduate Schools, College Board, Insti-tute of International Education, American Association of Col-legiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, and NAFSA.

To accomplish these massive exchange projects, studentsand faculty must become multilingual. Many EC countriesare reevaluating their language policies. The Netherlandsboasts one of the world., most successful and comprehensiveforeign-language programs, requiring grammar-school students to take three languages for at least four years.

-12

But political and economic change continues to boostdemand for multilingual competence, and Dutch policy mak-ers now say all language needs cannot he met within its for-mal education system, which is limited to English, French,German, and Spanish at the secondary level.

To improve EC-wide language instruction, a Brussels-basedprogram called Lingua supports initial and inservice trainingfor language teachers, language learning programs in voca-tional and higher education, and exchanges between youngpeople in professional, vocational, and technical education,limiting languages covered to those of the EC: Danish, Dutch,English, French, German, Greek, Irish, Italian, Luxembourgish,Portuguese, and Spanish.

The EC's position with regard to language competency isthat every member state should provide a practical compe-tence in two foreign languages for pupils in compulsory edu-cation. At least one of these should he the national languageof another member state (Van Els 1988).

The EC promotes university-industry cooperation and hasendorsed a program titled Action Programme of the Commu-nity in Education and Training for Technology (COMET!),which coordinates such projects. COMET!' will develop aEuropean network of University-Enterprise Training Partner-ships; create exchanges of students and personnel betweenuniversities and industry; develop and test joint university-enterprise projects in continuing education; support multi-lateral initiatives for developing multimedia training systems;and monitor and evaluate the projects (Luttikholt 1987 ).

A longstanding UNESCO project encourages countries toestablish mechanisms for recognizing degrees and diplomasworldwide and for establishing equivalencies among them.Like many other countries, Canada is creating a National Com-mission for the Recognition of Studies, Degrees, and Diplomasas part of a larger effort to coordinate and standardize degreeand diploma evaluations. A Canadian commission will facilitate the implementation of the lTNESCO Convention cm theRecognition of Studies, Degrees, and Diplomas. That bodywill work to make Canadian degrees and diplomas betterknown overseas and promote their recognition in other coontries (IA! Bulletin June 19901.

Pnparing for a Global Contniurilli.

Summary and Research NeededOn Educational Mobility

American strengthsFor many years, American colleges and universities have usedthe credit-transfer system to permit some students to completeportions of their studies in other countries; some institutionshave encouraged students to do so. Since most students werepaying for the foreign-study experience, decisions about goingabroad tended to take on a pragmatic cast, with foreign studyusually elected by students majoring in foreign languages,art, history, and other fields militating in favor of career-

oriented interest in international affairs.Institutions sending students abroad developed long-term

relationships with colleges and universities in other coun-triesa pattern that is being replicated as a new generationof colleges and universities move into the field. Surveys indi-cate that more American students plan to study in anothercountry, prompting more institutions to make arrangementsin that regard. Some institutions are trying to integrate studyabroad into major fields of study, with a comparably valuablecrosscultural experience sometimes offered for students whocannot or do not want to travel abroad.

Coupled with relatively mild U.S. controls on foreign-student entry and exit, U.S. institutions' ability to convey spe-cialized expertise in fields sought after by people from othercountries have drawn many of the best foreign students toAmerican campuses. These students offer Americans an oppor-tunity to communicate with and learn to understand othercultures.

American weaknessesDespite the long history of Americans studying abroad, lapsesin continuity exist between the foreign and domestic edu-cational experiences of students. Courses taken by Americansabroad often are considered peripheral to their majors; whenthese students return to the U.S., they rarely are asked toextrapolate from their foreign experiences to enrich the homecampus.

More American students are going abroad, but many stilldo not have this chance. When specialized expertise was themotivating force behind an academic sojourn in another coun-try, the limited numbers of study-abroad participants seemed

44

Z1 4" BEST COPY AVAILABLE

appropriate But as more institutions encourage students toseek international experience qua international experience,American study-abroad program scope and participationseems inadequate, if not parochial. For example, the list ofcountries to which American students and faculty can go iscurbed sharply by prospective participants' inability to speaklanguages other than English. Additionally, many Americanslack basic understanding about the country in which theywant to study.

Institutions often lack concrete policies on foreign-studentadmissions, deli as the desired number of foreign students,acceptance criteria, tuition, numbers, scholarships, and ser-vices. Sometimes foreign students are viewed as drains onthe enrolling institution; research suggests that many are dis-satisfied with the education they receive. This aspect of Amer-ican international education might be forced to change ascompetition increases for the best and brightest foreign stu-dents and as American administrators compare their attitudeswith those in other countries, which see foreign students asvalued guests.

Most schools have not integrated programs to help facultyimprove language skills, provide an international dimensionto their courses, or go abroad themselves. Faculty retain paro-chial attitudes toward the educational benefit of study inanother country and are slow to erase scheduling conflictsand requirements that bar many students from studyingabroad.

At the international level, although the U.S. belongs to net-works of international organizations that provide an admin-istrative structure for student mobility, the European Com-munity provides leadership in this area.

Research neededWith studies of attitude change constituting much of theresearch in this field, such inquiries should consider linksbetween students' academic preparation ( including languagefluency), location and duration of study abroad or internshipexperience, and the main body of a student's academic program. How much time is needed to gain a useful understand-ing of another culture? Could experiences obtained in theI'S. be as beneficial as those obtained abroad?

Assessment of Americans who study abroad generally dealswith different issues than does research on foreign students

Preparing for a Global Community 45

in the U.S. However, in matters of common challenge suchas acculturation or crosscultural communication, the resultsof comparative studies would be interesting. Research in bothdirections is needed to add an international perspective forcrosscultural research. Are there additional ways such inquiriescould improve the international education of Americans whodo not go abroad?

NationalThe federal role in movements of students from one countryraises questions. Should the U.S. set policy on recruitmentand admission of foreign students, or are existing immigrationregulations and supply and demand factors sufficient? Is therea need for a federally funded or mandated clearinghouse orsimilar mechanism to facilitate international student and fac-ulty exchange? Where have foreign students who studied inthe U.S. gone after graduation, and what are the implicationsof that data for American foreign policy?

InternationalCan multinational exchanges that benefit the U.S. and othercountries be organized through international bodies? Giventhe number of Americans who study abroad and the numberof foreign students who come to the U.S., what are the advan-tages to the U.S. in joining European Community exchangenetworks? Should the U.S. join regional exchange networksfor the Americas and Canada or the Pacific Basin countries?

16

ADMIls.ISTERING INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION

For many people, international education deals with studsabroad, foreign-student affairs, or curriculum dealing withinternational issuesbut not all three and rarely in concert.International education on American campuses often consistsof a collection of discrete activities with no comprehensivestructure. Administrators who manage programs that sendAmerican students to study elsewhere in the world might havelittle knowledge of foreign students enrolling in their insti-tutions or of faculty exchanges, development contracts, orprograms for non-English-speaking American students.

International Program Models in the U.S.Since World War II, evolving international relationships andnational educational systems have spawned new laws and reg-ulations regarding education and training of people fromother countries. Institutions have added more administratorsto carry out increasing numbers of bilateral, multinational,and international education agreements. Buffeted by a chang-ing world economy and worldwide tumult in foreign policy,these offices operate within volatileand now shrinkingbudgets. Aside from anecdotal information suggesting thatearly experiences living in another culture are a factor, littleinformation exists about the paths that lead administratorsinto careers in international program management.

In the 1990s, administrators serve many constituencies.Domestic responsibilities include foreign-student advisementand credentials evaluation, study-abroad coordination andexchange agreements, English and foreign-language profi-ciency testing, English and foreign-language teaching, inter-national visitor briefing, support services and counseling forforeign and American students, international grants and con-tract oversight, and liaisons with local, state, national, andinternational associations.

On the international side, administrators manage overseasprograms and projects, provide consulting and translation ser-vices, and direct community and government relations activ-ities. The American group's professional voice is the Assodation of International Education Administrators (AIEA),formed in 1982. Through a journal. International EducationForum and Newsletter, AI FA provides information exchangeand a network for individuals interested in international stndies and services. An AIEA-published pamphlet, Guidelinesto International Education at 1:S. colleges and Universities.

Preparing far a Global COMInlinn 47

offers suggestionson international

programadministration.

Gaugingthe frequency

of these activitiesat two- and four-

year Americaninstitutions,

researchershave found that the

most commontask of international

educationadministrators

is to provide foreign-studentservices.

After the foreign-student

advisor, four-yearinstitutions

are most likely to designatean

administratorto coordinate

study-abroadprograms;

two-year

institutionshire administrators

to coordinateforeign-language

instruction(Anderson

1988).

Some advocatesurge that comprehensive

internationaledu-

cation works bestwhen all elementsarecoordinated

by a cen-

ter on campus,sometimes

called an Office ofInternational

Programs(American

Council on Education1984; Backman

1984; Harari1983). In general,

institutionspay greater heed

to internal bureaucraciesthat have office space,

large budgets,

and directorswith seniority

in the hiring system. Coordination

is said tostrengthenindividual

programs,enhance interaction

amongprogramparticipants,

and heightenthe on-campus

visibility of internationalprograms.

The roles ofthese offices

vary by institutionalsize and type. Responsibilities

include:

I. Supportingefforts to internationalize

the curriculum;

2. Acting as a liaison toother units within the institutionthat

administerinternational

activities;

3. Administeringstudy-abroad

programs;

4. Administeringinternational

(foreign)student programs;

5. Promotingstudent, faculty, and staffexchange

programs

and other incentivesfor engaging

in internationaledu-

cation activities;

6. Negotiatingand implementing

contractsand grants with

foreign universities,governments,

and businesses;

7. Cooperatingwith international

interestsin thecommunity,

includingcitizenship-education

programsand business

activities;8. Supporting

regional,national, and international

associ.

ations and consortia;

9. Preparingproposals

to foreign agencies.foundations,

busi-

ness.and otherentities to help implement

the institution's

internationalcommitment;

and

10. Intopretingnational and international

trends and oppor

tunities and providingleadership

for the institution

tllarari 1983).

48

I

Administrators who direct these units recommend a centralbureaucracy, but no research demonstrates a relation betweentype of administrative structure and quality of educationreceived by participating students. However, institutional typeand size are good predictors of organizational structure.Reflecting the tendency of American colleges and universitiesto support unique goals and missions, most hooks describeinternational program offices at individual institution levels.Backman (1984) describes in detail how 17 American insti-tutions deliver international education, discerning among stateuniversities, private colleges and universities, and communitycolleges. Written mostly by directors of international-education programs, these case studies begin with brief his-tories of the origins and development of international-educational activities at the institution. Then, missions andgoals are discussed with respect to international education,international unit administrative organization, program com-ponents, funding, program strengths and weaknesses, andfuture plans.

Internationalization IndexesFew question whether a campus can he "too international."but in light of increased competition for status and funds tosupport international activities, it is logical to wonder whetherone campus can be "more international" than another. Somearticles rank U.S. campuses on a continuum ranging fromthose evincing little interest in international offerings to thosedisplaying a great deal of interest. One of the first such con,tinuums was constructed by the American Association of StateColleges and Universities from results of a 1981 survey ofmember institutions. The exercise separated institutions intofive levels of "internationalization."

The one extreme consisted of colleges and universitiesreporting no visible international curriculum activity, listingmostly western-oriented courses, enrolling a small percentageof the student body in study-abroad experiences, and de-scribing no plans for involvement in international education.Me other pole was occupied by institutions reporting majorswith specific international foci, heavy enrollment in study-abroad programs. substantial numbers of foreign students andservices for those students, large numbers of faculty studyingor working abroad, some foreign faculty and visitors on cam-pus. a record of development contracts in other countries,

Preparhrg for ct Global Community 49

6 I

and an office of international programs (Harari 1983).An index developed by Henson, Noel, Gil lard-Byers, and

Ingle (1990) considered a combination of quantitative andqualitative factors in scoring institutional internationalism.(Quantitative measures: type and level of activities engagedin by faculty and departments; foreign-language requirements;enrollments in internationally oriented courses; funds avail-able for international activities and private-sector expectations.Qualitative measures: priority commitment from administra-tors; institutional plans indicating attention to this topic; Fac-ulty competence in international affairs).

Afonso (1990) used exclusively quantitative measuresappropriate for land-grant institutions to develop an inter-national Dimension Index (IDI ) instrument using 14 mea-sures, including foreign languages (number of foreign lan-guages, enrollments, and degrees offered in them), areaethnic studies (number of degrees conferred), foreign-studentenrollment, membership in NAFSA, faculty awards for foreignteaching or research (number of Fulbright awards), foreignfaculty on campus (number of foreign Fulbright recipientshosted), and funding levels for international proiects (TitleVI area center and grant awards and National Science Foun-dation research with international implications). Smaller,teaching-oriented institutions might be more interested indifferent measures such as proportion of students at advancedforeign-language levels or proportion of courses offered witha foreign language component.

Evaluating campuswide international efforts remains animportant goal; in the absence of such measures, generalizations and trends cannot be discussed and improvementscannot he made. Multiple indexes probably will grow out ofthe widely differing goals of American institutions for international education.

Using Consortia to Carry OutInternational EducationColleges and universities in the I T.S. often use cooperativeconsortia arrangements to ease administrative burdens andstretch resources for international activities, especially in straitened economic times. In 1987, four year institutions in theU.S. reported participating in consortia primarily to) conductstudy abroad :-)RIgntrns, offer foreign-language instruction in

less commonly taught languages, and teach specializedinternational-studies courses (Anderson 1988).

Consortium participation often permits institutions to offermore international topics. In a localized project, the RussianStudies department at the University of Minnesota and theProgram of Russian Area Studies of the five Associated Col-leges of the Twin Cities (Augsburg College, Ham line Univer-sity, Macalester College, the College of Saint Catherine, andthe College of Saint Thomas) established a cooperative pro-gram to improve undergraduate Russian language and area-studies courses (Title VI 1987-88).

Some consortia pool resources statewide. The PennsylvaniaCouncil for International Education (PaCIE) brings togetherfaculty members and administrators to discuss programs andprovides follow-up campus consultation visits by experts whosuggest avenues to program improvement (Dinniman andBurkart 1988). The Virginia Tidewater Consortium for HigherEducation, in cooperation with the Public Broadcasting Sys-tem, offers television news broadcasts in French and Spanishto member institutions and the public. Other consortia areregional; for example, the Great Lakes Colleges Association(GLCA) and the Associated Colleges of the Midwest (ACM)number among their activities management of overseas-studyprograms for member schools.

Institutions also join consortia to heighten their visibilityand improve chances for program and research funding. Todocument contributions by their graduates to international-affairs, a group of liberal arts colleges created a consortiumcalled the International 50, publicizing data showing that students from these institutions tend to pursue internationalcareers (Engerman and Marden 1992). Many joined the PeaceCorps, went on to he foreign-service officers and even ambas-sadors, or worked in multinational corporations. The consor-tia's efforts ' Iped liberal arts colleges, which enroll only afraction of the students in higher education, to highlight theeffectiveness of their work.

Consortia seem highly successful in helping institutionswith limited resources widen opportunities in internationaleducation, but systematic testing is needed to uncover thereasons why some can overcome institutional rivalries andfaculty jealousies and others cannot (lambert 1980).

Institutionsalso joinccmsortia toheighten theirvisibility andimprovechances forprogram andresearchfunding.

Preparing for a Global Community

0 0

Strategies for Promoting International EducationOn CampusMany colleges and universities want to revise theirinternational-education programs. Before making changes,however, an institution must know what it already is doing.A 1981 Council on Learning worksheet for program planningand evaluation of international studies and foreign languagessuggested collecting data in the following areas:

Curriculum: organization of international, area, andforeign-language studies; institutional requirements;Budget. funding and grants;Cooperative efforts with other institutions;Faculty involvement: exchanges, foreign visitors, curric-ulum workshops;Student life and extracurricular activities: study-abroadprograms, student clubs, international speakers;Learning resources: language laboratories, library collec-tions; andEnrollments in internationally oriented courses.

A more complete listing of current international educationalactivities on campuses today would include:

Research and development projects and other agreementswith organizations abroad;International majors and minors for foreign as well asAmerican students;Centralized international-affairs offices or administrativenetworks to carry out international activities;Materials support for international activities includinginternational satellite telecommunications, computer network capability, and use of videodisc and other high-technology teaching tools in internationally focusedcourses;Cooperative work projects run in conjunction with studyabroad;Outreach to elementary and secondary schools and thecommunity; andInvolvement in state, national, and international organizations, consortia, foundations. and businesses that dealwith international education.

52

These missing areas indicate where administrative changesin higher education institutions have occurred since the 1980s.

Actual change depends on institution type, faculty expertise,geographical location, and a college's or university's historicalexperience in the field of international education. Between1982 and 1987, four-year American institutions reportedincreased foreign-student enrollment and more opportunitiesfor U.S. students and faculty to study abroad. More than halfhad increased the number of international course offerings,hired new faculty with international expertise, and added tothe international collection in their libraries. During the sameperiod, two-year institutions reported fewer changes, but onein six noted increased integration of international materialsinto regular courses and in foreign-student enrollments(Anderson 1988).

What strategies do administrators say they are using to putan international dimension on their campuses? A survey ofadministrators at the level of dean and above at American uni-versities (Henson et al. 1990) found the top five priorities forinternational activities on campus to be the following:

1. Establish cooperative relationships with institutions inother countries;

2. Offer study- or internships-abroad opportunities for U.S.students;

3. Encourage foreign-language study;-i. Recruit and train foreign students; andS. Include more international content in the curriculum.

These findings agree with results of an American Council onEducation survey of some 400 two-year institutions as wellas four -year colleges and universities. Participants reportedan astonishing 44 percent increase in contacts with foreigninstitutions among the nation's four-year colleges (Anderson1988).

Asked how they would use additional funds for interna-tional education. four-year institutions said they woulddevelop new internationally oriented courses, expand study-abroad opportunities, hire faculty with international expertise.and provide support for faculty to work abroad. Two-year insti-tutions responded in similar fashion but in a different order.They want to hire faculty with international expertise, deepentheir libraries' international collections, develop internation-

Pnparing for a Global Community 53

ally oriented courses, and expand study-abroad opportunities.Many people believe that lack of funding is an impassable

barrier to implementing international-education efforts. TheACE study reports that at American four-year institutions, fundscome most frequently from private foundations, individualdonors, and the U.S. Department of Education. Institutionsalso receive support from the National Endowment for theHumanities, state governments, business firms, and theDepartment of State/USIA.

Comprehensive collections of funding sources appear inHarari (1983), Hoopes (1984), the International StudiesFunding and Resources Book (Council on International andPublic Affairs 1990), and Financial Resources for internationalStudy (1989). However, although budget is important, it doesnot always determine the degree to which an institution sup-ports international-educational activities. The wittily titledWithout a Nickel (Leinwald 1983) describes ways in whichcolleges and universities support international education with-out significant financial outlay.

Some campuses take an integrated approach to planningfor international-educational activities, including the president,chancellor, board of trustees, supporting corporations, andalumni into the process. At some institutions, trustees havean international committee that considers where to direct thevice president for development to ask for funds for interna-tional initiatives and continuing programs. At others, alumniliving abroad are asked for advice and support. At many insti-tutions, corporate heads and state commerce departmentmembers serve on advisory councils that inform the institu-tion of state employment needs.

Crossinstitutional task forces can gather background dataon institutional strengths and needs, including existing fundedprojects, student population composition, local branches ofmultinational corporations, international programs, and enroll-ments in them. Using these data, an institution's presidentcan incorporate international objectives into a strategic planand set priorities for achieving them. Institutional account-ability requires documentation of progress toward achieve-ment of goals, and progress reports are integral to planning.When international goals are incorporated into general insti-tutional planning, they are less likely to be omitted fromfuture plans or budgets.

U.S. Programs in Other CountriesAs more American institutions begin to operate programs out-side the U.S., American administrators are asking how theseprograms should he administered and regulated. The Corn-mission on Postsecondary Accreditation (COPA) accredits for-eign components of American institutions and some foreigninstitutions by using a 10-point assessment program (Com-mission On Postsecondary Accreditation 1987) that askswhether institutions are:

Military education programs on overseas installations,offered under the aegis of United States-based institutionsthat are under contract with the armed forces;U.S.-based institutions with foreign campuses andbranches;Study-abroad and related academic programs ofII.S.institutions;Programs jointly delivered by U.S.-domestic accreditedinstitutions and foreign institutions;Institutions chartered in the U.S. and historically designedto serve 1`.S. citizens, but existing physically outside theU.S.;Foreign institutions with foreign charters but with noU.S.connection other than accreditation;Canadian or other foreign institutions whose accreditationprocedures are identical to the U.S.; orForeign institutions affiliated by specific program to ac-credited domestic institutions.

Programs involving a year or semester abroad generally havewell-defined missions and a history of good practice. Theyprovide crosscultural orientation and on-site support for stu-dents; programs are evaluated as part of the overall institu-tional accreditation visit ( Mayhew 1990).

\lost frequently, programs that do not meet American stan-dards of good practice are joint ventures between specific pro-grams of American institutions and foreign institutions. Sometimes problems arise because a venture's goal is not clearlystated; sometimes the difficulty is that the program is beingrun for profit rather than education (Mayhew 1990), Chambersand Cummings (1990) discuss contractual issues related toagreements between American and Japanese institutions inwhich joint ventures have increased dramatically.

Preparing f(r GlObal COMIl111110' tg ti

55

Professional associations respond to reports of abuse byissuing guidelines for American programs in other countries.A statement of good practice for overseas international edu-cation programs for non -U.S. nationals by the Middle StatesCommission on Higher Education (1989) suggests steps totake in regard to clarifying institutional mission, governinghoard authorization, instructional programs, resources, admis-sions and record keeping, student support, control and admin-istration, ethics and public disclosure, and contractual arrange-ments with other parties.

International Attempts at Self-RegulationAmerican methods of self-regulation and self-recognition arespreading as institutions worldwide gain autonomy. In 1988,two private associations of educational institutions, the Com-mission on Higher Education of the Middle States Association(CHE,MSA) and the Dominican Association for Self-Study andAccreditation (Asociacion Dominicana Para El AutoestudioY I <t Acreditacion (ADAA), agreed to collaborate on trainingworkshops in self study and accreditation procedures, super.vision visits, and other activities (Middle States Association1988).

How should education be reg..lated outside a country'sborders when programs are no longer arrangements betweenindividual institutions or bilateral agreements among govern-ments, but multilateral agreements administered by interna-tional organizations? With a burgeoning international-education industry extending beyond existing national lawsbut not yet under international agreements, governments aretightening controls on higher education programs operatedby foreign institutions, imposing new laws and more domestictaxes. Stein (1990) discusses tax implications resulting fromthe British Education Reform Act of 1988 and outlines legalissues for American institutions with programs in England.

For tax purposes, Britain distinguishes between programssponsored by foreign institutions and conducted in Britainand British organizations that accept and teach foreign stu-dents as part of the regular course of studies or in a separatecurriculum specifically designed for them. These new policieshave implications for accreditation, institutional and individualincome taxes, tax transfers, and value-added taxes.

American institutions often want to establish exchangeagreements with institutions abroad, but many do not know

ir)

4

where to begin. In 1984, the American Council on Educationissued guidelines regarding academic exchange of studentsand faculty members to help institutions seeking exchangepartners. That pamphlet lists contacts at 23 American organi-zations and Fulbright Commissions in 42 countries capableof assisting a U.S. institution in finding a partner for exchange.A newer report from ACE lists Central and Eastern Europeanuniversities seeking cooperative arrangements with Americaninstitutions; this publication lists institutions in Czechoslo-vakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the Commonwealth of Inde-pendent Republics (formerly the U.S.S.R.), and Yugoslavia(November 1990).

An Institute of International Education Report describeschanges in international educational exchange in these coun-tries as of 1989. Language barriers persist as do difficultiesresulting from differences in educational systems and the reor-ganization of the economies of these countries. Despite theseobstacles, American students and scholars going to East Cen-tral European countries found the experience a rewardingone. In return, these countries are now eager for academicexchanges (Burn n.d.).

International Administrative ArrangementsColleges and universities tend to think of international edu-cation occurring on a campus through a curriculum's inter-national and comparative orientationor through studentexchanges and other cooperative agreements of colleges anduniversities that cross national boundaries. However, inter-national education also can take place as a result of bilateralor multilateral government agreements. Projects supportedby private and public international organizations can encour-age the process, and an international element can be deliv-ered through distance-ieaming approaches that transcendnational boundaries with new computer and satellitetechnologies.

Many new agreements are multilateral and multilevel. Forexample, an important function of international organizationsis to facilitate cross-border access to informationa roleenhanced by the expansion of electronic networks and com-puterized databases. In a project directly affecting Americanresearchers, the International Association of Universities (IAU)has agreements with two regional divisions of UNESCO andthe U.S.-funded ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education to

Preparing for a Global Community 57I

create a commonEnglish/Frenchthesaurus

for indexing edu-

cational documents.This will permitretrieval

of ERIC dat-

abases through the UNESCOsystem, allowing international

access to Americaneducational

research.Efforts on the Amer-

ican side to access the UNESCOdatabase

also are under way.

Among the impressivesorts ofadministrative

arrangements

than can cross national boundariesis a set ofadministrative

structuresbegun by theEuropean

Community.In the past

20 years,the EC has moved dramatically

towardunifying its

educationalsystems in anticipation

of 1992and the establish-

ment of a true Europeancommon market. Projects approved

include programsencouraging

student and teacher exchanges,

promotingforeign-language

instruction,exploring technology

links for distanceeducation,funding university-industry

part-

nerships,and exploring

the possibilityof a European

edu-

cational satellite system.

In administrativematters,

the U.S. and othercountries are

beginningto talk with eachanother. To improve

the integra-

tion ofvarioushigher educationalsystems, Western Europe

is workingtoward an academic course-credit

systemakin to

that of U.S. higher education.At the same time, many Amer-

ican institutionsshould be

aiming todevelop an EC-style

study-abroadmodel for internationalizing

theirprofessional

educationprograms

(Carlson et al. 1990).

SummaryandResearch NeededinAdministration

Americanstrengths

At colleges anduniversitiesin the U.S., international

education

derives its form and content from each institution'smission

and resources.Administrative

structuresreflect each institu-

tion's programsand commitments,

resultingin a wide diver-

sity of successfulapproaches.

Developmentof such programs

has been encouragedby foreign-student

demand for American

education,American

prosperityand technical

expertise,and

comparativelyliberal laws governing

flow ofpeople and infor-

mation acrossnational boundaries.

Americanweaknesses

In the absenceof anational clearinghouse

for inquiries from

other nationsabout Americaneducation,

internationalcontacts

at the institutionallevel are necessary.

However,efforts to

create linksbetween U.S. institutionsand those in other coun-

58

tries are hindered by language barriers and lack of knowledgeof comparative educational systems. Additionally, Americanadministrators often lack a comprehensive view of what inter-national education means for the campus community.

At the international level, American higher education hasnot used every possible contact with other countries or withnational or international organizationsinstead, generallyopting for institution-to-institution arrangements.

Research neededAt the institutional level, researchers need to analyze the effec-tiveness of administrative structures above the stratum of theindividual program. Such analysis could include investigatingthe success of alternative administrative arrangements suchas consortia.

At the national level, longitudinal career surveys are neededto measure the background and training of international pro-gram administrators. Given the changing demands imposedon this role, such study should include critical factors thatprompted this choice of career. Consideration also ought togo to the academic preparation needed by someone enteringthis track, along with evaluations of programs now offeringtraining in the field.

In comparative administration, the literature extensivelycovers only foreign-student affairs. Few comprehensive dataexist on use by other countries of multinational or interna-tional bodies to support and extend educational efforts. Sub-jects especially worthy of study include foreign institutionsin the U.3., American institutions outside the U.S., and insti-tutions linked to campuses worldwide via satellite.

International treaties and other agreements on higher edu-cation are increasing in number faster than entities and mech-anisms with which to implement them are evolving.Researchers would do well to assess which agreements needto he written for cooperation on an international scale andwhat types of organizations would best serve higher educationworldwide.

Preparing fi»- a Global Community 59

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Americans increasingly are aware that they live, work, andthink in a global marketplacean awareness that propelsthem to demand more emphasis in educational programs oninternational topics. The changes that render the nations ofthe world ever more interdependent require colleges to workharder to produce graduates familiar with other cultures andtheir histories, languages, and institutions.

People coming out of American higher education must bemore cognizant of the ties that hind the regions of the world.They must be willing to consider perspectives held by peoplewhose cultures differ from their own. They also must be com-petent to conduct education, business, and governmentalactivities in an international environment and prepared tomake personal and public-policy decisions as responsible citi-zens of an international society.

To meet these and related challenges, colleges and uni-versities in the U.S. are incorporating their goals for interna-tional education into campuswide strategic plans and enrich-ing academic disciplines with a comparative and internationalview. Institutions are revising curricula to alert all studentsto the languages and cultures of other countries, while creat-ing faculty development opportunities that stress an inter-national outlook.

Some institutions are encouraging students from othercountries and American students with international experi-ences to contribute more actively to the curriculum; othersare devising new structures to coordinate burgeoning inter-national activities. Many colleges and universities are joiningconsortia that bring together academia and businesses andlocal, national, and international organizations to pursue inter-national interests.

Every discipline and every professional school can beinvolved in this expanded framework which, for purposesof nis volume, includes the study of international relations,area studies, foreign languages and cultures, comparative andinternational approaches to particular disciplines, and envi-ronmental, global, or peace studies.

Higher education takes on international tones when par-ticipants conic from more than one country or when institutions administer exchange programs, branch campuses, orhave other crossnational ties. An increasingly complex nettV links academic institutions. private groups, businesses,

wernmeia at many levels, and public and private interna

People comingout ofAmericanhighereducationmust be morecognizant ofthe ties thatbind theregions of theworki

Prcvanng for (1 Global Community 6/

tional organizations.The first colleges in the U.S. approached international edu-

cation by teaching foreign languages, comparative linguistics,and area studies (McCaughey 1984). Interest in internationalstudies, political science, and international relations grew afterWorld War 1, buoyed by the hope that the world could achievepeace and security if peoples of all nations could learn moreabout one another.

International student exchanges gained momentum in the1920s and 1930s but were interrupted by World War II. Afterpeace returned in 1945, the concept of the approved inter-national study-abroad programs gained wide acceptance.Americans began studying abroad in record numbers andmore foreign students came to the U.S., prompting the estab-lishment of credentialing systems and bodies to representthe interests of students, administrators, and institutions.

In the 1990s, the emergence of a global economy, increasedaccess to and interest in other parts of the world, andimproved electronic communications have combined tospread international topics across the curriculum. The decen-tralized nature of American higher education lets public andprivate institutions link up with educators in other countries,revise curricula to meet the career goals of graduates, andcreate administrative structures to carry out international inter-changes that reflect institutional missions.

Curriculum ReformOnce tightly focused on improving the international expertiseof language majors and foreign-affairs experts, American col-leges and universities have gained interest in teaching all stu-dents about other countries and cultures. institutions are re-vising general education courses to require exposure toseveral countries and cultures, broadening history- andcivilization course coverage of nonwestern countries, tight-ening standards on foreign language proficiency, and includ-ing foreign languages and study or work abroad in profes-sional programs (lambert 1989). This trend is evident in two-year, four-year, and graduate programs; depth and breadthof curricular applications vary.

Curriculumwide at many campuses, faculty are adding inter-national texture to their courses by stretching syllabi toinclude hooks, films, videos, musk-, and newspapers fromother countries. Advanced nonlanguage courses arc taught

in tongues other than English. Some institutions offer extra-diplomate certification to students who complete a series ofinternationally focused courses. Others offer double majorsor new minors with an international focus. Computer- andsatellite-technology advances allow American students to in-teract directly with counterparts in other countries. Electronicsimulations connecting students around the world are espe-cially useful in providing an international experience withinthe confines of the domestic classroom.

More students are studying abroad, but curriculum plannersquestion whether academic programs sufficiently integratethis experience. A few places award core course credit forwork completed abroad (Burn 1991). Some campuses areputting more effort into devising orientation programs fordeparting students and debriefing programs for studentsreturning from stays abroad. At other institutions, studentsreturning from study abroad may have the option of enrollingin courses requiring advanced language facility. Some pro-grams ask returning foreign-study participants to act as peeradvisors in recruitment activities for international-study pro-grams. Foreign students, Americans who have lived abroad,minority students, and internationally seasoned local residentstutor others in foreign languages and crosscultural commu-nication skills.

Some institutions encourage these curricular changes bysupporting faculty-development activities. They send facultyto other countries to learn another language, provide languagetutors on the home campus, organize summer curriculum-development workshops, engage experts from other insti-tutions to act as consultants, sponsor exchanges, encouragegroup study tours, offer release time for international projects,and supplement salaries for study, research, and travel abroad.In return, faculty are expected to equip their courses withmore content about other countriespossibly incorporatingmaterial in languages other than English. Teachers proficientin non English languages sometimes are encouraged to offertheir courses in that alternate language. However, faculty-development programs are still the exception rather than therule, and few institutions offer programs designed to help academic administrators who are institutional leaders gain aninternational perspective.

Institutions that factor community outreach into their missions provide intensive foreign-language and international-

Preparing 101" (1701)(11(..01111711111/1r 63

business courses for local business and civic groups. Manyoffer inserice programs on international and global issuesfor elementary and secondary school teachers. To obtain fund-ing and program support, more institutions are asking mul-tinational corporations for financial support and internshipspaces in their companies in the U.S. and elsewhere. Facultymembers interested in enhancing the international compo-nent of their courses can take advantage of the efforts ofsingle-discipline organizations which collect and publishcourse descriptions with international components (Groen-nings and Wiley 1990).

It is difficult to construct international measures of knowl-edge and attitudes about other countries, and few such instru-ments have been administered in more than one country(Cogan, Torney-Purta, and Anderson 1988). There is little jour-nal coverage of efforts by higher education organizations out-side the U.S. to promote the study of other countriesa sit.cation that might improve as a result of international effortsto merge educational databases and increasing interactionamong higher education organizations around the world.

Study Abroad and Foreign StudentsAt colleges and universities worldwide, more students arestudying outside their home countries. In European Community countries, student mobility is on the rise. By 1992,ERASMUS aims to see at least 10 percent of EC students acquir-ing academic training in another member state. That percent-age is the same goal being eyed by U.S. institutions, whichwant to encourage not only an increase in the number ofAmerican students enrolling in programs abroad, but a widerarray of countries where they may go (Burn and Smuckler1990).

The U.S. government is taking some fiscal steps to encourage study abroad. The National Security Education Act of 1991triples federal funding for undergraduate study abroad anddirects more money to underwrite graduate research Overseasas well as for grant support for programs in international andarea studies and foreign languages.

Crossnational analyses of study-abroad programs providealternative models that institutions can consider in structuringtheir arrangements (Burn, Ceiych, and Smith 1990; Opper,Teichler, and Carlson 1990). The 1 T.S. remains at the tc ill ofthe list of nations that attract foreign students, but the policies

()

of other nations could exert considerable influence on foreignstudents' choices in the future (Chandler 1989). For example,Australia and Japan are working harder to attract enrollmentin their higher education systems among students from Asiancountries who now dominate the foreign enrollment at Amer-ican institutions.

Administering International EducationInternational higher education takes place through a worldnetwork of organizations that grew during the late 1980s andearly 1990s. This growth was spurred by changing relationsbetween higher education and those who employ graduates.organizations supporting student mobility, and advances incomputer and telecommunications technology. At the insti-tutional level, these changes have meant increased individualcontacts with other countries and more administrators to coor-dinate the resulting activities. Institutions want to establishcooperative programs in other countries, offer more foreignstudy and internships. encourage foreign-language study,recruit and train foreign students, and include more international content in the curriculum (Anderson 1988).

The U.S. government modestly funds programs for inter-national education and foreign language study, business-education ventures, educational development contracts, andexchange programs. State and local governments have movedto coordinate efforts across educational sectors and betweeneducation and local business (National Governors Association1989). Governors are interested in educational quality; theywant better measures of student knowledge about other coun-tries. More states are requiring foreign language entrance andexit requirements for public colleges and universities (Draper1989).

At the international level. U.S. liaison committees are coopcrating with European Community and UNESCO projects tostandardize educational credential reporting, licensing, andcertification requirements; ease student mobility acrossnational educational systems; and develop compatible databases for information exchange (European Center for HigherEducation 198"). The European Community leads the effortto create a comprehensive structure for administering international higher education (Luttikholt 198' ).

As higher education follows other industries into the globalmarketplace, more Americans see schooling as an interna-

Preparing for a cdoba/ Community 65

66

tional commodity. Governments are scrutinizing joint edu-cational business ventures and increasing regulatory controlson them (Chambers and Cummings 1990; Stein 1990).

Promoting an International PerspectiveThe decentralized nature of American higher education hasallowed state systems and private institutions to create linkswith educators in other countries, revise curricula to meetthe job requirements encountered by graduates, and createentities to carry out international interchanges that reflectinstitutional missions. The latitude they enjoy has kept somecolleges and universities from noticing worldwide changesin education. Nationalism and its historical and culturalmarkers continue to guide individual nations' participationin and response to international education. But as nationsexpand joint educational endeavors, they influence one anoth-er's understanding of the term. Newer research, couched incrossnational and international contexts, can reveal obstaclesas well as opportunities implicit in a more internationalunderstanding of the concept.

How can individual faculty and administrators encouragedevelopment of an international perspective on their cam-puses? They must clarify the term's meaning on each campusand evaluate institutional policies on international andforeign-language studies, foreign students, and faculty devel-opment against that definition. Other elements of this basicappraisal include:

Curriculum reform. Assess the degree to which all stu-dents on your campus are exposed to other languages andcultures, and measure the learning that results. Are intern.t-tional elements infused into courses, even at professionalschools? Do students acquire the foreign-language proficiencydemanded by their career goals? institutions at least shouldproduce graduates knowledgeable of other peoples and cul-tures, professionally competent to conduct education, busi-ness, and governmental activities at an international level, sen-sitive to intercultural differences, prepared to extend scientificunderstanding through collaborative transnational research,and familiar enough with world affairs that they can be re-sponsible citizens of an international community (Hayden1982 ).

Read journal articles on how postsecondary institutionsabroad provide an international education through their cur

'7

ricular offerings. Attend conferences attracting internationalaudiences. Consider whether your campus might benefit fromcurriculum projects carried out by multinational and inter.national organizations.

Educational mobility. Widen chances for internationalcontact by sending Americans abroad, bringing foreign stu-dents to the U.S., and using international telecommunicationsin the classroom. Help lengthen the list of potential study sitesabroad. Make it possible for students to participate in study-abroad programs by removing the academic and other institutional harriers preventing them from going. Query foreignand American students and faculty with international expe-rience on the countries they know, and enlist them in supparting second- language instruction and crosscultural cornmunication on campus. Encourage organizations andinstitutions to establish and maintain state and federal programs that increase the number and broaden the types of stu-dents who can go abroad, and prepare them to learn fromthat experience. Evaluate the U.S. role in efforts by interna-tional organizations to improve student mobility and considerthe implications for your own campus.

Administering international education. Evaluate institutional structures that help and hinder international educa-tion activities on campus. Coordinate with other institutionsand consortia inJuding community, state. national, and international organizations. Investigate how individual institutionscan benefit from educational work by international Nichesand the avenues to participation in these efforts.

Preparing:1., (.? C,1 I ,d t.,nNrrnrilr

(467

REFERENCES

The Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) Clearinghouseon Higher Education abstracts and indexes the current literature onhigher education for inclusion in ERICs data base and announce.meat in ERICs monthly bibliographic journal, Resources in Education (IZIE). Most of these publications are available through theERIC Document Reproduction Service (EMS), For publications citedin this bibliography that are available from EDRS, ordering numberand price code are included. Readers who wish to order a publication should write to the ERIC Document Reproduction Service.7-i20 Fullerton Rd., Suite 110, Springfield, \A 22153.2852. (Phoneorders with VISA or MasterCard are taken at 800443-ERIC or-03 4-40 1.400.) When ordering, please specify the document (ED)number. Documents are available as noted in microfiche ( MF) andpaper copy (PC). If you have the price code ready when you callEDRS, an exact price can be quoted. The last page of the latest issueof Resources in Education also has the current cost, listed by code.

Adelman. Clifford. 1990. A College Course.lierp. Washington. D.C.:U.S. Department of Education. Office of Educational Research andImprovement. ED 326 153. 260 pp. ME-01; PC- 11.

Afonso. Janet. 1990. "The International Dimension in AmericanHigher Education." Doctoral dissertation, 1 university of Arizona.

Altbach, Philip. 1991. "Patterns in Higher Education Development:Toward the Year 2000." Reliew of Higher Education 1.4( 3 ): 293316.

American Council on Education. 1984. Guidelines for College andl'iiietwity Linkages Abroad. Washington, D C.: Author. ED 250 997.2-i pp. MF-01; PC-01.

. November 1990. "Building East West Partnerships: HelsinkiMeeting Fosters Multi Literal Ties." Higher Education andNational Affaim Special report. Washington, D.C.

Anderson, Charles J. 1988. International Studies for l'ildergraduates,1987: Operations and Opinions. Higher Education Report No.-6. Washington D.C.: American Council on Education.

Anderson. (.ee. 1991. "A Rationale for Global Education." In GlobalEducation. Kenneth 'Ike, ed. Arlington, Va Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Arum, Stephen. 1987. hrternationa/Educatiou: What Is A Tay-onomy '>f International Education of 'S. l'incersities New York:Council on International Educational Exchange. Occasional PaperNo. 23. El) 305 835. 28 pp. MF 01: PC 02.

Ashby, Eric. 1966. i'niversities. British, Indian, African. Cambridge.Mass.: Harvard l'niversity Press.

A,stin, Alexander, et al. 1983. The American Fee shman: National,V01711S for Fall 1983. los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institune, University of California. El) 239 5-12. 220 pp. NIF -01; PC 09.

1986 The American Freshman: ,Vational Norms for Fall

Preparing for a Global Community 69

BEST COPY AVAILABLE `'

1986. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, Universityof California. ED 278 296. 267 pp. MF-01; PC not available EDRS.

. 1987, The American Freshman: National Norms for Fall1987. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, Universityof California. ED 290 371. MF-01; PC not available EDRS.

Bachner, David, and Ulrich Zeutschel. 1990. Students of FourDecades: Influences of an International Educational ExchangeExperience on the Lives of German and 11:1 High School Students.Washington, D.C.: Youth For Understanding.

Baclunan, Earl L, ed. 1984. Approaches to International Education.New York: American Council on Education/Macmillan.

Barber, Elinor G., Philip G. Altbach, and Robert G. Meyers. 1984.Bridges to Knowledge. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Bates, A.W. 1987. "The Organization and Management ofa EuropeanSatellite System." ED 291 375. 18 pp. MF-01; PC-01.

Black, Robert, and George W Bonham. 1981. "The Council on Learn-ing Project on Education: Education and the World View." Annalsof the American Academy of Political Science 449: 102-13.

Bozeman, Adda B. 1960. Politics and Culture in International HistoryPrinceton, NJ.: Princeton University Press.

Wickman, William W 1965. "Historical Development of Govemmen.tal Interest in International Higher Education." In GovernmentalPolicy in International Education. S. Fraser, ed. New York: JohnWiley.

Brown, Peggy Ann, ed. 1984. "Internationalizing the Curriculum."Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges. ED 242 239.19 pp. 1IF-01; PC not available EDRS.

Brownlie, Ian. 1971. Basic Documents on Human Rights. Oxford:Clarendon.

Burn, Barbara. 1991. Integrating Study Abroad into the Undergrad-uate Liberal Arts Cuiriculunt: Eight Institutional Cc.4..,e Studies. NewYork: Greenwood Press.

L Cenvh, and A. Smith, eds. 1990. Study Abroad Programmes.Higher Education Policy Seriesll, vol. 1. London: Jessica Kingsley.

and Ralph Smuckler. 1990. A National Mandate for Edu-cation Abroad: Getting on With the Task. Washington, D.C.:National Association of Student Affairs.

Butts, R. Freeman. 1968. "America's Role in International Education:A Perspective on Thirty Years." In The I 'frilled States and Interna-tional Education. liztrold G. Shane, ecl. Chicago: National Societyfor the Study of Education. 68th yearbook, part 1: 3.45.

. and LC. Cremin. 1953. A History of Education in AmericanCulture New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Carlson, erry S., Barbara Burn, John Useem, and David Yachimowicz.:990. Study Abroad: The Eperience of American I bidergraduates.New York: Greenwood Press.

Cerych, Ltdislay. 1991. "Higher Education and Europe After 1992."

-o

4

European Education 23(2): 77,95.Chambers, Gail S., and William K. Cummings. 1990. Profiting from

Education:japan-United States International Education Venturesin the 1980s. New 1.'Ork: Institute of International Education. ReportNo. 20. El) 320 488. 180 pp. MF-01; PC-08.

Chandler, Alice. 1989. Obligation or Opportunity: Foreign StudentPolicy in SCr Major Receiving Countries New York: Institute ofInternational Education. Report No. 18. ED 312 981. 144 pp. MF-01; PC-06.

Chronicle of Higher Educatiem. December 4. 1991: A55.Washington, D.C.

Clark. Burton. 1983. The Higher Education .System: Academic Organ-ization in CrossNational Perspectie. Berkeley: UC Press.

Council on International Educational Exchange. 1992. Black Studentsand avrseas Programs: Broadening the Base of Participation.New "fork.

Cogan, John, Judith "Ibrney.Purta, and Douglas Anderson. 1988.**Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Global Issues: Students in Japanand the l'nited States." Comparative Education Revieiv 32(3 ): 282.97.

Cole. Donna J., and Theresa McCormick. i987. "Infusions of International Perspectives into Undergraduate Teacher Education Programs." ED 289 855. 21 pp. N1F-01; PC-01.

Cole. Michael. 1990. "The World Beyond Our Borders: What MightOur Students Need to Know?" In Group Portrait. International.izing the Disciplines Sven Groennings and David S. Wiley, eds.New NiOrk: The American Forum.

Coombs. Philip H. 1985. The it'brld Crisis in Education: The ViewFrom the Eighties New Thrk: Oxford University Press. Council onInternational and Public Affairs. 1990. International Studies Funding and Resources Book: The Education Interface Guide to Sourcesof Support for International Education. 5th ed. New York: ApexPress.

Council on Learning. 1981. "1981 Questionnaire Worksheet for Program Planning and Evaluation in Foreign language and International Studies." New Rochelle, N.Y.: Change Magazine Press.

Council on Postsecondary Accreditation. 1987. "Final Report of theAd Hoc Committee on the Accreditation of Foreign Institutionsand Programs." Washington. D.C.

Crawfird Lange, Linda, and Dale lange. 1984. "Doing the Unthinkable in the Second language Classroom: A Pmess for the Integration of language and Culture." In Teaching for ProficiencyThe Organizing Principle. Theodore V. Higgs, ed. Lincolnwood,III.: National textbook.

Cressey, William W 1991. "Georgetown l'niversity: The Articulationof Study Abroad Programs and the !tome Campus Curriculum."In Integrating Study Abmild into the 15/do:graduate Liberal Arts

Preparing for a Global (.eminzunit 7/

0 6

Curriculum. Barbara Burn. ed. New York: Greenwood Press.trAlmeida. Irene Assiba. 1982. The Meaning and Status of Interna-

tional Studies in West African Schools.- Theory into Practice 21(3):19399.

Dawson. Ian. 1989. -The Schools History ProjectA Study in Cur-riculum Development. The Historr. Teacher 22( 3): 221-38.

Delaney. Jean. 1991. -Fhe University of Colorado at Boulder: TheInternational Affairs Major.- In Integrating Study Abroad into thel'ncleigraduate liberal Arts Curriculum. Barbara Burn, ed. NewYork: Greenwood Press.

Demuth, Katherine A.. and V.B. Smith. 1987. "The Foreign languageRequirement: An Alternative Program." Foreign Language Annals20(1): 6""".

Dinniman, Andrew. and Holzner llurkart. eds. 1988. Education forInternational Competence in Pennsykania. Pennsylvania Dept.of Education and the University Center for International Studies.University of Pittsburgh.

Draperjam le B. 1989. The States of the Slates: State Initiatives inForeign Languages and international Studies. 1979-1989.Washington. D.C.: Joint National Committee for Languages.

Ebuchi. Kazuhiro. 1989. "Foreign Students and Internationalizationof the l'niversity: A View from Japanese Perspective.- In ResearchInstitute ft. Higher Educathm ( eds. ). Foreign Studeuts and Inter-nationalization of Higher Education. Hiroshima: HiroshimaUniversity.

1991. 'The Effects c >1 Governmental Policies on Foreign Students in Japan: A Brief Statement of General Policy Trends." HigherEducation 21: -10- 22.

Edmondson, Locksley. 198-t. "Black American Educational Interestsin the Era of Global ism.' Jot rola' of Negro Education 53(3 ): 243.56.

Education and Vorld Affairs. 1965. The l'ilit.etwity Looks Abroad.Approaches to Wbrld Affairs at Six American Oriercities. Newlink: Walker.

Encyclopedia of Educational Research 1982. harry Mitzel, John Best,and Rabint,witz. eds. From haentational Education 2:945 58.

Eno'clopedia of Higher Education. 1991. Burton R. Clark and GuyNeave, eds. Vols. 1 -4. New Thrk: Pergamon Press.

Engerman. David, and Parker Harden. 1992. In the InternationalInterest: Contributions and Needs of America's Liberal Arts CollegesBeloit. Wis.: Beloit College.

Enklaar. I tans. 1985. 'International Education: The Dutch System."Western European Education 1"(1): 46 62.

Emrich. Nell P. 1981. Sstems of Higher Education in Twelre Coun-tries: A Compamtit.el'iew New York: Praeger.

European Center for Higher Education. 198". Bibliography of Arad

able Literature Relating to the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas.and Degrees and to Intemational Mobility in Higher Education.Bucharest. UNESCO: European Center for Higher Education. El)292 -t2$. 122 pp. NW 01: PC-05.

Flint, William. 1989. Modern li,chnologr in Foreign Language Educatkin: AppliCalioits and Projects. Lincolnwood. 111.: NationalTextbook.

Ford Foundation. 196. International Studies in Six Eurcpean Colintries: ['Wuxi kingdom, France. Federal Republic of Germany,Sweden. The .Vetherlands. Italy New lbrk.

Fox, Elizabeth. 1985. -International Sill( and the InternationalBaccalaureate. Harvard Educational Review 55( 1 ): 53 68.

Frankel, Charles. 1965. The Neglected Aspect of Foreign Affairs: Amer.ican Educational and Cidt,iral Policy Abroad Washington, 1).C.:The Brookings Institute.

Freed. Barbara. 1989. -Perspectives on the Future of ProficiencyBased Teaching and 'Testing.- AD/-7, Bulletin 20(2): 52 =7.

Freeman, Jennifer. 198. "The International Baccalaureate: CollegeBoard Revien 1 3: ().

Garr, Ramesh (:. 19); . ,w to Internationalize the Finance Curriculum.- In Languages and Contnittnications for 11.6r/c/ Businessand the Profrssions Conference Proceedings: El) 293 310. 23 pp.

01: PC 01.Goodman. Neal R.. J. Nlichael Antler. and susan Carlson. eds. 1991.

Internationalizing the .Sociolog Curriculum: Syllabi and Resources.2d ed. Washington. D.C.: American Si s IttIcgic,tl Associatiim.

Goodrich. 1..N1., F. I lambro. and A.P. Simons. 1969. Charier of theInflect Nations. 3rd ed. New 'c rk: Columbia ( niversity Press.

Goodwin. (:.I ).. and Michael Nadu. 1983. Absence of Dec/Simi: Foreign Students in Americcm Colleges and I )tiversities. New lock:Institute of International Education. El) 234 t92. 58 pp. NW 01:PC 03.

. 1988. ithroadanc/lAyoncl: Patterns in American UtriseasEducation. New York: Cambridge Vniversity Press.

199 I . .111sqng the Boca: The Failure to Internalize Americanli,gher Education. New Yi irk: Cambridge 1 .niversity Press.

Greene. William. 1985. .The Intern:at mat Intercultural General Educatkin Requirement.- oium, nay and Junior College.lowwal55(1): 18 23.

Groennings, Ss, en, and I )avid ti. Wiley. eds. 1999. Group Portrait:internationalizing the Disciplines. New Y( irk: The American Forum.

Gueufette. Da\ id G. 198-. "Internatiintalizing 'k ac Education:The Northern Illinois Itiversirt Plan. Netherlands: Paper firesented at the World Assembly of the Internals mncil on Education lOr Teaching. El) 248 862 15 pp. ME (11: PC 01.

Gutek, Gerald 1. l9) Internationalizing the .Sodrd. him/dation.gf Education Chicago. Iiiyola 'ffiversity of Chi( agi e El) 265 103.

Preparing fora Global (..ommuitity

BEST COPY AVAIL/TIE

20 pp. MF-01; PC-01.Haggenbloom, Steven. 1989. "Teaching About Human Rights." In

Thomas and Klare (eds.), Peace and tt'brld Order Studies. Boulder,Colo.: Westview Press.

Hammond, Grant T. 1989. "The State of Undergraduate Educationin International Relations." Political Science Teacher 2( 1): 1.4.

Harari, Maurice. 1983. Internationalizing the Curriculum and theCampus: Guidelines for the AA.SCI! Institutions. Washington, D.C.:American Association of State Colleges and Universities. ED 212244.65 pp. MF-01. PC not available EDRS.

Harf, James, and Chadwick Alger. 1985. "Global Education: Why?For Whom? About What?" Columbus: The Mershon Center, TheOhio State University. ED 265 107. 30 pp. MF-01; PC-02.

Hayden. Rose. 1980. "U.S. Government Exchanges: The Quest forCoordination." The Annals of the American Academy of Politicaland Social Science 449: 114-28.

1982. International Studies Goals. In International Role ofthe I briversities of the Eighties Michigan State University.

Healy, Lynn M. (ND.) Introducing International Derelopment Content in the Social Vibrk Curriculum. Silver Spring. NationalAssociation of Social Workers.

Henderson, Ingeborg. 1983. "The Undergraduate Internship in theForeign Language Curriculum." Foreign Language Annals 16(2):99 102.

Henson, James, Jan Noel, Thomas Gillard-Byers, and Marcus Ingle.1990. "Internationalizing U.S. LIniversities-Preliminary Summaryof a National Study." In Internationalizing I:S. Universities Con.ference Proceedings June 5 7, 1990. Spokane: International Pro.gram Development Office, Washington State University.

"History of Education." 1985. Encyclopedia Britianica 18: 11 100.Chicago.

Glen. 1989. "Internationalization of Contemporary Japan."The fapan Foundation Newsletter17(11: 13 16.

lioopcs, David S., ed. 1984. Global Guide to International Education.New Birk: Facts on File.

JAI' Bulletin. April, June, August 1990. Paris: International I 'niversitiesBulletin.

International Encyclopedia of Comparath.e Higher Education. 199I.New York: Garland Publishing.

International Encyclopedia of Education. 1985. T. Husen and T.N.Postlethwaite, eds. Vol. A. New York: Pergamon Press.

Jackson, Sir Gordon. 198-4. "Report of the Committee to Review theAustralian Overseas Aid Program." Canberra: AustralianGovernment

Janes, Jackson, and Ilelene Scher. 198'. Mixaillfe.sNages: A Reporton the Study of Contemporary German), in the I Wiled states.Washington, D.C.: German Marshall Fund for the Ilnited States.

74

jU

Japan Foundation. 1989. Japanese Studies in the United States. Vols.1-2. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Association for Asian Studies.

Jenkins, Hugh M., and Associates. 1983. Educating Students FromOther Nations. San Francisco: Jossev -Bass.

Jurasek, Richard. 1988. "Integrating Foreign Languages into the College Curriculum." Modern Language Journal 72: 52.58.

. 1991. "Earlham College: Connecting Off-Campus and OnCampus Learning." In Integrating Study Abroad into the Under-graduate Liberal Arts Curriculum. Barbara Bum, ed. New York:Greenwood Press.

Kandel, Isaac L 1944. Intellectual Cooperation: National and Inter-national New "Ark: Teachers College Bureau of Publication.

Keohane, Robert 0. 1990. "Teaching How to ask Questions AboutInternational Relations." In Group Portrait: Internationalizingthe Disctplines. Seen Groennings and David Wiley, eds. New York:The American Forum.

Kitamura, Ka7uyuki. May 1983. "The Internalization of Higher Edu-cation in Japan." The Japan Foundation Newsletter 1.9.

Klinger. M. Robert 1965. "The Development of the National Assnelation for Foreign Student Affairs From Idea to Institution." InGorernmenta/ Policy and Education. Stewart Fraser, ed. New York:John Wiley.

Klitgaard, Robert. 1981. "Why International Studies." ChangejanFeb: 28 34.

Kobayashi, Tetsuya. the Internationalization of JapaneseHigher Education." In Changes in the Japanese University: A Com-paratie Penpectit.e.William Cummings, Ikuo A. nano, andKazayuki Kitamura, eds. New York: Praeger.

Kyllonen, Timo. 1984. "Internationalism and Finnish Higher Edu-cation," Higher Education in Europe 9(2): 50 56.

Lafayette, Robert C. 1985. "Education Theory and Methods: International Teacher Education." Paper commissioned by the AmericanAssociation of Colleges for Teacher Education for the InternationalTeacher Education Project. ED 265 10-i. 22 pp. MF-01; PC 01.

Lambert, Richard D. 198(1. "International Studies: An Overview andAgenda." The Annals of the American Academy of Political andSocial Science-4-49: 151 64.

. 1986. Points of leivrage: An Agenda for a National Formdatum for International Studios New York: Social ScienceResearch Council.

. 1989. International Studies and the 'ndergraduate.Washington D.C.: American Council on Education.

Lamy, Stephen L. 1987. The Definition of a lAscipline.- The Objectsand Methods of Analysis in Global Education. New York: GlobalPerspectives in Education Occasional Paper.

larihee, Stephen F. 1988. "International Accounting and the Accounting Educator.' In Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Eastern Mich

l'reparing for a Global Community

N

igan 'nit-ers/4, Conference on Languages for Business and theProfessions. ED 304 897. 18 pp. ME- 0 I; PC -01.

Laroche, Jacque. 1985. "Undergraduate Internship in Conversation."Foreign Language Annals 18( 3): 209-12.

Lives, Walter H., and C.A. Thomson. 1957. UNESCO.Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Leaver. Betty Lou. and S.B. Stryker. 1989. "Content Based Instructionfor Foreign Language Classrooms.- Foreign LanguageAnnaLs22( 3 ): 269 75.

Leestma, Robert. 1969. "OE's Institute of International Studies." Anzet-ican Education: 5 8.

. 1981. "Comparative and international Education in the U.S.Office of Education: A Bibliography of Studies and Publications,1968.1980." Compa-atire Education Review. 27288.

Leinwald, Gerald. 1983. Without A Nickel: The Challenge of Inter.ruttio the Curriculum and the Campus. \Washington, D.C.:American Association of State Colleges and Universities.

Lewis. Samuel. 1989. "The l'nited States Institute for Peace: A NewFederal Role in Peace Education and Research. COPRED PeaceChronicle 1 -i( 1 ): S.

Liaison Group for International Educational Exchange. 1989.Evcbange 2000: International Leadership for tlic, Next Century.Washington, D.C.

Lopez, George. 1989. "Conceptual Nlodels for Peace Studies Programs." In Thomas and Klare. Peace and IXbrld OrderStudies.Boulder. Colo.: Westview Press.

. 1989. "Trends in College Curricula and Programs." Annalsof tile American Academy of Political and Social Science 504: 913.

Lulat, Y G M. i98 -. Comparative International Education Biblhgraphs. Comparative Education Reteu 31131: 412 58.

Lulat, Y. 6 NI., and P. Altbach. 1985. "International Students in Computative Perspective. In John Smart ( ed. ), Higher Education:Handbook of 'theory and Research. New Yt Agathon Press.

Luttikholt, Harry. 1987. "EEC Sources of Support for I Iigher Educationand Research in 1988.- CRE information 80: 83 103.

McCarthy. Joann. 1986. "Internationalizing the Curriculum." Washington, 1).C.: American Association of State Colleges and Universities.ED 306 85-t. 48 pp. ME 01; PC 02.

McCaughey, Robert. 1984. International .Studies and Academic 1-:nterprise. New York: Columbia I 'niversity Press.

McLean, John J. 1990. -Consortial Approaches to Education.'' InRichard Greenfield (ed. ), Developing InternationalEducationPmgratits New Directions kw Community Cu illeges No. -0, 18(2):47 56. San Francisco: Josse Bass.

Marshall, L 1987. "The Multi Language Seminar: An Approachtr Offering More of the '1..ess Commonly Taught* Languages.- For

4' BEST COPY AVAILABLE

et:tm Language Anna/ 20( 2): 155 63.Mashiko, Ellen. 1989. japan. World Education Series. Washington,

D.C.: American Association of Collegiate Registrars and AdmissionOfficers.

Mayhew. Paula. 1990. "Overview of International Educational Initiatives in the Middle States Region.- Philadelphia. Pa.: Middle StatesCommisskm on Higher Education.

Nlerrfield. Merry. 1991. "Preparing American Secondary Social Studies Teachers to Teach with a Global Perspective: A Status Report."Journal of Teacher Education 42(11: 11.20.

Moeller, Paulette. 1989. "The Making of a Foreign LanguageTeacher Regina Style.- Pbreign language Annals 22(2 ): 135 44.

Morgenthau. Hans. 196". Politics Among Nations -ith ed. New lbrk:Km )pf.

Nagai. Michio. 1980. -Iligher Education in an Age of Internationalization." In I Iiroshima l'niversity Research Institute for I ligherEthical 0 in. Hit her Eduattitm in the 19,90s: Challenges andResponses

National Endowment for the I lumanities. 1988. 1989. Foreign Language Programs Funded in Higher Education. Washington, D.C.:National Endowment for the Humanities

National Endowment for the Humanities. 1991. National Tests: It hatOther Countries Expect Their Students to Knout Washington, D.C.

National Governors Association. 1989. America In Transition, TheInternational Frontier: aport of the Task Force on internationalEducation. Washington, D.C.: National Governors Association.ED 316 if 89 pp. MF 01. PC not available EDRS.

Natoli, Salvatore.)., and Andrew R. Bond, eds. 1985. "Geography inInternationalizing the Undergraduate Curriculum." WashingtonD.C.: American Association of Geographers.

Neave, Guy. 1989. "On Articulating Secondary School, Higher Education and 1992." European Journal of Education 2-4(41: 35163.

Newell, Barbara. 198". "Education with a World Perspective: A Necessit for America's Political and Economic Defense.- Annals of theAmerican Academy of Political and Social Scierices 491: 13411

Ochoa. Ann. 1986. "Reforming Preservice Education: An InternationalDimension.- Indiana: Social Studies Development Center. ED 298130. 35 pp. Mr- 01: PC 02.

)pper. S., Teichler, and J. Carlson. 1990. "The Impact of StudyAbroad Programmes on Students and Graduates." Higher Education Policy Series 11, vol. 2. London: Jessica Kingsley.

Palmer, Norman. 1980. -The Stuch of international Rdations in thel'nited States: Perspective of lialf a Century." hiternaMmat Studiesoiameriy 24( 3 ): 3i3 64.

Pankenier, David. December 5, 1990. "Foreign language Requirenetts at the College Level Do Not Work.- Chronicle of Higher

Preparing for a 6lobal C( ?unmanly

Education 37(14): B1-B53Pelton, Joseph N. 1987. "A New Era Begins: Satellite Communications

and Development." Arlie, Va.: Paper presented at the Telecom-munications Research Policy Conference. ED 289 457. 19 pp. MF-01; PC-01.

Peterson, A..D.C. 1972. The International Baccalaureate. London:George Harrap.

Picker, Sarah, and Barbara Turlington. 1992. Internationalizing theUndergraduate Curriculum: A Handbook for Campus Leaders.Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.

Pike, LW, T.S. Barrows, M.H. Mahoney, and A. Jugeblut. 1979. OtherNations, Other People: A Survey of Student Interests, Knowledge,Attitudes, and Perceptions Washington D.C.: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office. ED 189 190. 177 pp. MF-01; PC-08.

President's Commission on Foreign Language and International Stud-ies. 1979. Strength Through Wisdom: A Critique ofU.S. Capability.Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. ED 176 599.161 pp. MF-01; PC-07.

Ramaglia, Judith. 1988. "Internationalizing the Introductory Account-ing Course: A Case History of the Nitty Gritty." In Proceedings of11.72 Seventh Annual Eastern Michigan University Conference onLanguages for Business and the Professions ED 304 896. 30 pp.MF-01; PC-02.

Reilly, Kevin. 1985. World History: Selected Reading Lists and CourseOutlines From American Colleges and Universities New York: M.Wiener.

Rothney, John. August 1987. "Developing the Twentieth CenturyWorld History Course: A Case Study at Ohio State." History Teacher20(4): 465.85.

Sakamoto, Clyde, and Mary F. Field, eds. 1987. The Next Challenge:Balancing International Competition and Cooperation. Washing.ton, D.C.: American Association of Community and Junior Colleges.ED 280 058. 104 pp. MF-01; PC- 05.

Scanlon, David. 1960. International Education: A Documentary List-ing. New York: Teachers College Press.

Southern Governors ASsociation. '.986. Findings of the Southern Gov-ernors Association Advisory Council Gerald Baliles. Governor ofVirginia, Chairman.

Spaulding, Seth. and Michael Flack. 1976. The Wbrld's Students inthe US.: A Review and Evaluation of Research on Foreign Students.New York: Praeger.

Stein, Rxid J. 1990. "Foreign Educational Programs in Britain: LegalIssues Associated with Establishment and Taxation of ProgramsAbroad." Journal of College and University Law 16( 3): 521-45.

Thomas, Daniel, and Michael Klare. 1989. Peace and World OrderStudies Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.

Thomas, R. Murray, ed. 1990. International Comparative Education,

78

F.

New York: Pergamon Press.Tirakjan, Edward A. 1990. "Sociology's Great Leap Forward: The

Challenge of Internationalization." In Sven Groennings and DavidWiley, eds., Group Portrait: Internationalizing the Disciplines NewYork: The American Fomm.

Tonkin, Humphrey, and Jane Edwards. 1981. The lihrld hi the Cur-riculum: Curricular Strategies for the 21st Century New York:Change Magazine Press.

Thrney.Purta, Judith. 1977. "International Knowledge and Awarenessof Adolescents in Nine Countries." Internationaliournal of Po-litical Education 1: 3-19.

1989. "Measuring the Effectiveness of World StudiesCourses." In Approaches to Win-ki Studies: A Handbook for Cur-riculum Planning. Robert Woyach and Richard Remy, eds. Boston:Allyn and Bacon.

. 1990. "Annotated Bibliography of Materials to Add an Inter-national Dimension to I'ndergraduate Courses in Developmentaland Social PsTchology. In Group Portrait. Internationalizing theDisciplines Sven Groennings and David Wiley, eds. New York: TheAmerican Forum.

. October 1990. "International Comparative Research in Education: Its Role in Educational Improvement in the I. IS." Educe:-honed Researcher. 32 35:

Tucker, Jan. 1991. "Global Education Partnerships Between Schoolsand I. 'niversities." In Global Education. 1991 Yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. KennethA. Tye. ed. Arlington, Va.: 109 2.4.

U.S. Department of Education. Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education ( EIPSE). 1986; 198'; 1988: 1989; 1990. Com-preht-ilstre Program Project Descriptimis Washington. D.C.

t 'S. Department of Education. 198-4. Japanese Education TodayWashington, D.C.

U.S. Department of Educatic o. Title VI I ligher Education Act. 1986;198'; 198%. t'ndergraduate Int ernati( oal Students and Foreignlanguage Program. Project Abstracts. Washington, D.C. 1;S. Depart.meat of Education.

. Part B of the Higher Education Act. 1987 88; 1988-89; 198990. Business and International Education Prognon ProtectAbstracts Washington, D.C.: 1'.S. Department of Education.

Van Dijk, Hans. 1985. "The Study Assessment Division of the Netherlands Universities Foundation for International Cooperation."Higher Education in Europe 10( 2): 118 21.

Van Els. TIM. 1988. "Towards a Foreign language Teaching Po UTfor the European Community: A Dutch Perspective." Language,Culture. and Curriculum 1(11: 53 65.

Vcysey, L.R. 19'3 The Emergence tbe American I Wirersity Chi(ago: I'niversity of Chicago Press.

Pr(paring for a Global 0111111110lity 57()

Vocke, David. 1988. "What is Global Education?" The Social StudiesJanuary February 1988: 18 20.

Walberg, Herbert. 1990. "OECD Indicators of Educational Productivity." Educational ResearcherJune July 1990: 30.33.

Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1990. Sociology for Undergraduates: SocialSystems as World Systems. In Group Portrait: huernationalizingthe Disciplines. Sven Groennings and David \Viley, eds. New York:The American Forum.

West, Bradley B. 1985. "The State of the Profession: InternationalField Student Teaching Experiences in Undergraduate TeacherPreparation." Michigan State University, College of Education. ED265 113. 31 pp. ME-01; PC 02.

Wien. Barbara. 1981. Peace and WOrkl Order Studies: A CurriculumGuide I( 21. New York: World Policy Institute.

Wilkenfelcl. Jonathan. 1983. "Computer Assisted International Studies." Thaching Political Science 10(41: 1-1 76.

VIII, W. Marvin. 1980. "American Politics in Comparative Perspective:Thoughts cm Teaching the Course to International Students."Teaching Political Science 7(41: 4'3 80.

Iearbook of international Omanizatims: /989- 1990. l'nion of International Associations, ed. Vol. 1, 26th ed. New York: K G Saur

Zikopoulos, M., ed. 1988. Open Doors 1987 1988: Rtport on Inter.national Exchange. New York: Institute of International Education.ED 303 117. 189 pp. ME 01; PC 08

. 1989. Open Doors 1988 1989: Report on InternationalErchange. New York: Institute of International Education. ED 316162. 21- pp. ME- 01. PC not available HAS.

1091 Open Doors 990 1901: Report on InternationalEx-change. New Niwk: Institute of International Education. ED 34032-4. 194 pp. MI"--01; PC 08.

Zimincrn, Alfred. 1939. The League of .Vatiwis and the Rule of law193 '935. New York: Russell Russell.

tiv )

INDEX

A

Agency for International Development, 5Center for University Cooperation in Development, 6

Alexander the Great, 1American Academy of Political and Social Science, 21American Association of State Colleges and Universities, 49American Council on Education, 48, 57

survey, 53American Field Service, 33American Sociological Association, 18Asoka the Great, 1Associated Colleges of the Midwest, 51Associated Colleges of the Twin Cities, 51Association of International Education Administrators, 47

B

Bologna, University of, founding, 2Boston University

language training, 14British Education Reform Act, 56Brown University

foreign languages, 16

C

California State University, 22California, University of, San Diego, 31Canada

international education, 8Carnegie, Andrew, 3Carter, Jimmy, 6Center for International Business Education

funding, 6Chronicle of Higher Education, 11Clemson University

language training, 14Cold War, 4Colorado School of Mines, 23Colorado, University of, 34Commission on Foreign Language and International Studies, 6Commission on Postsecondary Accreditation, 55Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Degrees, and Diplomas

UNESCO, 43Council on International Educational Exchange, 30Council on Learning, 25, 52Cross culture

students, 33Crosscultural communication, 63

Preparing for a Global Community 81

J

Curriculumforeign students, 25international focus, 17reform, 11, 62, 66

D

Debriefing programsstudents abroad, 63

Dickinson College, 36Dominican Association for Self-Study and Accreditation, 56

E

Earlham College, 36foreign study, 15, 16, 34

Education majorsinternational studies, 23

Education, Department of, 5, 54Educational mobility, 67

American strengths, 44American weaknesses, 44research, 44

Educational Testing Service, 25ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, 57Ethnic studies, 21European Center for Higher Education, 65European colleges and universities

cooperative arrangements, 57European Community Action Scheme for the Mobility of University

Students (ERASMUS), 41European Community Course Credit Transfer System (ECiS), 41Exchange programs

international, 1

F

Florida International University, 23Ford Foundation, 5, 20Foreign language departments

foreign cultures, 18Foreign language requirements

public schools, 13Foreign language study

colleges and universities, 12Foreign Service Institute, 13Foreign student admissions

policies, 45Foreign students, 29, 37

Australia, 40Canada, 40

82

curricula, 25Egypt, 40European Community, 64French universities, 38Germany, 39India, 40Japan, 39, 40

Foreign study programsassessment, 32psychological benefits. 31

Foreign universitiescooperative arrangements, 57

Franceinternational education, 8

Fullbright Act, 5Fullbright Commission, 57Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education. 12, 42

G

Georgetown Universityforeign study, 34

Georgia Southern Universityinternational studies, 22

German Academic Exchange Program, 39German Marshall Fund, 20Germany

international education, 8Global education, 21Global marketplace, 61Goucher College, 36Great Lakes Colleges Association, 51

HHarvard College. 2Higher Education Act

Title VI, 12Title VIB, 12

Higher Education in Europe, 12Higher Education Panel

survey, 30Higher education

modern, 2

1

Indiana University. 23Institute of International Education, 30, 57International baccalaureate, 24International Baccalaureate Organization, 25

Preparing for a Global Community 83

a

International activitiesevaluation, 50priorities, 53

International Association of Universities, 42, 57International Bureau of Education, 3International curricula

American strengths, 27American weaknesses, 28faculty support, 36

International Dimension Index, 50Internnonal education

administration, 47, 58, 65administrative effectiveness, 59administrative responsibilities, 48American strengths, 58American weaknesses, 58early attempts, 62funding, 54promotion, 52U.S. program models, 47

International educational activities, 52International exchanges

artists, 3authors, 3scientists, 3

International higher education, 1International organizations

foreign students, 41International perspective

promotion, 66science and mathematics, 19

International relations. 1International society, 61International studies

evaluation, 52Internationalization

colleges and universities, 49

JJapan

international education, 8Jefferson, Thomas, 2Joint National Committee for Languages, 13Joliet Junior College

foreign languages, 16

84

1 o

7.0

KKalamazoo College, 35, 36Kellogg, W.W., 3

L

Lafayette College, 23Language instruction

European Community, 43satellite broadcasting, 19

Language mentors, 37League of Nations, 2

Committee on Intellectual Cooperation, 3Lehigh University

language training, 14Lewis and Clark College

overseas study, 15

M

Marshall Plan, 4Maryland, University of, 24

foreign languages, 19Michigan, University of

School of Business Administration, 22Middle States Commission on Higher Education, 56Minnesota, University of

Russian studies, 51Montpellier, University of

founding, 2Multinational exchanges, 46

N

National Council on Foreign Language and InternationalStudies, 17

National Defense Education Act, 5National Endowment for the Humanities, 5, 12, 14, 27National Governors Association, 7National Security Education Act, 6, 66National Student Association for Foreign Student Affairs, 3Netherlands Universities Foundation for International

Cooperation, 8New York, State University of, 20North Carolina, University of, 16Northern Illinois University, 23

0Ohio State University, 15Oregon State University

international studies, 16

Preparing for a Global Community 85

1r

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 4Organization of American States, 4Orientation programs

students abroad, 63Oxford University

founding, 2

PParis, University of

founding, 2Peace Corps, 5Pennsylvania Council for International Education, 51Public Broadcasting System, 51

RRamapo College, 37Rhode Island, University of

international studies, 24Rockefeller Foundation,Rockefeller, John D., 3Russian studies, 51

S

Science and mathematicsforeign language study, 20

Simulation, 24Smith-Mundt Act, 5Social work

international studies, 23Southern Governors Association, 7St. Olaf College, 19Stanford University, 4, 37State Department, 5Student mobility

federal role, 46Study abroad, 29, 64Survey of Global Awareness, 25, 26Sweden

policy on international education, 8Swedish Commission on Internationalization of Higher

Education, 8

TTaxila, University of 1Texas A&I University

MexicanAmerican students, 36'Mans-European Mobility Scheme for University Students

(TEMPUS), 41

86

1i

.

TransRegional Academic Mobility and Credential Evaluation(TRACE), 41

Treaties of Westphalia, 2

UUS programs abroad

accreditation, 55UNESCO, 3, 4, 57, 58, 65

journal, 11United States Institute of Peace, 21

V

Virginia Tidewater Consortium for Higher Education, 51Virginia, University of

founding, 2

W

Wageningen Agricultural University, 8Washington, University of, 4William and Mary, College of

founding, 2

Y

Yale University, 2Youth for Understanding, 33

/

Preparing for a Global Community 87

1 ( , 0'

O 4

ASHE-ERIC HIGHER EDUCATION REPORTS

Since 1983, the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE)and the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) Clear-inghouse on Higher Education, a sponsored project of the Schoolof Education and Human Development at The George WashingtonUniversity, have cosponsored the AWE-ERIC Higher EducationReport senes. The 1992 series is the twenty-first overall and the fourthto be published by the School of Education and Human Develop-ment at the George Washington University.

Each monograph is the definitive analysis of a tough higher edu-cation problem, based on thorough research of pertinent literatureand institutional experiences. Topics are identified by a nationalsurvey. Noted practitioners and scholars are then commissionedto write the reports, with experts providing critical reviews of eachmanuscript before publication.

Eight monographs (10 before 1985) in the ASHE-ERIC HigherEducation Report series are published each year and are availableon individual and subscription bases. Subscription to eight issuesis $90.00 annually; $70 to members of AAHE, AIR, or AERA; and $60to ASHE members. All foreign subscribers must include an additional$10 per series year for postage.

To order single copies of existing reports, use the order form onthe last page of this book. Regular prices, and special rates availableto members of AAHE, AIR, AERA and ASHE, are as follows:

Series Regular Members1990 to 92 $17.00 $12.751988 and 89 15.00 11.251985 to 87 10.00 7.501983 and 84 7.50 6.00before 1983 6.50 5.00

Price includes book rate postage within the U.S. For foreign orders,please add $1.00 per book Fast United Parcel Service available withinthe contiguous U.S. at $2.50 for each order under $50.00, and cal-culated at 5% of invoice total for orders $50.00 or above.

All orders under $45.00 must be prepaid. Make check payableto ASHEERIC. For Visa or MasterCard, include card number, expi-ration date and signature, A bulk discount of 10% is available onorders of 10 or more books, and 40% on orders of 25 or more books(not applicable on subscriptions).

Address order toASHE-ERIC Higher Education ReportsThe George Washington University1 Dupont Circle, Suite 630Washington, DC 20036

Or phone (202) 296-2597Write or call for a complete catalog.

Preparing for a Global Community 89

104

1992 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports

1. The Leadership Compass: Values and Ethics in Higher Educationby John R Wilcox and Susan L. Ebbs

1991 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports

1. Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the ClassroomCharles C. Bonwell and James A. Eison

2. Realizing Gender Equality in Higher Education: The Need toIntegrate \X'ork/Family Issues

Nancy Hensel

3. Academic Advising for Student Success: A System of SharedResponsibility

by Susan H. Frost

4. Cooperative Learning: Increasing College Faculty InstructionalProductivity

by David W. Johnson, Roger T Johnson, and Karl A. Smith

5. High School-College Partnerships: Conceptual Models, Pro-grams, and Issues

by Arthur Richard Greenberg

6. Meeting the Mandate: Renewing the College and DepartmentalCurriculum

by William Toombs and William Tierney

7. Faculty Collaboration: Enhancing the Quality of Scholarshipand Teaching

by Ann E. Austin and Roger G Baldwin

8. Strategies and Consequences: Managing the Costs in HigherEducation

by John S. Waggaman

1990 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports

1. The Campus Green: Fund Raising in Higher EducationBarbara E Brittingham and Thomas R. Pezzullo

2. The Emeritus Professor: Old Rank New MeaningJames E. Mauch, Jack W Birch, and Jack Matthews

3. "High Risk" Students in Higher Education: Future TrendsDionneJ. Jones and Betty Collier Watson

4. Budgeting for Higher Education at the State Level: Enigma,Paradox, and Ritual

Daniel T Layzell and Jan W Lyddon

5. Proprietary Schools: Programs, Policies, and ProspectsJohn B. Lee and Jamie P Merisotis

6. College Choice: Understanding Student Enrollment BehaviorMichael B. Paulsen

1 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

04.

7 Pursuing Diversity. Recruiting College Minority StudentsBarbara Astone and Elsa NuTiez-Wormack

8 Social Consciousness and Career Awareness Emerging Linkin Higher Education

John S Swift, Jr

1989 ASITE-ERIC Higher Education Reports

1 Making Sense of Administrative Leadership The T Word inHigher Education

Estela M. Bensimon, Anna Neumann, and Robert Birnbaum

2. Affirmative Rhetoric, Negative Action: African-American andHispanic Faculty at Predominantly White Universities

Valora Washington and William Harvey

3. Postsecondary Developmental Programs: A Traditional Agendawith New Imperatives

Louise M Tomlinson

4. The Old College Balancing Athletics and Academics inHigher Education

John R Thelin and Lawrence L Wiseman

5. The Challenge of Diversity: Involvement or Alienation in theAcademy?

Daryl G. Smith

6. Student Goals for College and Courses: A Missing Link in Assess-ing and Improving Academic Achievement

Joan S. Stark, Kathleen M. Shaw, and Malcolm A. Lowther

7. The Student as Commuter: Developing a Comprehensive Insti-tutional Response

Barbara Jacoby

8. Renewing Civic Capacity: Preparing College Students for Serviceand Citizenship

Suzanne W. Morse

1988 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports

1. The Invisible Tapestry: Culture in American Colleges andUniversities

George D. Kuh and Elizabethi. Whitt

2. Critical Thinking: Theory, Research, Practice, and PossibilitiesJoanne Gainen Kurfiss

3. Developing Academic Programs: The Climate for InnovationDaniel T Seymour

4. Peer Teaching: To Teach is To Learn 'NiceNeal A Whitman

Managing the Costs in Higher Education 91

5. Higher Education and State Go-emments: Renewed Partnership,Cooperation, or Competition?

Edward R. Hines

6. Entrepreneurship and Higher Education: Lessons for Colleges,Universities, and Industry

James S. Fairweather

7. Planning for Microcomputers in Higher Education: Strategiesfor the Next Generation

Reynolds Ferrante, John Hayman, Mary Susan Carlson, andHarry Phillips

8. The Challenge for Research in Higher Education: HarmonizingExcellence and Utility

Alan W Lindsay and Ruth T Neumann

1987 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports

1. Incentive Early Retirement Programs for Faculty: InnovativeResponses to a Changing Environment

Jay L Chronister and Thomas R. Kepple, Jr.

2. Working Effectively with Trustees: Building Cooperative CampusLeadership

Barbara E. Taylor

3. Formal Recognition of Employer-Sponsored Instruction: Conflictand Collegiality in Postsecondary Education

Nancy S. Nash and Elizabeth M Hawthorne

4. Learning Styles: Implications for Improving Educational PracticesCharles S. Claxton and Patricia H. Murrell

5. Higher Education Leadership: Enhancing Skills through Pro-fessional Development Programs

Sharon A. McDade

6. Higher Education and the Public Trust: Improving Stature inColleges and Universities

Richard L. Alfred and Julie Weissman

7. College Student Outcomes Assessment: A Talent DevelopmentPerspective

Maryann Jacobi, Alexander Astin, and Frank Ayala, Jr.

8. Opportunity from Strength: Strategic Planning Clarified withCase Examples

Robert G. Cope

1986 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports

1. Post-tenure Faculty Evaluation: Threat or Opportunity?Christine M Licata

92

2. Blue Ribbon Commissions and Higher Education: ChangingAcademe from the Outside

Janet R. Johnson and Laurence R. Marcus

3. Responsive Professional Education: Balancing Outcomes andOpportunities

Joan S. Stark, Malcolm A. Lowther, and Bennie MK Hagerty

4. Increasing Students' Learning: A Faculty Guide to ReducingStress among Students

Neal A Whitman, David C Spendlove, and Claire H. Clark

5. Student Financial Aid and Women: Equity Dilemma?Mary Moran

6. The Master's Degree: Tradition, Diversity, InnovationJudith S. Glazer

7. The College, the Constitution, and the Consumer Student: Impli-cations for Policy and Practice

Robert M. Hendrickson and Annette Gibbs

8. Selecting College and University Personnel: The Quest andthe Question

Richard A Kaplou'itz

1985 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports

1. Flexibility in Academic Staffing: Effective Policies and PracticesKenneth P. Mortimer, Marque Bagshaw and Andrew TMasland

2. Associations in Action: The Washington, D.C. Higher EducationCommunity

Harland G. Bloland

3. And on the Seventh Day: Faculty Consulting and SupplementalIncome

Carol M. Boyer and Darrell R. Lewis

4. Faculty Research Performance: Lessons from the Sciences andSocial Sciences

John W Creswell

5. Academic Program Review: Institutional Approaches. Expec-tations, and Controversies

Clifton E Conrad and Richard F Wilson

6. Students in Urban Settings: Achieving the Baccalaureate DegreeRichard C Richardson, Jr. and Louis W Render

7. Serving More Than Students: A Critical Need for College StudentPersonnel Services

Peter H. Garland

Managing the Costs in Higher Education 93

8. Faculty Participation in Decision Making: Necessity or Luxury?Carol E. Floyd

1984 ASHE -ERIC Higher Education Reports

1. Adult Learning: State Policies and Institutional PracticesK Patricia Cross and Anne-Marie McCartan

2. Student Stress: Effects and SolutionsNeal A Whitman, David C Spendlove, and Claire H. Clark

3. Part-time Faulty: Higher Education at a CrossroadsJudith M Gappa

4. Sex Discrimination Law in Higher Education: The Lessons ofthe Past Decade. ED 252 169.*

J. Ralph Lindgren, Patti T Ota, Pe. 9, A. Zirkel, and Nan VanGieson

5. Faculty Freedoms and Institutional Accountability: Interactionsand Conflicts

Steven G. Olsu'ang and Barbara A Lee

6. The High Technology Connection: Academic Industrial Coop-eration for Economic Growth

Lynn G. Johnson

7. Employee Educational Programs: Implications for Industry andHigher Education. ED 258 501.*

Suzanne W Morse

8. Academic Libraries: The Changing Knowledge Centers of Col-leges and Universities

Barbara B. Moran

9. Futures Research and the Strategic Planning Process: Impli-cations for Higher Education

James L. Morrison, William L. Renfro, and Wayne I. Boucher

10. Faculty Workload: Research, Theory, and InterpretationHarold E Yuker

Out of print. Available through EDRS. Call 1 8(10-143-ERIC.

9,1

ORDER FORM 92-2Quantity Amount

Please begin my subscription to the 1992 ASHE-ERICHigher Education Reports at $90.00, 33% off the coverprice, starting with Report 1, 1992.

Please send a complete set of the 1991 ASHE-ERICHigher Education Reports at $80.00, 41% off the coverprice.

Outside the U.S., add $10.00 per series for postage.

Individual reports are avilable at the following prices:1990 and 1991, $17.00 1983 and 1984, $7.501988 and 1989, $15.00 1982 and back, $6.501985 to 1987, $10.00

Book rate postage within the U.S. is included. Outside US., please add $1.00per book for postage. Fast U.P.S. shipping is available within the contiguousU.S. at $250 for each order under $50.00, and calculated at 5% of invoicetotal for orders $50.00 or above. All orders under $45.00 must be prepaid.

PLEASE SE `1D ME THE FOLLOWING REPORTS:

Quantity Report No. Year Title Amount

Subtotal:

Please check one of the following: Foreign or UPS :

Check enclosed, payable to GWIJ -ERIC. Total Due:. . ,-,...._ . . ,Purchase order attached . minimum).Charge my credit card indicated below:

Visa MasterCard

1 1 H 1 1 1 1

Expiration Date

Name

Title

Institution

Address

City State ZipPhone

Signature Date

SEND ALL ORDERS TO:ASHE-ERIC Higher Education ReportsThe George Washington University

One Dupont Circle, Suite 630Washington, DC 20036-1183

Phone: (202) 296-2597

If you're not familiar with the ASHE-ERICHigher Education Report Series, just listento how subscribers feel:

The ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports are amongthe most comprebensity summaries of higher educationliterature available The concise format, jargon-freeprose, extensity reference list, and index of eachReport make the ASHE -ERIC Higher Education ReportSeries a "must" for any library that maintains ahigher education collection.

The above statement has been endorsed by many of yourcolleagues. including:

Kent MillwoodLibrary Director. Anderson College

William E. VincentPresident, Bucks County Community College

Richard B. FlynnDean, College of Education. 1 ?ninersity of Nebraska atOmaha

Dan LandtAssistant to the Chancellor. The City Colleges of Chicago

Mark A. SherouseVice Provost, Southern illethodist University

ASFfkr ERICHigher Education Reports

Informed liadership makes the difference.

SARAH M. PICKERT is an associate professor of education atThe Catholic University of America, where she also has servedas department chair and dean of the School of Education (1985-89). During 1986-87, she participated in the American Councilon Education's Fellows Program in Higher EducationAdministration. She coauthored an ACE publication with BarbaraTurlington titled Creating and Internationalizing Curriculum:Strategies, Case Studies, and Presidential Perspectives publishedin 1992. In 1991, Dr. Pickert spent a sabbatical semester inTokyo to study the roles of higher education institutions,governments, and international organizations in shapinginternational education policy and practices in Japan.