February 4, 2005
Memorandum for MULTI Participants
From: Sherman Garnett, Director of the NCA Self-Study
Subject: Overview of February 7th NCA MULTI Session
Attached please find the materials for Monday’s MULTI session on the NCA Self-Study on internationalization. Please familiarize yourself with these texts in advance, as we intend to provide only a brief overview of the Self-Study and spend the bulk of our time in small-group discussions. We plan on organizing tables on four key themes— defining the international mission, faculty issues, undergraduate education, and organizing the administrative support for our international goals. We also plan on holding additional sessions on the other key sections of the study in the coming months.
The attached texts represent a collection of the issues, ideas, recommendations, and options that have emerged during the last year of Committee sessions. We want your ideas, criticisms, and perspectives, as the Committee will be producing a formal first draft during this semester.
These texts are short [1-5 pages each]. In a separate message, we will also be forwarding a working draft, Ken Waltzer’s “Review of the MSU Curriculum: Revised Draft for Further Development, Response & Comment,” and Appendix D Global Environment. Theses are much longer papers but really brings together a wide range of important issues related to developing a curriculum for a global age.
In the coming weeks, we will be posting a wide range of materials on our web site, http://www.accreditation2006.msu.edu/, including data sets, discussion papers, redrafts of the sections we will be discussing at Monday’s meeting, and the latest drafts of other sections of the report. We would especially like your help in bringing this material to the attention of faculty and staff in your units.
See you Monday.
Attachments:
Draft Table of Contents for the Self Study [1 page]
Section II: Defining a 21st Century International Mission [3 pages]
Section III: Sustaining and Expanding Faculty Capacity and Excellence [4 pages]
Section V: Enhancing International Aspects of Undergraduate Education [3 pages]
Section VIII: Organizing Administratively for Success [5 pages]
NCA SELF-STUDY ON INTERNATIONALIZATION
DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction: The Challenges and Opportunities of Internationalization
II. Defining a 21st Century International Mission
III. Sustaining and Expanding Faculty Capacity and Excellence
IV. Supporting Excellence in International Research
V. Enhancing International Aspects of Undergraduate Education
VI. Enhancing International Aspects of Graduate and Professional School Education
VII. Global Outreach
VIII. Organizing Administratively for Success
IX. Extending Our Reach: Global Strategic Partnerships
X. Internationalizing Campus Life
XI. Recommendations and Conclusions
Appendix A: Bibliography
Appendix B: MSU Data Sets & Web sites
Appendix C: Guiding Questions (December 2003)
Appendix D. Global Environment
Appendix E: Global Health
Appendix F: Science as an International Activity
Appendix G: Study Abroad
Appendix H: MSU International Courses
Appendix I: MSU Foreign Language Courses
Appendix J: Area Studies Review
Appendix K: VP for Research: Research Priorities
Appendix L: Developing Global Capacity
[Others as needed]
II. Defining 21st Century Internationalization
Discussion—
Whatever the strengths of our tradition of internationalization or current position as a global leader in such areas as engagement with Africa, international development, or study abroad, our position is constantly challenged by budget constraints and a turnover of faculty internally, as well as global, disciplinary, and higher education trends externally. Almost every institution is responding by becoming or claiming to become “more international.” Almost every institution can or will soon be able to produce lists of international courses, programs, research, and outreach that will seem to the bewildered prospective student, state legislator, foundation president, and taxpayer to be very much like everyone else’s list. Signature programs like study abroad are becoming less and less unique now and will become more widespread in the coming years, not only at colleges and universities, but even in high schools.
In the past, it may have been enough to underscore internationalization as a way of differentiating MSU from other institutions. Those days are gone. MSU now needs to define more precisely its international mission and niche. It also needs to nurture, expand, and build an integrated set of teaching, research, and outreach programs that both reflect that mission and are widely recognized by peers and stakeholders as excellent. Some of the key building blocks for such a mission are already in place. The Committee has attempted below to offer one version of such a mission statement, aiming to present to the university community an example of what it believes is necessary and to stimulate a wider consideration of whether it or some other version better captures existing strengths, longer term ambitions, and necessary choices.
A Draft Mission—
MSU has a long tradition of pioneering international work. We believe it is time to take another step and create a truly 21st century global MSU. This MSU would be committed to understanding globalization and the globalizing world in all its aspects and would make this search for that understanding one of its fundamental missions to be reflected in its teaching, research, and outreach.
This initiative would help distinguish our understanding of international mission from many other colleges and universities also claiming to be global or international. It would also require restructuring some administrative and other support structures and acquiring a limited set of true global strategic partners. In our view, MSU already has a foundation in place for such an initiative but requires the vision and follow-through to stretch that foundation toward a leadership position. Indeed, such an initiative needs to build upon existing foundations in research, teaching, and outreach. It must have roots in undergraduate and graduate education, in visible research and support for research, and in our hiring and retention of faculty and staff who support the initiative. The basic building blocks for such a position are outlined below.
The initiative would require our defining internationalization in a way that differentiates ourselves and helps us make the best use of our limited resources. The Committee found that MSU’s international strengths are not comprehensive. Regionally, we are strongest in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Thematically, we are strongest in global environment, development, and health issues. These strengths play out upon a variety of disciplinary and unit indicators, including a general recognition of the strength of our basic science and professional programs. As a result, we may be in a unique position to develop a kind of “land grant” internationalization by staking a claim to understanding and helping fashion responses to the human opportunities and costs of globalization.
Such an approach would single out issues where there is an impact on human and animal health; the environment; economic prosperity and development; ethnic, religious, and racial tolerance; political reform and democratization; equity and social justice; and conflicts and conflict resolution. Our roots in the poorest regions of the globe, or strengths in outreach and research with consequences, our global reach all argue for becoming the institution with a mission to understand globalization theoretically and pragmatically and ways to mitigate its negative effects and more widely distribute its opportunities.
In our era, these global issues are inherently local and regional as well. They do not prevent our continuing to serve Michigan and in fact may help establish clearer linkages for ourselves, the legislature, and publics between our local and state work and our international mission. Implementing this commitment would require us not only to build upon strengths but also to fill in gaps, such as currently exist in areas of global conflict or in working through the public policy implications of our theoretical and practical insights.
Overall, such an initiative would create a clear set of research, resource, and teaching priorities within the international mission. It would not attempt to micromanage faculty research or teaching, but it would create a broad set of themes, concentrations, and priorities that would be easy to present to ourselves and the outside world. Having an overarching focus and pursuing that focus helps to place outreach and pragmatic work in a context more likely to garner peer and public respect.
This focus on globalization matches well with another strength on campus—the pursuit of large-scale research in basic science and technology and the related task of understanding the implication of this research for society. Together, these two areas could be seen as the foundation for a truly 21st century MSU.
Questions and Issues for Further Discussion—
First and foremost, does this mission statement make sense? Does it adequately differentiate us from other institutions and create a niche? Does it capture where we are already strong or where we can improve? Does it leave out themes and/or programs?
Second, what are the implications for such a mission? What other actions need to be taken to support it? How disruptive will and should this or any new mission be? Do we have the institutional and fiscal wherewithal and individual and unit energy and morale to set out on such a course?
Third, what other alternatives are out there and within reach?
III. Sustaining and Expanding International Faculty Excellence
Discussion—
Sustaining and deepening MSU’s commitment to internationalization would seem to depend on the indispensable role MSU faculty play and will continue to play in all aspects, particularly its reputation as a leader in international research and teaching. Faculty engagement is the key to efforts to enhance the range and reputation of “land grant” internationalization. Successful internationalization is not the result of making additional demands on faculty time, but of creating the right mix of motivated faculty, an intellectually stimulating environment of research, teaching, and outreach, and the proper incentives. In what follows, we have focused on faculty issues directly related to internationalizing, mindful that there is vast experience and a large literature on faculty issues in general. We are also aware that some of what we outline below might better be handled in this more general context.
MSU already has a large cadre of faculty devoted to international teaching, research, and outreach. More than 1,200 MSU faculty and staff members are regularly involved in international scholarship, instruction, and work abroad. Over 25% of our faculty and staff are directly involved with formal international programs, and many more are involved in less formal ways across the mission.
Yet this cadre must be sustained in a time of the graying of the faculty, budgetary constraints that have reduced the number of tenure-stream faculty positions, and department and disciplinary priorities that do not always place a high value on regional studies and international research
Hiring and Sustaining Great International Faculty—
Our first priority is to hire the very best faculty, especially those who are internationally-minded and internationally-experienced A great international faculty body is one that includes scholars who work in international contexts and who work on problems of global consequence, faculty who teach study abroad courses and who infuse on-campus courses with international content, and faculty from around the world who research and teach in all areas. Not only should these faculty fill positions related to internationalization, but these capabilities should be seen, where possible, as a plus factor in hiring in general. In this fiscally constrained environment, there has to be a more serious effort made to look for faculty who fill multiple niches, are inter- and cross-disciplinary, and are able to work in or across a number of departments. Of special interest would be faculty who can meet not only international but other vital campus priorities. This step also entails greater attention to recruiting, hiring, and especially orienting and supporting the faculty and graduate students we do hire.
Such an approach to hiring requires a strategic plan and a supporting system of managing faculty and faculty positions supporting our international mission. Such a plan would match existing faculty to international teaching, research, and outreach priorities, identify gaps and additional positions needed, and have a role in managing these positions and the faculty who hold them in all phases (e.g., searches and hiring; reappointment, tenure, and promotion; research and teaching support; recognition). We need to know now how well faculty and other resources match the University’s international priorities, where the gaps are, how many positions are required to fill them, and how to manage hiring, tenure and promotion, and incentive processes over the next decade to reach our goals.
**The Dean of ISP already has an inventory of faculty engaged in international work, including information about their world region expertise, research interests, teaching, language assets, and other international activities. ISP shares this information widely and expects to have this searchable database available on the web with an MSU password. Through a collaborative process, the Dean makes recommendations to departments and colleges about institutional priorities for key faculty positions. Through this process, 15 critical positions in CAL and SSC were identified during 2003-04. The colleges are moving to fill these positions. More recently, additional critical positions (i.e., Islamic Studies in James Madison) have been identified as faculty have retired or departed MSU.
However, in many cases, ISP currently plays only a coordinating and cajoling role in the management of positions. ISP may be unaware of emergent international teaching and research that does not connect to existing university resources or support of efforts to integrate international content in courses taught on campus. not part of the basic mission. Here there is a need to sustain important pockets of internationalization, as well as recognize how international the basic underlying practices are. MSU, the faculty and graduate students in the basic sciences are far more diverse internationally than other units and cooperative international research is commonplace. Campus efforts at internationalization need to capture aspects of this highly globalized work environment for the campus at large.
**Of greater concern, however, are trends in the core academic disciplines of the liberal arts traditionally favorable to regional studies and other aspects of internationalization, where a greater emphasis is now put on disciplinary theoretical priorities. Where open international positions exist or are created and incumbent faculty have been identified who are crucial to the University’s international mission, there should be consideration given to a process of career management that ensures some attention is paid to international priorities, with special consideration being given to supplementing established departmental or unit reviews with an outside look when a faculty member’s international role is in some apparent conflict with internal standards.
Support for Pre-Tenure Faculty and Faculty in Less Internationally-Minded Departments—
MSU needs to take additional steps to make international criteria listed on promotion and tenure documents meaningful. MSU is ahead of other universities in that the current tenure and promotion materials include performance rating for “service” to ISP and narrative evaluations for such items as international instruction abroad and comparative /international courses on campus. However, faculty, especially pre-tenure faculty must have a clear understanding of how international instruction is evaluated and valued. This is particularly relevant for faculty who engage in international instruction but do so as overload pay (e.g., teach study abroad for 3 weeks in the summer).
**Consider a role for the Dean of ISP in promotion and tenure. Such a role has to be part of a larger strategic plan and system of managing this plan, since pre-tenure faculty need support, guidance, mentoring, and feedback well before reappointment and tenure decisions are made. Thus, for faculty fulfilling a role in the international mission, there needs to be early efforts to define expectations and review progress that supplement existing departmental and college processes.
**Present more successfully models of senior faculty success in supporting internationalization to pre-tenure faculty, the campus as a whole, and external constituencies. If internationalization as outlined above is to sustain and expand its prominence at MSU, there should be a set of faculty at all career stages who are models of success through their research, teaching, outreach, and outside support. A number of these models already exist, but are they as numerous as they should be and are their international accomplishments highlighted? Are they proportionately represented in UDP and Hannah professorships? Should there be additional, international categories of faculty status (e.g., global scholars or professors)?
Creating Additional Incentives and Addressing Constraints—
**Review existing and proposed faculty development programs to ensure that some portion regularly and effectively targets internationalization at every level.
**Explore development opportunities to increase support for international research and travel. A number of international faculty identify dwindling support for international research and travel as a problem. Many faculty have identified exploring ways to increase this support as a major priority and one likely to have a significant impact on international research.
**To motivate and encourage faculty not currently engaged in international work, there should also be programs that are modeled upon the ISP model for study abroad course development, which currently provides participating MSU faculty the opportunity for travel and “seed” support for a new study abroad course. Such programs could be competitively based on the likelihood that the faculty member will remain involved in international efforts and the benefit to be derived from the faculty member’s participation. They could include opportunities for faculty to attend a “seminar abroad” and / or language programs for faculty. A model might be Texas A&M’s program in which 10 faculty are selected each year to go to its Mexico City Center for a 10-day intensive networking and cultural learning experience; however, given the far-flung opportunities already available on account of existing MSU research, study abroad courses, and collaborative partnerships, we believe an annual program of this type could be much broader and more diverse, providing selected faculty the opportunity to obtain an international experience and develop an international focus.
**Consider alternatives to standard teaching assignments. There is a compelling need for units to address the inflexible academic calendar, which inhibits faculty travel and research. Though the flexibility to permit modular courses, team-teaching, and other arrangements would create greater flexibility for international engagement at times other than summer or semester breaks, the overwhelming majority of courses at graduate and undergraduate level remain single instructor and semester long.
**Give appropriate recognition for international teaching efforts. This recognition could come through a variety of venues including newsletter, university magazines, or via speeches of higher-level University administrators. Faculty may also be recognized through awards in excellence in international teaching. The University may also wish to work with key departments to allocate a portion of the merit salary increase budget to reward faculty involvement in international teaching.
**Provide support for international curriculum development. Faculty incentives can be developed for faculty to develop new international courses or modify existing ones to include and international component. Providing this support can have an enormous impact on the University’s efforts to enhance international education efforts. Texas A&M, Virginia Tech, and Wright State University offer grants to faculty members each semester to offset professional expenses related to international curriculum development. CASID and MSU CIBER currently offer faculty grants for international course development, and these programs could be expanded.
**Continue to provide faculty salaries and other incentives for those leading study abroad programs. Current on-campus overload pay policy does not apply to study abroad; faculty overload pay policies for study abroad are determined by each individual college. The only caveat in this regard is that the faculty salary must fit within the budget parameters of the study abroad program. The individual colleges, not the University, sign off on program budgets and, implicitly, faculty salaries. In general, faculty study abroad salary is determined by the rank of the program faculty leader and the number of credits taught/contact hours. (Hence, the only way faculty from the same college teaching 2-week and 6-week programs would earn the same pay would be if they were providing the same number of credits/contact hours over their respective time periods.)
**Expand the hosting of international scholars and visitors to campus. Although hosting these scholars on campus may be directly linked to research presentations, opportunities exist to engage these international scholars in the classroom. Where departments are limited in their ability to host visiting scholars, provide centralized resources (e.g., shared office space, computer access) for international visitors who will spend several weeks to a few months on campus.
**Encourage increased involvement of international graduate students in course instruction. The University is in a unique position to take advantage of the presence of international graduate students on campus. These students already come to the University with international experience and can bring these as experiences directly into the classroom. Creating a listing of international graduate students and, perhaps, their spouses who would be interested in participating in a course as a guest speaker would provide many instructors with a simple and effective manner to incorporate international experiences and examples in their courses.
**Be more creative with time off for international teaching. The majority of study abroad courses taught by MSU faculty are currently taught during the summer, when many faculty who may be interested in leading study abroad are under contract to teach domestically and/or to conduct research locally. More an issue for annual year contracted faculty than academic year faculty, the need to free up time to teach abroad is a very real issue.
**Through a range of faculty development mechanisms, provide adequate information on existing international research opportunities on ways to locate funding for new international research projects or for inclusion of global content in ongoing research through a range of faculty development mechanisms. New graduate student and faculty orientations could highlight international research; workshops, seminars, web tutorials could direct faculty to funding resources.
V. Enhancing International Aspects of Undergraduate Education
The past decade has seen the robust growth of the nation’s largest study abroad program on the basis of a curriculum already rich in regional studies and global issues. In the years ahead, MSU needs to expand upon this base by creating a true pyramid of internationalized curriculum that reaches from modest but broad-based exposure of every undergraduate to international issues to an expanded capacity to train a small but steady number of global and regional experts, particularly in the regions and issue areas of special strength. Many courses relevant to this new pyramid already exist at every level of the curriculum and throughout the major academic units on campus, especially those responsible for general and liberal education. Indeed, MSU is in some sense already providing key elements of the proposed pyramid to its undergraduates. The key building blocks of this pyramid consist of the following:
**First, though the size, diversity, and interests of its undergraduates should encourage focus on creating an expanded set of options for students, not a range of new and burdensome requirements, there is merit in considering a requirement for every undergraduate to take a specified number of global issues course from an approved list of courses in integrative studies, freshmen seminars, and courses within departments at MSU and/or study abroad. The purpose of this course requirement is to expose students to the key issues of a globalizing planet and how globalization influences local, regional, national, and international issues.
**Second, the University should provide the opportunity for willing undergraduates to develop “global capacity” through a variety of approved thematic and regional courses (distributed among methodological, historical, regional, disciplinary, and thematic clusters), a study abroad or international internship experience, exposure to foreign languages, and significant cross-cultural volunteer work on or around campus. The university would certify the successful student’s achievement of “global capacity.”
**Third, MSU needs to continue to expand its study abroad opportunities, especially broadening the level of participation and expanding the number of extended research opportunities and semesters abroad, especially in a second language. There has to be new efforts to prepare students before they go abroad and to integrate their experience back into the classroom when they return. MSU should also aim at placing 20% of its students on internships in international settings.
**Fourth, the expansion of international majors and specializations needs to continue.
The current effort by ISP, the College of Social Science, and the College of Arts and Letters to establish a number of new international regional and thematic majors is an important model, as is the International Business Specialization. Of special importance are options that allow students to add an international dimension to an existing course of study. Coincident with the area studies review, the need for a new internationally-focused undergraduate major that would allow MSU students to concentrate on area studies was identified. In consultations with area studies center directors, faculty and administrators from the Colleges of Social Science, Arts and Letters, and James Madison, a major in Global and Area Studies has been designed. This major will be grounded in a common foundation of understanding global systems and processes as they are expressed in local places, and it will offer students a choice of two types of concentrations - on world regions and relevant foreign languages and on global themes. Concentrations will be available in all of the world regions of the existing specializations except for Canada.
A proposal for the new Global and Area Studies major is being developed and is expected to be put before the curriculum committees of the Colleges of Social Science, Arts and Letters, and James Madison during the spring of 2005. The major is intended to be an attractive additional major to students in these and other colleges.
**Fifth, regional and thematic centers of study, majors, specializations, and programs need to increase their capacity to produce a steady stream of highly qualified graduates trained in the strategically important languages, countries, regions, and global issues identified as the university’s international focus. These students should be given special research and travel opportunities. Our aim should be nothing less than that MSU should be a recognized leader in students accepted at premier graduate programs and winning Fulbrights and other major international fellowships.
**Sixth, this international curriculum should be one of the three or four key selling points in recruiting prospective students and their parents.
Foreign Language—
Expanded opportunities for foreign language acquisition require special attention. A new effort has to be made to build upon and expand the language skills students bring to the university.
**First and foremost, there needs to be a widespread re-examination of the move away from foreign language requirements in the past several decades. For resource and other reasons, we understand that the university cannot re-impose a universal two-year foreign language requirement... Rather, we believe there is room for programs in the liberal arts to consider reinstating these requirements. Moreover, the incentives to pursue competency in a foreign language are already out in the world and ought to be reinforced in a university that sees on of its primary missions as international.
**Second, as a minimum, administrative reorganization should not eliminate foreign language requirements that already exist (e.g., History’s requirement needs to remain intact in CSS). University resources need to ensure adequate support in the language departments for existing College and department requirements.
**Third, we should expand the number of voluntary options that enhance a student’s education or preparation for the working world. These include programs like the International Business Specialization and new regional studies majors in CSS.
**Fourth, we have to expand the options available for students to fulfill their foreign language work outside the traditional “two-years in class” model. We believe the university has to encourage a wider range of summer and study abroad options, as well as the computer and tutor model used for less commonly taught languages. Study-Abroad programs where language and disciplinary issues are combined, as in our Volgograd offerings for engineering students, are important models. The University should invest in the studies and support required to determine the effectiveness of these alternative models of instruction and convince those who provide governmental and foundation support of the utility of these alternative models.
**Fifth, MSU also has to expand the opportunities students have for acquiring practical foreign language skills through travel and internships and to document these capabilities where they have reached a significant level of competency. Greater encouragement needs to be given to foreign language facility relative to the workplace or environment. Nursing in fact has a program that exposes students to real world health care in Mexico and thus to the importance of functional second-language capabilities that can be brought back to the workplace.
**Finally, MSU ought to take on the task of being a national leader in preparing a small but significant number of students in the less commonly taught languages, especially those with growing strategic significance. Special support should be extended to encourage students to take on the task of learning a less commonly taught language, and MSU should attempt to become a leader in producing a small but steady stream of undergraduates specializing in important but less commonly taught regions and languages.
New Residential College or Program—
In late 2003, the Provost called for the establishment of a third residential program to stand alongside James Madison College and Lyman Briggs. Though the basic mission and curriculum of the program, and even its status as an independent college or program within an existing college are still under discussion, a new residential college or program offers expanded opportunity for specialized, internationally-oriented undergraduate education.
Moreover, adding a third major residential option creates new opportunities for Madison-Briggs-new program cooperation, especially on international curriculum and co-curricular options (e.g., Madison-Briggs-FW STEPPS programs].
Discussion—
This section presents a range of notions for enhancing or altering existing administrative supports for internationalization, especially in light of a potential embrace of a more focused international mission and corresponding options for change in international research, teaching, and outreach suggested in the rest of this document. We do not present this list as a set of coordinated recommendations, but rather as a grab bag of ideas we have heard along the way and which need further consideration.
In particular, we believe a newly defined international mission is not—nor can it be—a marketing ploy or simply a way of justifying the international work we already do. For the reasons stated elsewhere in the report, a new mission implies making choices regarding faculty and fiscal resources and key program directions. It requires an appropriate set of administrative structures, policies, and actions to support it. Obviously, many administrative supports for internationalization already exist, so this section will consider ideas for improving or even transforming them, as well as alternative models at a time when the very structure of the colleges may well be changing.
1. The Need for Presidential Leadership
This notion may seem an obvious one, but an institutional embrace of internationalization and particularly a new statement of the international mission of MSU starts at the top. It must be one of the handful of stated priorities of President, Provost, and Deans. It must also be one of a limited number of Presidential and Provost development priorities.
2. The Need for Faculty Voice and Support
This one is also obvious, but cannot be stated often enough: any move in the direction of a new mission needs faculty input and support. To be a success, the MSU community, its external stakeholders, and key external audiences need to see the link between rhetoric at the top and day-to-day actions by faculty and staff. This self-study aims to provide a view of where we could/might/ought to head on internationalization, with a view to seeking input before the study is completed but also to stimulating consideration of various options around campus after the study is done.
**We will be seeking input throughout the next several months through a variety of scheduled meetings and open fora, such as this MULTI session.
**We will be keeping the appropriate academic governance structures informed of our work. Any recommendations taken up and adopted by the university would have to pass through appropriate governance structures.
**We are also trying to stay current with the “revisioning” process, especially those issues that might lead to changes that would have an impact on internationalization (especially changes to the colleges, the new residential college, and alteration of integrative studies or other basic features of undergraduate and graduate education.
3. Organizing to Support Internationalization: ISP and its Alternatives
MSU already has organized itself to support internationalization by creating a dean for International Studies and Programs (ISP) and placing leadership for study abroad, international cooperation agreements, issues associated with international students, area studies centers, and much else under ISP’s administrative oversight. Organized through a matrix model, ISP was developed to meet the challenges of internationalization within the institution. This administrative unit, headed.by the Dean of International Studies and Programs, facilitates international program development and implementation in cooperation with deans of MSU academic and professional colleges. The ISP dean has direct responsibility for five area studies centers and nine other programs and offices. Consistent with the policy of spreading an international dimension throughout the university, all faculty members have their major academic appointments in university departments or schools. Internationally engaged faculty are linked to ISP and its centers and institutes through dual appointments, core faculty membership in the centers and institutes, and work and activity financially supported by ISP. Thus, ISP serves as an important partner and catalyst in the processes of instruction, research, and outreach across campus and throughout administrative units of the university. The Dean of ISP has direct responsibility for the following centers that focus on various world regions: Africa, Asia, Europe and Russia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Canada; as well as the thematic center on Women and International Development. The centers on Africa and Asia are currently designated by the U.S. Department of Education as National Resource Centers for the study of their regions and languages. All of these centers are housed within ISP and have affiliated faculty from all of MSU’s 14 colleges plus the MSU College of Law. The Dean has additional administrative responsibility for nine other programs and offices that support the internationalization mission, e.g., Office of Study Abroad and Office for International Students and Scholars.
There also are a number of thematic centers with an international focus including the Center for Advanced Study of International Development (CASID), Center for International Business Education and Research (CIBER), Center for Language Education and Research (CLEAR), Institute of International Agriculture (IIA), and Office of International Studies in Education (ISE). These centers are administered by their relevant colleges. CIBER, CLEAR and WID/CASID are designated as National Resource Centers by the U.S. Department of Education. Like the area studies centers, CASID, WID, and CIBER link faculty across many colleges. IIA and ISE bring together faculty specifically from Agriculture and Natural Resources, and Education, respectively.
The Self-Study Committee did not carry out a review of ISP. Indeed, the Provost made clear that the Self-Study was not a review of ISP. However, it was impossible to examine any international issue on campus and not find significant ISP input and influence, whether in the form of setting policy, conducting overall management, providing financial support, or providing an interdisciplinary and integrated forum for discussion and decision. ISP provides much of the organizational impetus, synergy, and public face for MSU’s international programs and activities.
Option A: Maintaining or strengthening the current ISP. In this view, which was shared by the majority the Committee has spoken with during the last year, there is no reason to change ISP’s central role in internationalization of the campus. Even if major changes are undertaken in the structure and organization of academic units, such as greater consolidation of major academic units, ISP needs to function as a strong and independent actor on campus on behalf of the international mission and agenda. Its strengths come from not being subordinate to any specific an academic unit on campus. We have gotten where we are on major international programs because there has been an independent dean and staff, with resources and responsibility for leading and coordinating important issues and programs.
Some argue that, in fact, ISP needs further enhancing to carry out its mission. In an environment of internal and external challenges, The Dean of ISP could be given a variety of new responsibilities which would enhance internationalization on campus. These include the following:
**the title and responsibilities of Vice President and Assistant Provost for International Studies and Programs;
**shared responsibility and input on the management of internationally designated faculty lines and on internationally significant promotion and tenure decisions.
**an expanded role in establishing research and funding priorities, working with the Vice President and Assistant Provost for Research to establish international research priorities and ensuring adequate support for them. This broader research role offers the opportunity to expand the mission and priorities of ISP beyond current Title VI priorities and to integrate these priorities into a more balanced portfolio of MSU and outside foundation, and governmental research support.
Option B: An administrative unit within an enhanced liberal arts college. The most obvious alternative to the current structure is to put all of some part of the current ISP within an existing college, as is frequently done at universities with large LS&A colleges. The idea has resurfaced during consideration of creating a consolidated liberal arts college by joining two or more of the existing colleges on campus into a larger unit. The general argument for such a structure is the greater integration of internationalization and the major liberal arts units that provide the basic building blocks for international studies and programs (languages, history, the study of societies and politics, etc.). A variation on this theme is to transfer area studies centers to an academic unit and leave ISP with a set of general oversight functions. Some critics of the current structure saw the regional centers as tilting ISP’s focus toward regional studies and away from the integration of global issues and regions that will be necessary to define a new and more sustainable international mission.
Both options see the importance of maintaining and perhaps even enhancing the focus of those charged with oversight of key international programs back on campus, where support for internationalization and key international programs must be strengthened and sustained. A number of interlocutors argued that MSU’s international position is much stronger abroad than it is in certain major academic units and campus, and that changing attitudes on campus would have to be a major priority in the years ahead if MSU is to maintain and expand its reputation as an international university.
4. Enhanced Position and Career Management Options.
Another idea that has been regularly suggested here and elsewhere is the creation of an active system of position management to ensure coverage and encourage synergies among units related to internationalization. In priority areas of research and teaching, such as internationalization, there may well need to be a process above the unit and college level that monitors the use of positions designated for specific tasks and has an active role in assessing where these positions are best used when vacancies occur.
An idea that is offered either as an alternative to position management or as an addition to it focuses on providing a career management input for ISP in the case of a set of identified positions on campus. ISP would work with units to develop a clear set of unit expectations for faculty in these positions that create a place for international program, research, and teaching goals. Such expectations could be formalized in a memorandum of understanding.
Both of these options grow out of the concern on the part of both faculty and administrators involved in internationalization that international expectations exist apart from ordinary unit expectations, that these different expectations are not always well managed, to the detriment of all parties, and that a more formal role for ISP or its successor would help deal with this problem.
5. Supporting “Virtual” Internationalization.
However defined, internationalization needs technological support, including a technology initiative to support “virtual internationalization.” Such an initiative includes the growth of on-line repositories, journals, and other important and recognized web resources, such as MSU’s CIBER. In areas where the university is asserting its leadership, there must be an on-line component. Another aspect of the technology initiative is the acquisition and distribution of web collaborative software to support the virtualization of international [and other] classes, meetings, and outreach. The software needed to create virtual classrooms or symposia across continents has many applications and is also a priority for the sciences, engineering, business, and elsewhere across campus. MSU should set the goal of making “virtual internationalization” of courses, research, and outreach a regular part of campus experience within the next three to five years.
Launched in February 2001, MSU Global Access (www.msuglobalaccess.net) is an electronic directory of web-based international resources provided free of charge to the general public by ISP. The database now contains over 8,500 annotated links in a variety of categories, including: country information; international news and news sources; maps and travel information; foreign language resources; and internationally involved organizations. A companion site, MSU Global Michigan (www.msuglobalmichigan.net), provides information about Michigan-based international involvements.
6. Building a Limited Number of Strategic Partnerships.
To sustain and expand our international role, MSU must find a limited number of external strategic partners. These strategic partnerships differ from the normal linkage agreement. MSU has more than 160 active linkage agreements with international higher education institutions, professional, and research organizations. These linkages, which extend to about 50 countries, include approximately 50 student exchange agreements and well over 100 general agreements or memoranda of understanding.
MSU should move toward developing a systematic, proactive and strategic approach to expanding its international engagement abroad through strategic partners. For example, through partnership arrangements, it might consider developing three to four new programs of research, teaching and outreach in fields where we can make a difference in three to four countries in the next three years. Following the establishment of those partnerships, develop another four to five programs in three or four more countries after that. This systematic expansion would foster MSU’s national and international recognition as the U.S.partner in six to seven world signature programs in countries of strategic importance to Michigan, the U.S. and the world. Consideration of potential partners should take into account MSU’s academic objectives in that world region, academic program compatibility and complementarity, rankings of potential partners (and compatibility with MSU’s reputation), potential for multiple partner arrangements in the country/region, operational and financial arrangements, geographic suitability to MSU faculty and students, among others. The vagaries of the state budget in Michigan make this approach the only fiscally viable one for expansion of MSU programs abroad.
7. Enhancing Communication Internally and Externally.
Another important element of administrative support is an enhanced ability to communicate internally and with external stakeholders and the public at large. A number of people mentioned the difficulty of navigating a large university with so many visitors and activities taking place at any given time. There seems to be a clear need for a single web portal and supporting listservs where one-stop information could be found on international activities, events, seminars, opportunities, and programs. The Committee has only begun to think about this issue and has simply flagged it here for further discussion.
8. Pursuing an International Admissions Strategy.
Another issue we are currently flagging for further discussion. If internationalization is a major mission of MSU, then we need to adapt admissions efforts to reflect this priority, both in how we market to prospective students in the U.S. and in expanding the number and improving the distribution of foreign students. Origin diversity for the undergraduate international population at MSU enriches the undergraduate experience for all students, faculty and staff. Over 56% of the MSU student body today come from Korea, China, India, Japan and Taiwan. The Asian markets provide MSU with volume in student enrollment; however, MSU gains much from student diversity from other world regions. The Strategic Plan for Undergraduate International Recruitment for Michigan State University was designed to provide a multi-year plan for recruitment of undergraduate international students, with long and short term objectives tied to appropriate strategies, performance indicators, and assessment of outcomes that will enhance MSU’s position in a competitive international admissions environment. The plan has a recruitment goal to increase the number of high quality international undergraduate.
Partnerships will play an important role in the recruitment of international undergraduates. This will require targeted recruitment efforts with alumni assistance abroad, maintaining strong relationships with staff at American degree programs in select countries, and forming deep relationships with select high schools abroad and domestic community colleges that have a significant international student population can provide a prospect base of international students currently in the U.S. Also, it would be desirable to develop more partnerships similar to the one proposed with the state government of Hidalgo, Mexico to establish the Hidalgo-MSU Partnership. Hidalgo has created a monetary fund to be used for loans or grants for top academically talented students to complete undergraduate and graduate programs in the U.S. For Fall 2004, 40% of all MSU freshmen international students were attending schools within the U.S.
For an illustration of the interconnection between environmental issues and internationalization, see Kelly Millenbah, Jordan Pusateri, Sara Hughes, & William Taylor, The Environment and Internationalization, NCASS-WP03, http://www.accreditation2006.msu.edu/. This paper is attached at Appendix D. On the College of Social Science’s capacity to theorize about contemporary global processes, see Laurie Medina, Theorizing contemporary global processes, NCASS-WP04, http://www.accreditation2006.msu.edu/. This paper is attached at Appendix E.
1 For a summary of the Committee’s extended discussion of this issue, see Kristen Renn and Kelly Millenbah, Internationalization of Faculty Roles and Rewards: Challenges and Opportunities, NCASS-WP02, http://www.accreditation2006.msu.edu/.
For example, a quick count found more than 500 courses already on the books with obvious relevance to international issues simply by their title.
A special overview of MSU’s Study Abroad programs is found at Appendix C.
What are the measures of leadership that we should flag here?
Additional points to be incorporated from ISP-Admissions paper.
David Prestel, “The Role of Foreign Language Study in Campus Internationalization,” Presentation to the NCA Self-Study Committee at the May 2004 Retreat, http://www.accreditation2006.msu.edu/.
See, for example, ISP’s own vision of its organization in International Studies and Programs at MSU: Building Collaboratively Toward a Strategic Management Plan at ISP, February 1998.
One such option for an enlarged liberal arts college appears to be a live one and is described in the final report of the College reorganization Committee, which may be found at http://realizingthevision.msu.edu/.
Theresa Bernardo, Internationalization of Education: new possibilities through technology, Presentation to the NCA Self-Study Committee, January 7th 2004.
Dr. Tomas Hult, “MSU-CIBER: A Focus on the Organization, Activities, and Integrated Role at the University, Presentation to the NCA Self-Study Committee, May Retreat 2004.
The software is only part of the problem. Many MSU classrooms and other collaborative spaces are still only “chalkboard-enabled” and created the regular experience of virtual internationalization campus-wide will require substantial space improvements.