Internationalization Self-Study:

  Background and Guiding Questions

Background

Michigan State University is scheduled for the decennial re-accreditation review by the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association in 2005-2006. Since the last review in 1996, the Higher Learning Commission has both revised the criteria for re-accreditation and provided several additional options for the review process.   Based on the potential for institutional improvement regarding the specialized report Provost Simon has opted for the "Customized Review Process," the main contours of which were developed by the CIC institutions to better serve the needs of well-established universities. Unlike the standard retrospective review, this approach holds some promise for adding value, institutionally, and helping us to project where we should be in the future.  

While the new process requires an evidence-based compliance report demonstrating satisfaction of the revised institutional criteria, the major focus is a specialized self-study that forms the basis for a consultative visit by experts in the focal area. The reviewers will be looking for an appraisal of our strengths and concerns, evidence that supports our claims, an openness to raising questions and entertaining new ideas. Re-accreditation will turn on the compliance section of the report, with the specialized self-study providing a basis for institutional decisions and perhaps new directions. All official materials will need to be completed by November, 2005; the site visit will occur in Spring semester, 2006. Building on our leadership in the international sphere and looking toward an agenda that will serve us well in the next ten to twenty years, the Provost has identified internationalization across the University mission as the subject for the specialized review.

Provost Simon has asked Dean Sherman Garnett of James Madison College to direct the customized self-study on internationalization.   He will be joined in this effort by a cross-University faculty team that is being assembled.   Collectively, we will be working out the several dimensions of the investigation and defining the questions we would like to address. Once the contours are better defined, the self-study team will consult widely with faculty, staff, and administrators in putting together its report.

MSU's self-study on internationalization will look comprehensively at the university's mission, research, curriculum, student and faculty issues, programs, outreach, and future aims in light of our stated goal of being a university with a global reach in a time of global change.   This study assumes that MSU is already in a decisive respect an international university, devoting serious time, energy, and resources to providing its students, faculty, and the community at large with internationally oriented curriculum, research, and outreach.   It also assumes that the university has other missions and priorities, so that not every aspect of our work can or needs to have an international component.  

In light of the above, the self-study has several related purposes:

**First, to define more clearly an international mission for the university relating to the Guiding Principles and MSU Promise, especially in light of global trends that are widely believed to be "shrinking" and integrating the planet. [1]

**Second, to integrate this international mission and related programs into, and make sure it supports, other institutional missions and priorities.   We obviously need to help define and encourage synergies, as well as to understand where existing synergies need further cultivation and support.

**Third, to assess existing data about internationalization, existing measurement processes or tools, and best practices at MSU and in international higher education efforts along with what will be necessary to put them in place and maintain them for the future.  

**Fourth, to identify the successes and shortcomings of our overall mission, and individual programs in support of that mission, with regard to internationalization.   This self-study should come to terms with the evidence we have of program successes or shortcomings, as well as the assessment measures we need to develop.

**Fifth, to encourage support for existing and successful endeavors and the creation of new internationalized activities and programs where there exist gaps, short-comings, weaknesses, or new opportunities.  

Key Questions

The following questions have previously been raised with the Chairman of the NCA internationalization self-study during meetings with administrators and faculty.   The following questions are in no way definitive or comprehensive with regard to the process and result of the self-study.   Ongoing internal and external review efforts ( e.g. , the Area Studies review) and other discussions are expected to further illuminate and demarcate important paths of inquiry regarding internationalization.   For the sake of simplicity, the questions have been grouped under these three headings:

Defining a Mission :

Overarching Issues-

**Why did we choose this topic for our self-study?   What do we hope to get out of it?   What do we need to know?   Why will it be useful?   And to whom will it be useful?   How will the findings be used?   Are we clear about our purposes here?

**What do we mean by internationalization, especially as it applies to Michigan State University ?   Have we clearly defined the concept for ourselves and presented our mission and programs to others?   If we have presented our mission, how has it been understood by MSU's varying constituencies?

**How does internationalization fit into other core missions?   How is it possible for us to respect and prioritize the global dimension of teaching, research, service, and learning without understating the challenges this will present?   How do we reiterate that internationalization is not only an opportunity to learn about others, but to reflect more deeply upon ourselves?

**How have external conditions changed the way we need to think of internationalization?   John Hannah could largely view international programs through the combination of an obligation for the rich to help the poor and a pragmatic sense that American economic and security interests might be served by such engagement.   Though this rationale still has significance, the sense of American remoteness, and especially of its ability to shield itself from larger global developments, has been called into question by globalization.   We still need to send students abroad, but to what extent do changing global conditions and education requirements demand changes here in East Lansing ?   To what extent have local, state, and national conditions and problems been internationalized in the past two or three decades?

**To what extent must an educated person of the 21 st century be a person of international experience?   What are the learning objectives and curricular content of study abroad and international internships?

** How can MSU begin to struggle with the challenges of global understanding that go beyond toleration and acceptance of difference, beyond the international as an accretion of internship or study abroad experiences, but go also to encounters with problems of comprehending intractable political and cultural differences.  In this context, what does it mean for students to be "international" -- in knowledge, in skills, and in dispositions?   What is current practice?   In what ways does MSU hope to refine and elaborate on those goals?

**Should international experience be built into disciplinary, graduate, and professional education?   Is one a better lawyer, engineer, or supply chain manager because of international exposure, experience, or perspective?   Why?

**How can we implement and assess an international campus culture at MSU?   What roles do the following departments, along with others, have in creating an international campus culture at MSU: Residence Life and Food Services; Career Services; Registered Student Organizations; Alumni involvement; Service Learning; Community groups; cultural exhibits ( e.g. , museum, theater, or art installations); and Health Services?

Student Issues-

**Should MSU recruit more international students, especially concentrating on those units where there are few such students now?   How do international students impact the MSU community and how does MSU utilize their experience and maximize their participation?   What would the university and affected units need to do to attract and retain such students?   What recruitment systems are currently in place and are they effective?  

**Is such recruitment a part of our commitment to diversity?  

**Which units recruit students internationally?   What programs do they have to accommodate foreign students?   What programs are needed to ensure a broader interaction between international students and the rest of the student body?   How effective are they?   How does the MSU community know about these programs?

**How has residential and other student activity programming performed with respect to both acclimating foreign students and creating interactions with the student body as a whole?   How can the university better support international students?

**What does internationalization mean for graduate students?   What does it mean for undergraduate students?

**If internationalization is important to MSU how is that conveyed to prospective students in letters of invitation, university publications, and orientations?

Faculty Issues -

**Is the faculty sufficiently international in terms of country of origin?

**Should we focus on the experiences of our international faculty and staff and the degree to which their international expertise and perspectives are tapped?   What do we know about the experiences of our international faculty at MSU?   It seems international faculty members are a key resource that might be underutilized in this respect.

**Is the faculty sufficiently international in terms of research initiatives?   How conscious of international pedagogical methods and curriculum perspectives are MSU faculty?

**How often is internationalization a factor in faculty recruitment?   How often is internationalization a factor in annual reviews and reappointment, tenure, and promotion?   How can MSU offer incentives to faculty to rethink their specialized expertise in global context?   How does the subject matter or its frame change when this is done?  One thinks here of the impact of globalization on nation states, sovereignty, national narratives, and the like.

**How do we encourage internationally engaged faculty to make a lasting institutional contribution?   Are there incentives to create new courses or research opportunities for students to make use of these international connections and projects?

**How do we mitigate detrimental inter-departmental competition for funding in regards to international programs or research?

** Approx. 25% of all faculty at MSU are in the life sciences/biology/biomedical sciences. Where do they fit in to the "internationalized" campus? How will we define "internationalized" campus to include them?

Curricular Issues-

** How can MSU absorb into its curricula and understanding that
  globalization is not new, that it began with the modern and with
  nation-making and with global political and cultural encounters, and is
  therefore best addressed as something that has a history of its own, has
  been occurring for some time, and should not be merely added in as a recent
  phenomenon.   How is globalization continuous with the modern past and not a
  break with it?

**How has MSU been committed to internationalization historically?   Has there been a continuity of commitment?   How can an assessment of such commitment help us to understand our current and future efforts?   How can an assessment of such commitment help us to place our efforts against a background of American and international higher education?

** How can MSU begin to struggle with "knowing" in a global context -- the
  irony that we are more than ever linked in chains of production, consumption, and communication, and bound by regimes of norms, but we "know" less and less about such linkages and "know" the world mainly through mediated forms of communication that present narrow visions and offer false senses of knowing.   Is "knowing" in a global context a developmental issue or are there different points of entry?

Supporting Programs and Resources:

Area Study Centers -

**Area studies centers are a common way of ensuring high quality, interdisciplinary work on particular regions of the world gets done.   This self-study obviously needs to take a look at the existing area study centers for a sense of accomplishments, best practices, and continued challenges.   What are the ingredients of a successful area studies effort?   What are the incentives and disincentives to inter-unit cooperation?   

**Do we have the centers we need in light of global trends?   Should we rethink the number and orientation of the existing centers?   Which areas of the world are now neglected and should not be?   How can area study centers better accommodate thematic studies?   Should they?   How can, to the extent desirable, MSU  -- as an institution -- move beyond traditional regional studies and development theory approaches and
centers for organizing activities and generate curriculum and centers that
address global issues and themes across regions -- and continue to win government support and funding.  What are the possibilities?   How do they relate to strategic planning?

**How have we done in securing Title VI support?   What are the incentives and disincentives to inter-unit cooperation in the Title VI process?   What have been the key ingredients where we have succeeded?   What obstacles prevent other centers following these best practices?   Has Title VI success had the intended impact of providing seed money for additional university and foundation support?

Outreach & Linkage Agreements -

**Do we have too many linkage agreements?   How are these agreements reviewed and monitored?

**Which international linkage agreements have grown beyond an individual's research agenda or a single research project?   What transformed these from an individual success to a larger institutional success?

**What incentives are in place to encourage others in and outside the unit to build upon an existing linkage agreement?

**Do we have an adequate review process to weed out unproductive or inactive agreements, programs and outreach?  

**To what extent are globally focused transcollegiate courses or online courses a link from MSU to other cultures and countries?   What is the role of technology in outreach, especially with reference to the Internet?

Foreign Languages -

**What is the role of foreign language study in internationalization?   How can we encourage more students to take foreign languages?   Are there other means of fitting foreign languages within current requirements?   Are there other ways we should deliver foreign language instruction?   Should we look again at the general education requirements related to foreign language?

Study Abroad -

**What curricular changes have occurred as a result of study abroad, both direct and indirect?   Is there evidence of curricular enrichment resulting from faculty participation in study abroad?

**What has been the impact of study abroad on the student?   Their choice of major; subsequent courses taken; foreign languages studied; career decisions; and worldview?

**What has been the impact of study abroad on faculty members?   Their research, teaching, outreach, and worldview?

** How can MSU get students to study abroad earlier in their education, as part of the liberal arts portion of their education as distinct from the professional/specialized major portion of their education?  Early enough to build additional related learning on?  Early enough to become truly international in outlook and perspective?

**Is there a way to make language study a broader option for students before or during their study abroad experience?

Academic Advising-

**How do academic advisors promote internationalization among students?   How do they perceive their role as an advisor with regard to internationalization efforts?   How do academic advisors incorporate internationalization into advising resource materials?

**How do academic advisors serve international students?

Assessment:

Major Accomplishments and Emphasis-

**What are the major unit level accomplishments in international research, programming, outreach, and curriculum?

**What are the major unit level goals for the next five years?

**Who is in charge of these goals?   Who monitors, refines, and closes the assessment loops with regard to our internationalization goals at MSU?   How do we begin to define internationalization as a permanent journey and not a destination with a definite end?

**What incentives should we offer for internationalization?   How can we ameliorate the disincentives?

Assessment and Institutional Impact-

**Given our level of international engagement and research, how are we measuring the curricular and institutional impact?  

**What kinds of curricular options and changes have come from international engagement?

**What types of systematic changes have resulted from attempts at internationalization?

** How can organizational change at MSU remove barriers and disincentives to international activities or provide congenial institutional contexts for supporting (old or new) international activities.

** How are the aspirations of an international university toward the international and the guidelines, policies, and laws of the national state in sync or out of sync today and more generally in assisting the university to achieve its aspirations.  What things might be done either alone or with other institutions to affect these?

**How do we assess our internationalization goals in light of our mission as a large, public, land-grant university?

[1] These trends include global economic and cultural integration, as well as the resistance to this integration; the revolution in communications; long-term patterns of immigration; ecological interdependence, including issues of climate change, invasive species, or diseases like HIV-AIDS; and a range of proliferation and other security issues that create a more fragile and dangerous world.