Policy matters in attracting international students

A recent study by economist and education research, Janet Ilieva, demonstrates that national policy decisions directly impact the rise and fall of international students. The analysis demonstrates that countries like New Zealand, Canada, and Australia are gaining ground over the U.K. and U.S.A. because strategic policies are in place to attract international students to study in these countries.

By contrast, not only does the U.S.A. not have a national policy, the Trump administration is considering restrictions that will deter some international students from studying in U.S. universities. The number of students in the U.S.A. may presently be the highest in the world but policy statements and the rising competition around the world could put an end to $39billion in national revenues as well as undermine the role of higher education as a diplomatic measure.

Collaborating for Student Success

One of the most persistent and troubling aspects of U.S. higher education is the division commonly found between faculty and staff. The causes for this are numerous but one that I've addressed in my previous writing (most notably in Deeper Learning in Leadership, Roberts, 2007) is the bureaucratization that emerged when higher education opportunity expanded in the U.S. in the middle of the 20th century. The practical issue was that, as student numbers expanded, roles were segmented according to the management theories of the time; these management theories advocated specialization and hierarchical bureaucracies as being best for the efficient handling of students.

U.S. universities struggle with the impact of a 'divided house' and this is something that international higher education faculty and staff should seek to avoid at all costs. There are institutions that have found ways to bring faculty and staff together and these universities' practices should be replicated or adapted wherever possible. Georgetown University started a collaboration effort over a decade ago and it may be an approach worth considering. Essential to the Georgetown example and any effort undertaken to link faculty and student affairs staff is letting go of a sense of privilege or superiority that often undermines building respectful relationships focused on shared work - helping students be successful.

U.S. admissions staff need to talk with Chinese recruits

Which Chinese students study in U.S. universities and which institutions they attend is a potentially life-changing decision for them. However, many lack a substantive understanding of the process.  Xiaofeng Wan indicates that many Chinese students and their families have misconceptions that need to be corrected about how admissions works and where to place their priorities, a result of reliance on admission agents who have previously served large numbers of Chinese applicants.

The role of high school counselor is new to many Chinese schools and countering the bias toward private agents is difficult to challenge. These counselors urge U.S. college admissions staff to "visit China and meet with students and parents in person" (73%) as well as establish more effective Chinese social media for parents who do not understand English (62%). These are simple steps are probably only the beginning if U.S. institutions want to help Chinese students/families make decisions that are in their best interest.

New strategy for internationalization in Brazil

Brazil is trading its previous efforts to advance internationalization by sending STEM students to study abroad for a new, and less expensive approach. The Capes-Print program redirects a portion of almost US$2 billion spent on "Science Without Borders" to an application process that will allow institutions to identify their own internationalization strategy and pursue it with governmental funding.

The Capes-Print program comes with a more modest pricetag - US$90 million. The goal is to "transform colleges and universities into internationally-oriented institutions. By developing research networks, international cooperation, and the mobility of faculty and graduate students, it will promote change that should benefit more cohorts of students." The move by Brazil represents the challenge faced in other Latin American countries - "to invest in internationalization in order to stay relevant." There is growing realization that higher education institutions should internationalize in order to engage in research and prepare graduates for the dynamics they will face in work and private life.

How Chinese students engage U.S. higher education

With Chinese student numbers increasing so dramatically in the U.S. over the last decade, many educators have struggled to understand how to address their needs. Elizabeth Reddens' review of Inventing the World Grant University: Chinese International Students' Mobilities, Literacies and Indentities (Fraiburg & Wang) suggests that this new book may be a helpful resource.

Redden indicates that Fraiburg & Wang's theoretical grounding is particularly useful. The research for the book was undertaken at Michigan State University, which increased from 600 in 2006 to 4,527 Chinese students in 2016. The influx of Chinese students during this time resulted in some professors teaching courses where domestic U.S. students were in the minority, a dynamic unusual for both professors and students. As a personal anecdote, I frequently travel by train from Chicago to East Lansing (location of MSU) and have enjoyed seeing the dynamic of Chinese students traveling to Chicago for the weekend. The dynamic I've observed that is most disconcerting is that other passengers on the train seem either disinterested or disoriented by Chinese students' presence.

One of the apparent strengths of Fraiburg & Wang's book is that it identifies how Chinese students find supports that allow them to be successful. This is something that is so important for educators to understand; Chinese students have strengths that they bring to their learning. Focusing on these, rather than their deficits, has a much higher likelihood of resulting in both individual student and institutional success.

The Future of Undergraduate Education

A new report, The Future of Undergraduate Education, raises concerns about the condition of higher education in the U.S. While the focus is only U.S. institutions, there are likely implications for higher education around the world.

Particular issues addressed in the report include; improving graduation rates, the need to garner public funding, and improving quality. Particularly related to quality and graduation rates, the report advocates improving the quality and relevance of teaching for the "17 million diverse students in many types of programs" that should be helping them learn and develop the "skills and dispositions that will help them succeed in the 21st century U.S." The recommendations are directed primarily at the curriculum and teaching although there is recognition that learning takes place in extra and cocurricular settings.

In addition, the report "asserts that the long-standing debate over the value of a liberal arts education versus a more 'applied' program is a 'false choice.'" In the ideal learning environment, in and out of class experiences would be valued and classroom content would include strong liberal arts and discipline-based mastery of knowledge. The result - students would see that the "ability to work and learn with others, and to disagree and debate respectfully, as a skill essential for a high quality of life and a future of economic success and effective democratic citizenship."

A professor at Knox College, Laura L. Behling, advocates a "whole college - whole student" view that encourages students to relate learning across disciplines as well as across experiences. Based on Martha Nussbaum's "Education for Citizenship in an Era of Global Connection," Behling probed students about their: 1) capacity for living a critically examined life; 2) understanding of other human beings, and; 3) critical imagination. She found that asking students to explore these capacities demonstrated "that there is more to students than just who they are in my class and that all of their courses are presenting them with opportunities for success and challenge." And I would add, that all of their EXPERIENCES could be explored for even greater impact.

Liberal Arts in the global era

Liberal arts institutions in the U.S. have experienced considerable criticism over the years for their lack of practical outcomes - particularly related to workplace preparation. Global trends indicate that 36% of the non-U.S. liberal arts programs can now be found in Asia with the explicit purpose of preparing students for rapid global change that requires graduates to have skills and character traits of "creativity, innovation, adaptability, collaboration, and communication." These attributes are perceived to be essential to individual success and they are the bread and butter of liberal education. in the U.S.

The challenge of liberal education in the U.S. has been that it has most often been confined to elite and smaller institutions. Criticism has also been asserted by current U.S. Secretary of Education, Betsy Devos, who believes there should be more focus on job training and internships as a way to expand educational access; these kinds of programs would most likely be offered through 2-year institutions or through certificate training programs. With the U.S. apparently on the verge of backing off the importance of a broad (liberal) education, and with the growing advocacy for liberal arts in China, China may soon be an international leader as it experiments with liberal arts innovations that are scalable to larger numbers of students.

As we advocated in Enhancing Student Learning and Development in Cross-Border Higher Education (Roberts & Komives, eds., 2016), utilizing educational practices may not be directly applicable, or even appropriately adapted, from one cultural context to another. Liberal arts approaches in the U.S. were most prominent in colonial colleges, which were based on British elite institutions. The intent of these institutions was to educate elite, white men for professions such as ministry and law and to prepare them as public servants in government. The liberal arts approach is still very much a part of elite institutions in the U.S. and those who attend these institutions are offered select networks and educational opportunities that other U.S. citizens do not have. The later education policy changes exemplified in the Land Grant movement of the late 19th century or the G.I. Bill of the 1950s were the first concerted efforts to increase access to higher learning; broadening access did not take place at elite institutions but in public institutions that were much more focused on preparing students for workplaces that would drive national prosperity.

The point here is to question the transferability of the liberal arts model to other cultures and to encourage careful consideration about the assumptions of the model and how it could/should be adapted by institutions outside of a Western context. Liberal arts approaches cultivated talent and intellect among the elite for both work and public service. Is this what it now represents and is this purpose understood by those embracing it as exemplary educational practice? If China knew that liberal arts originated out of a commitment to education elite citizens for democratic participation, would they still want to adopt its philosophy? If they know, then what about liberal arts practices might be different especially if the attempt is to expand the number of graduates with this type of education?