Download KatiBell_Diss_Research_slides

Similar Goals and Dueling Agendas:
Perceptions of Campus
Internationalization and Equity Policies
Dr. Kati Bell
Director, Global Education
Dominican University of California
Growth of
Internationalization Policy
Background to the Problem
Demonstrated growth of internationalization policy in U.S. higher education
93 percent of doctoral institutions, 84 percent of master’s
institutions
and 78 percent of baccalaureate intuitions surveyed,
perceived that
internationalization has accelerated on their campuses in
the past three years (Green, 2012, p. 6).
Critical research of internationalization policy is lacking
Internationalization has become a synonym of “doing good” and
people are less into questioning its effectiveness and essential nature
an instrument to improve the quality of education or research.
(Brandenburg & de Wit, 2011, p. 16)
Key Terminology
Globalization vs. Internationalization:
Internationalization is a series of agreed upon practices around the
common campus goal of creating a more globally connected student and
faculty body (Knight, 2007).
Globalization is understood as an economic phenomenon involving the
increasing the flow of technology, economy, knowledge, people, values and
ideas across borders (Knight & de Wit, 1997)
Equity vs. Diversity:
Educational equity is the understood as the provision of equal access,
opportunity, and outcome for all students and faculty (Bensimon, Dowd, &
Harris, 2007).
Diversity is the inclusion of a compositional difference of people as defined
by ethnic, cultural and socio-economic criteria (McGee-Banks & Banks,
1995).
Typology of
Internationalization
Ideology
Ideal
Internationalization policy as
an ideal state
Economic
Internationalization policy as economic
priority
Curricular
Internationalization policy as
educational priority
Focus
The moral world
The global marketplace
The individual learner
Vision
To create a better world
To develop global revenue streams
Goals
Mutual understanding across
cultures, tolerance of diversity,
and social change
Economic growth; exchange of knowledge
for profits
To facilitate personal and educational
transformation
Learning enrichment, new
perspectives, personal
transformation and growth
Strategies
Provide global knowledge,
Recruitment of international fee paying
facilitate insight, generate
students and professional training programs
empathy and compassion
Increased international mobility Increased revenue from new markets
and exchange
Stimulate self-awareness, and selfreflections (study abroad), foster
intercultural competence
Increase in cultural
Competency for students/faculty
Arrogance, victimization,
Ethnocentrism
Brain drain, wealth disparity, cultural
imperialism
Academic arrogance, chauvinism,
individualism
Senior level administrators
Faculty members
Measures
Critiques
Organizational Staff administrators
group
Typology of Understandings of Equity
in Higher Education
Key Concept
Access
Opportunity
Outcome
Focus
Incoming freshman and
transfer students
Continuing students
Graduating students and
alumni
Goals
Racially and socioeconomically diverse
student body
Inclusive and active student
body; increased diversity in
majors
Increased graduation rates
for diverse students,
improved employment
opportunities, positive
campus recognition
Strategies
Affirmative action,
Increased need-based
funding opportunities
Increased participation in
student activities, improved
pedagogy and programming,
inclusive excellence
Measures
Critique
Social Justice
Historically
marginalized
populations
Overcoming the
hegemonic
structures to
increase
educational equity
Outreach, tutoring and
advising services for at-risk
students. Structural and
curriculum changes to
facilitate graduation
Acceptance rates for
Higher participation in student Increased completion of
racially and economically activities by racially and
underrepresented students
diverse students
economically diverse students
Awareness and
empowerment
building
Stops short, admission is Potential for exclusivity, and
Preservation of prevailing
no guarantee of success decreasing campus integration ideology without true
transformation.
Sustaining change
and transformation
Equality of access,
opportunity and
outcomes in
education
Components of International and
Diversity/Multi-cultural Offices
Shared Challenges
Shared Values
Perceived disconnect from core
university goals
Commitment to cultural diversity,
tolerance, inclusiveness
Offices are silo’ed and narrowly
defined
Desire to transform institutional
structures
Mission and goals not always well
understand by greater campus
community
Promotion of understanding and
tolerance of culturally different and
marginalized people
High risk to budget and staff cuts
during resources allocation
Interdisciplinary approach with a
strong focus on experiential learning
RQ 1. How do the reported practices of the
international and diversity offices relate to the stated
campus goals of internationalization and equity?
Stated goals for internationalization
•Provide for global perspective to student body
•Promote globally diverse community (ex. International students &
faculty)
Congruent with reported practices
•Increase the diversity of study abroad program participation
•Enrollment support for international students (additional advisors)
•Collaboration of diversity programming to enhance cross cultural
awareness
Incongruence with practices
•Divergent understandings of diversity – term reserved for domestic
students
•Global community is segregated and lacking inclusion
RQ 2. How does organizational structure
influence the perception of campus
internationalization and equity initiatives?
Reported and observed organizational structures:
loose-coupling, collaborative efforts , and top-down support
•decentralized structure (loosely-coupled & silo-ed units) created
divergent narratives and understandings of diversity & equity,
collaboration was reliant on personal relationships
•centralized structure –shared space and common goal of serving
students ; ex. “one-stop” advising center; centrally administered,
all students served
•governance: top down & shared goals reported to be important
Conclusion : Supporting Educational
Equity through Leadership
Findings and Implications
Equity
Internationalization policy may negatively impact campus equity by:
a) introducing a diverging definition of diversity at the campus
b) implementing a practice that is different from the original policy
c) failing to evaluate or establish evaluative measures for campus
diversification due to internationalization policy
Leadership
Understanding how internationalization impacts the campus diversity
initiatives serves to inform campus leaders how to address potential
inequities when developing, implementing and evaluating international
policy.
Integrating Equity into
Internationalization Strategy
Equality Is Not Always Equity
This Is Equality
This Is Equity
Similar Goals and Dueling Agendas:
Perceptions of Campus Internationalization
and Equity Policy
Contact Information:
Dr. Kati Bell
Director, Global Education
Dominican University of California
[email protected]
Dissertation:
https://diva.sfsu.edu/bundles/218069
Dominican Global Learning
Environment
GEO Mission:
GEO’s mission is to support campus comprehensive internationalization through
the lens of the Dominican Global Learning environment by promoting equity of
access and demonstrated academic outcomes in three key areas: International
Student/Scholar Services, Dominican Study Abroad and Global Faculty
Engagement.
GEO Vision: Advancing the Global Learning Environment:
GEO’s vision is to provide all students access to a global experience that reflects
the values of the Dominican Global Learning environment. The DU Global Learning
environment supports transformational opportunities for the DU community to
engage with cultural difference and to foster global citizenship, ethical leadership
and social responsibility at home and abroad. Achievement outcomes will be
measured in three learning domains: intercultural competency, global interconnectivity, and global social responsibility.