 |
2007 Leadership Network for International Education
The Globally Engaged Institution, November 2007
How do institutional leaders navigate the increasingly complex world
of global partnerships, joint degrees, and branch campuses? During the
2007 annual meeting of the Leadership Network on International
Education, more than 130 institution presidents and provosts discussed
the intricacies of partnering with institutions and organizations around
the globe. The expanding international opportunities open to
institutions require leaders to make sound decisions about how to have a
global presence, whether or not to partner, and with whom; how to
develop a strategy to pursue global connectivity; and how to ensure
quality and assess potential benefits and risks. The meeting focused on
the strategic decisions institutional leaders must make in developing a
strategy for global engagement.
In a session on U.S. campuses and degree programs delivered abroad,
panelists described their experiences and lessons learned in providing a
U.S. education for students in their home countries. The remarks of John
A. Elliott, dean of the Zicklin School of Business at Baruch College,
The City University of New York; Jim Baker, vice president for research
and economic development, Missouri State University; and Mark Kamlet,
provost, Carnegie Mellon University (PA), illustrated that while some
issues are country-specific, there are common strategic concerns. Among
them are questions of alignment with mission, financial and reputation
risk, and the cultural and legal intricacies of working in another
country.
There was consensus among panelists that presidents and provosts must
seriously consider the institution's strategic mission before making a
commitment to engage in the development of a branch campus or degree
program abroad. The question, "why are we engaging in this partnership?"
should be among the first asked by institutional leaders. Institutional
leaders may answer the "why" question differently, but motivations that
were repeated include the education of globally competent students,
benefits to the sending institution and the host country, and enhancing
mobility of students, faculty, and staff. Panelists stressed that branch
campus agreements should not be entered into for perceived financial or
reputational benefit, but rather that an institution should have a
strategic mission grounded in the value added to students and
society.
The speakers also described the challenges of providing degree
programs abroad. The legal issues alone can create major hurdles.
Balancing foreign government regulations with the demands of US laws can
be challenging in unforeseen ways. Difficult questions include: What are
the tax implications of working in a foreign country? Is there a
financial framework in place to process tuition and other payments on
the home campus? What are the capacities of US institutions to implement
US regulations (such as ADA requirements) in a foreign country? These
legal complexities arise with in the context of foreign cultural
practices, and seemingly simple decisions and transactions can produce
unanticipated consequences. The panelists suggested that institutional
leaders need to decide which policies and practices are non-negotiable,
and be able to think creatively to arrive at mutually acceptable
solutions.
Other issues that were discussed include quality assurance concerns,
faculty participation, and board and administration support. All of the
panelists agreed that in order to maintain quality control over
programs, the institution must retain control over the curriculum.
Indeed, many partnership arrangements have the actual curriculum spelled
out and included in the agreements or MOUs with partner organizations.
Panelists also shared best practices in increasing faculty involvement.
Some suggestions included:
- Have faculty spend time on the home campus to maintain ties between
the home and branch campus
- Have research facilities abroad and incentives to conduct research
there
- Make the location and amenities appealing for faculty: provide "high
end" living and cultural experiences
- Build international experience into promotion and tenure
guidelines
One panelist described the extensive discussions with the board
surrounding the decision to authorize the establishment of a branch
campus. The board was quite skeptical and asked for detailed information
and plans. Among the suggestions for garnering and maintaining board
support were:
- Help the board feel invested in the campus by describing in detail
the potential benefits for students, faculty and staff
- If possible, invite Board members to do a site visit to the branch
campus location
This day-long meeting only scratched the surface in describing the
benefits, problems, pitfalls, and lessons learned in international
engagement. The continuation of annual forums such as the Leadership
Network can help advance the field in supplying information and best
practices to institutional leaders looking to expand global
partnerships.
Please direct questions about this page to:
jill_wisniewski@ace.nche.edu
| Staff
Contacts
Download our information
brochure (PDF File)
This page last updated on 08/29/2008
| leadership network, globally engaged institution, international education, internationalization |
|
 |