IIE Network - Spring 2014 - (Page 37)

FEATURE: THE IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION ON INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION Mission Apt: Evolving Strategies for Global Student Recruitment By George Kacenga AN INCREASINGLY INTEGRATED global marketplace is influencing international education in countless ways. Understanding that impact and leveraging it requires a keen sense of institutional awareness and strategic thinking. Gauging the role globalization has had in shaping the pursuits of academiaat-large requires reflection on the various purposes of education in its many modalities including delivery in public and private institutions, research universities, and forprofit ventures. In each of these settings, a globally-conscious international education strategy should fully integrate articulation agreements, accelerated programs, special cohort training, and partnerships of various types. When the future is unclear, it is important to analyze the actual and theoretical aspects of how globalization has impacted international education. Questions surrounding the need, value, and capacity to accommodate globalization arrive at a time of uncertainty and change in higher education around the world, across the United States, and in the state of Colorado. During the past decade many state governments have shifted their funding priorities and reduced resources for higher education. Consequently, public institutions such as the University of Colorado Denver (CU Denver) have come to rely increasingly upon tuition revenue as they face intense competition and questions from students and parents about the value and affordability of higher education. Creating further ambiguity is the fact that established measures for predicting recruitment, retention, and graduation of students are quickly becoming obsolete in an age of extraordinary student mobility and ever growing demands for services and accountability with questions hereunto unasked. As a frontier state in the United States, Colorado must look past the best practices of today, towards the cutting edge of scholarship, if international education is to thrive in this setting. Negotiating competing ideologies to determine the best course to follow is a particular challenge. Between the years of 1959 and 1974 only 21 (2.5%) articles published in the Journal of College Student Personnel were written about international students (Hood, Hull, and Mines 1979). This has increased in recent decades and in other scholarly outlets, but the literature is continually exploring new themes, best practices, and definitions of success. Many domestic and international students lack a secure sense that a high paying job awaits upon graduation. And many among them do not feel comfortable pursuing an expensive degree even with extended financing opportunities. What then should institutions of higher education be teaching? The debate shifts from an institutional quandary about which degree programs to offer to that of the degree earned, becoming the student's problem to negotiate. Already, globalization is calling for increased business acumen and focus on creativity across all disciplines and a decrease of the traditional trivium and quadrivium. What was once an effort to simply enroll academically strong, geographically diverse international students in institutions of higher education in the United States has become an all-out tactical machination to drive up international and out-of-state student enrollments with a mounting emphasis on education outcomes that are tied to employment. Campus administrators are basing enrollment projection on a capacity to respond to student choices and preferences in tandem with a growing commitment among academic institutions to see students as customers. An opposing force to this momentum is that often "Campus personnel are left to rely on their previous experience with local students to guide their interactions with international students" (Arthur 2004, 6). Globalization has been a driving factor in shifting higher education from a goods industry to a service industry. The rate of change and level of uncertainty within international higher education will persist for many years to come. Therefore, the focus for success must shift from a laissez-faire approach to engagement in three domains: global, emergent and individual campus enterprise. Global By its very nature, globalization demands a worldview mindful of geopolitical activity. "International education is in a paradoxical Campus administrators are basing enrollment projection on a capacity to respond to student choices and preferences in tandem with a growing commitment among academic institutions to see students as customers. situation because while it is a part of the system of higher education, it is also larger than higher education because it is a part of international and global relations" (Mestenhauser 2006, 63). Whether administrators in academia seek to attract students through the use of agents, engage education attachés at embassies throughout Washington, DC, or collaborate with foreign government sponsorship programs to bring cohorts of students through carefully designed pathways programs, none of these efforts is a stand-alone solution to campus internationalization. Beyond those instances when governments do not agree with one another, each are subject to compromise in their own way whether it be obstacles tied to conflating intercultural ethics, an unintended dominance of one nationality of geographic region on campus, or external interest in only one or two boutique programs rather than those designed for large-scale delivery. Furthermore, what colleges and universities once did for themselves, brokers are now lining up to provide as a service, with increased expertise and at a significant discount, to higher education institutions seeking to break into developing markets around the world. This can be a very lucrative path to follow-that is if you are lucky enough to land a legitimate partner. Where it is not the intrepid entrepreneur, it is the Ministries of Education in many countries that are structuring themselves to recruit for the nation as a whole through incredibly smart means including sophisticated globally targeted marketing and 37

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IIE Network - Spring 2014

A Message from Allan E. Goodman
2014 IIE Andrew Heiskell Awards for Innovation in International Education
An Interview with Torbjørn Røe Isaksen, Minister of Education and Research, Government of Norway
Introduction to the Globalization of International Education
Internationalization as Acquisitions, Mergers, and Synergy: A Value-Based Framework of Internationalization
Globalized Internationalization: Implications for Policy and Practice
Advocating the Value of Experiential Learning in the Age of Globalization
The Translocal Urban Nexus in International Education: Trinity College in China and Southeast Asia
Mission Apt: Evolving Strategies for Global Student Recruitment
Global Research Networks: Experiments in Internationalization
Two Models of Global Learning
Advertisers Index
Final Thought: Fostering Global Research Capacity Through Multilateral Partnerships: The Global Innovation Initiative

IIE Network - Spring 2014