Potential and Promise: Global Education At James Madison University A Report for Dr. Douglas T. Brown Provost Vice President for Academic Affairs Lee G

Potential and Promise:Global Education

At James Madison University

A Report for Dr. Douglas T. BrownProvost

Vice President for Academic Affairs

Lee G. Sternberger, Ph.D.

Potential and Promise: Global Education at JMU

OVERVIEW

I. Basis for the Report

II. International Programs at JMU

III. Global Education Nationally

IV. The Potential and Promise of Global Education at JMU



A. Meetings at JMU

B. Contacts with Other Colleges and Universities

C. Review of Recent Source Documents



A. Meetings at JMU (48)

1. Office of International Programs Staff

2. OIP Directors 3. OIP Area Coordinators

4. OIP Faculty Members in Residence 5. Summer Program Directors6. Student Affairs Staff7. Accounting Services Staff8. External Funding9. Other Relevant Individuals



A. Meetings at JMU (48)B. Contacts with Other Colleges and Universities

1. Virginia Colleges and Universities (6)

George Mason UniversityOld Dominion UniversityUniversity of VirginiaVirginia Commonwealth UniversityVirginia TechWilliam and Mary




1. Virginia Colleges and Universities (6)2. “America’s Hot Schools,” 2000-2001 (9)

Boston College (exemplary program but not a “hot pick”)

Emory UniversityNew York UniversityOberlin UniversityRice UniversityTulane UniversityUniversity of MichiganUniversity of Southern CaliforniaWesleyan University




1. Virginia Colleges and Universities (6)2. “America’s Hot Schools,” 2000-2001 (9)3. Reviewed a Cross-Section of Websites/Materials

(50)

Public and Private Religious/Denominational and Secular/Non-

denominational“Research 1” Doctoral, Master’s, and Baccalaureate



A. Meetings at JMU (48)B. Contacts with Other Colleges and UniversitiesC. Review of Recent Source Documents

1. Higher Education in the 21st Century: Global Challenges and National Responses (1999)2. Open Doors report (1999-2000)3. Expanding the International Scope of Universities (2000)4. Major Obstacles and Best Practices in International

Educational Exchanges (2001)5. Public Experience, Attitudes, and Knowledge: A Report on Two National Surveys About International Education (2001)6. Beyond September 11: A Comprehensive National Policy on

International Education (2002)7. One Year Later: Attitudes About International Education Since September 11 (2002)8. The Brave New (and Smaller) World of Higher Education: A Transatlantic View (2002)9. Journal of Studies in International Education (2002 volumes)



A. Overview of Programs and Operations

1. Office of International Programs (OIP)2. Directors and Area Coordinators

3. Faculty Members in Residence (FMIRs)4. Summer Program Directors5. Non-JMU Programs and Internships7. International Students and Faculty8. CMISS9. Accounting Services



A. Overview of Programs and Operations B. The Office of International Programs (OIP)

1. 7 full-time and 2 part-time staff who manage:

Semester study abroad programs (fall, spring, summer)

International students and faculty (e.g., visas, etc.)Non-JMU programs (e.g., coordination with other

organizations)International internships (e.g., associated with

various classes/ programs)



A. Overview of Programs and Operations B. The Office of International Programs (OIP)

1. 7 full-time and 2 part-time staff2. Study Abroad Programs

London (fall, spring, summer)Florence (fall, spring, summer)Salamanca (fall, spring, summer)

Paris (fall, spring)Antwerp (fall--beginning in 2002--and summer)

Austria (summer)Ghana (summer)Honduras (summer)Ireland (summer)Malta (summer)Martinique (summer)Rome (summer)


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1993/94 1997/98 2001/02

DirectEnrollment,Consortia,andExchange


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1997/98 1999/00 2001/02

Internat'l.Internships


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1993/94 1996/97 1999/00

Total J MUStudentsAbroad


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1993/94 1997/98 2001/02

Internat'l.Students atJ MU


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1997/98 1999/00 2001/02

Internat'l.Faculty atJ MU



A. What are other colleges and universities planning and doing?

1. Some institutions have established goals regarding the percentage of students they intend to “send abroad.” For example:

Elon College 60% by 2007

Michigan State University 40% by 2006

University of Minnesota 100% University of Virginia 80% by 2020




1. Some institutions have established goals regarding the percentage of students they intend to “send abroad.” 2. The actual percentage of students who do have a “ global education” experience during a typical four year period varies widely, from quite high (i.e., over 50%)...

Boston College 50%Emory University Over 50%George Mason 24%Georgetown University Over 50%Oberlin College 35-45%Rice University 35%University of Virginia 36%Wesleyan University 40%William and Mary 40%




1. Some institutions have established goals

regarding the percentage of students they intend to “send abroad.” 2. The actual percentage of students who do have a “

global education” experience during a typical four year

period varies widely, from quite high (i.e., over 50%)...to quite low (i.e., 1% or less).

Old Dominion University 6% Tulane University 7-10% University of Michigan

5% Virginia Commonwealth University 1%




1. Some institutions have established goals

regarding the percentage of students they intend to “send abroad.” 2. The actual percentage of students who do have a “ global education” experience during a typical four year period varies widely, from quite high (i.e., over 50%)...to quite low (i.e., 1% or less).

JMU sends approximately 4.5% of its student body abroad per year, or 18% over a four-year period.




3. Many institutions have enhanced the profile and prominence of study abroad on campus by a) emphasizing the “global” nature

of their focus and activities and/or b) according greater prominence and centrality to global education leadership.

George Mason University Director, Center for Global Education

James Madison University Executive Director, Office of International Programs

Old Dominion University Executive Director, International Programs

University of Virginia Vice Provost for International Activities Virginia Commonwealth Vice Provost for International Education Virginia Tech Associate Provost (pending) William and Mary Dean of International Affairs




3. Many institutions have enhanced the profile and

prominence of study abroad on campus by a) emphasizing the

“global” nature of their focus and activities and/or b) according greater prominence and centrality to global education leadership.

4. Likewise, in a recent national survey of four-year institutions in the U.S., 44% include “international education” in their mission statement and 38% list internationalization among their top

five priorities (from ACE 2002, Transatlantic Dialogue).




5. Other national survey data also indicate that “global education” is an increasingly important priority for today’s students. For example,

a recent (2001) survey of college-bound seniors found that:

98% took a foreign language in high school and planned to continue such

studies in college

86% planned to participate in international courses and programs

85% believed that proficiency in a foreign language would help them find a better job

80% believed that acquiring international skills and competencies would help them in the workforce

75% wanted the institution they attended to offer foreign languages and international courses, study abroad programs, and opportunities to

interact with foreign students



A. What are other colleges and universities planning and doing? B. What recommendations are offered for universities that

intend want o emphasize global education (NASULGC, 2000)?

1. Include internationalization as an integral part of the institutions mission and strategic plan. 2. Promote greater involvement of all students in significant international education experiences.

3. Create and maintain a stimulating and supportive academic and cultural environment for international students and scholars.

4. Increase the international activity of faculty and professional staff.5. Internationalize the curriculum.

6. Assure that research and scholarship pertaining to international matters permeates disciplinary and interdisciplinary fields.

7. Ensure that international awareness is an integral part of appropriate outreach and extension activities.


IV. The Potential and Promise of Global Education at JMU A. Innovative Programs and Best Practices

1. Centers for Global Education

Institutional Priority

University Wide

Strong Administrative Presence

Organization, Integration, Leadership

Examples: Boston College, ODU, Penn State



A. Innovative Programs and Best Practices

2. Internationalizing the Curriculum

Global Proficiency Program (Boston College)

Honors Programs (GMU)

Short-term, Concurrent, or Alternating Programs (GMU, FSU)

Service Learning and Internships (FSU)

Graduate Courses (U of St. Thomas)

Non-Western Languages and Destinations (Georgetown)

Curriculum Development (U of Minn)




3. Faculty Development

Faculty Exchanges (Boston College)

CIEE Study Programs/Fulbright Teacher and Administrator Exchange

Cross-Disciplinary Group Projects (Fulbright-Hays Group Project Abroad)

Travel and Curriculum Development Grants (Tech)

Database/Directory (Michigan State, ODU)

Integration into Reward System (Tech)




4. External Funding

Partnerships/Consortia (Global University Alliance)

U.S. Department of Education (Title VI, FIPSE International Programs)

U.S. Department of State (Sponsor of the Fulbright)

Private Foundations/Corporations (U of Minn)

Development Strategies (William and Mary)




5. Assessment

Assessment of Learning Outcomes (Georgetown/Title VI)

JMU Programs and Assessment Day (Incoming Freshmen and Sophomores)

Goals and Objectives

Value-Added for International Experiences




B. Summary and Conclusion

1. Basis for the Report 2. International Programs at JMU 3. Global Education Nationally

4. The Potential and Promise of Global Education at JMU

Center for Global Education Internationalizing the Curriculum Faculty Development External Funding Assessment