Die OeAD-GmbH und das BMBWF haben mithilfe österreichischer Hochschulen ein Nachschlagewerk zu Beispielen guter Praxis von Auslandsmobilität und der Reflexion von interkulturellen Erfahrungen vor Ort gestaltet. Das Handbuch bietet für jeden etwas: für Studierende, Lehrende, junge Forscher/innen und das allgemeine Hochschulpersonal gleichermaßen wie für die Hochschulleitungen. Es spricht sowohl Hochschulen an, die seit Jahren erfolgreich Mobilitäten und Kooperationen betreuen oder Internationalisation at home praktizieren, wie auch jene, die in diesen Bereichen gerne aktiver werden möchten. Der vorliegende Band bietet Anregungen, zeigt aktuelle Beispiele auf und soll Diskussionen anstoßen.
LINK
Long before the COVID pandemic, we had already realised that traditional forms of internationalisation had their limitations. Mobility of students had remained limited to a small minority of students, a ‘cultural elite’. We had also become aware that student mobility was mostly from the global north to the south and that some of its effects were unwanted, and could lead to ‘white saviourism’. Finally, before the COVID pandemic we were already discussing the CO2 imprint of mobility and considering ‘greener’ forms of mobility of students and staff. More than twenty years ago, around 2000, attempts had already emerged to bring the benefits of internationalisation to all students through internationalisation at home. At the time, this was defined as “Any internationally related activity with the exception of outbound student and staff mobility”. This definition did not mention explicitly that all students were targeted and also omitted the purpose of these activities.
Increasingly, internationalisation at home and internationalisation of the curriculum are adopted by universities across the globe but their systemic implementation is a complex process. For instance, academics and academic disciplines understand and approach internationalisation differently, as previous studies have shown. However, there is little research on the role of such disciplinary perspectives in relation to different internationalisation practices and interventions. Using the Becher-Biglan framework of academic tribes, this exploratory study compares 12 undergraduate programmes at a Dutch university of applied sciences and addresses the question if the different disciplinary approaches to internationalisation as identified in previous studies are also reflected in the choices of internationalisation at home activities. The findings show there is more variation in the range of activities rather than in the types of activities and that it is within the rationales underlying those choices where the influence of disciplinary perspectives is more visible.
