Since the late nineties, there has throughout Europe been a growing focus on internationalisation of curricula. This may be seen as a reaction to the traditional and sustained focus on internationalisation abroad. It became clear that internationalisation abroad would always be a domain of a (small) minority of students. Therefore, if intercultural and international competences would be considered essential for all students, the curriculum would remain the only available tool to ensure that students would actually acquire these. This was the situation in 1999, when Bengt Nilsson coined the term 'Internationalisation at home' and it had remained fundamentally unchanged.
DOCUMENT
This article takes the 3rd Global Survey Report of the International Association of Universities (IAU) as a starting point. The results of this worldwide survey were published in September 2010. The article discusses four questions from the survey that include internationalisation at Home (IaH) and internationalisation of the curriculum as response items. outcomes of these four questions are commented on and, where relevant and possible, compared to the results of the previous survey, which was conducted in 2005 and published in 2006. It is argued that the sections of the Global Survey that mention internationalisation of the curriculum and IaH use terminology that is not always adequate for the purpose and at times even seems contradictory. The Global Survey includes a question on internal obstacles to internationalisation, which will also be discussed here. These obstacles include the lack of engagement and limited expertise of academic staff in relation to the internationalisation process. The response items for this question do not connect these obstacles to internationalisation of the curriculum explicitly, but it is argued here that a relationship indeed exists. The same is true for issues around foreign language proficiency, which may have a strong impact on internationalisation of the home curriculum. In the conclusion, several additional questions are raised that could serve to get a clearer picture of the development of internationalisation of the curriculum in a global perspective.
MULTIFILE
Presentation addressing the following questions: When you talk to your colleagues/lecturers/academic programmes, what do they tell you? What does research tell us about lecturers & their (dis)engagement with internationalisation?
DOCUMENT
This chapter revisits the concept of internationalisation at home in light of the COVID pandemic and also of experiences and ongoing discourses on internationalisation. These include how internationalisation at home relates to diversity, inclusion and decolonisation of curricula. It discusses how the COVID pandemic has led to increased attention to internationalisation at home but also that confusion about terminology and the desire for physical mobility to be available to students may lead us to return to pre-COVID practices, in which internationalisation is mainly understood as mobility for a small minority of students and internationalisation of the home curriculum is a poor second best. A component of this chapter is how Virtual Exchange and Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) have moved into the spotlight during the pandemic but were already in focus areas well before. This will be illustrated by some recent developments in internationalisation at home, mainly from non-Anglophone, European and particularly Dutch perspectives.
DOCUMENT
This article explores the development of skills of lecturers for internationalisation at home. It discusses backgrounds and the current situation, but also suggests ways forward. These suggestions are made mainly on the basis of experiences in The Netherlands, one of the few countries outside the English-speaking world, where a body of literature is emerging that discusses the implementation of internationalisation at home. The insights generated by this research may benefit universities in other countries in continental Europe, where English is not the standard language of instruction. Original Article at: https://www.zfhe.at/index.php/zfhe/article/view/1095
DOCUMENT
The relevance of an internationalised home curriculum for all students is generally acknowledged. Other than study abroad, the home curriculum gives programs of study full control over the way students learn international, intercultural, and interdisciplinary perspectives. However, misconceptions, lack of strategies, lack of skills of academics, and lack of connection between stakeholders present major obstacles to internationalising teaching and learning “at home”. The practical trajectory outlined in this chapter presents programs of study with the opportunity to focus on employability skills instead of on a semantic discussion on internationalisation. By linking this orientation on employability skills with the articulation of intended learning outcomes (ILOs), a pathway for developing employability skills in all students will be created. Within this pathway, international, intercultural, interdisciplinary, and future-focused dimensions serve to enhance students’ acquiring employability skills. The trajectory presented here evolved out of action research on internationalisation with academics. During the action research, taking employability skills as a starting point emerged as an enabler for the internationalisation process. It helped to overcome lengthy and semantic discussions on the meaning of internationalisation. After that, international and intercultural dimensions are included in these employability skills. These skills are then translated into ILOs. This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Routledge/CRC Press in Internationalization and employability in higher education on 19/25/06, available online: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781351254885.
MULTIFILE
This study aims to identify factors that impact on the internationalisation of learning outcomes of programmes at The Hague University of Applied Sciences (THUAS). The process of the articulation of learning outcomes has been studied at institutional, faculty and programme levels. Both document analysis and action research with trainers, managers and lecturers provided data for this study. The study describes the broader issue and the layers of contexts in which THUAS operates: the global, European, national, local and institutional. Within the latter two, several strategies are distinguished, i.e. research on employability skills of students and THUAS’ Educational vision. The strategies for internationalisation of learning outcomes at THUAS are then placed in an international perspective. The next section zooms in on current practice on the basis of self-assessment and management reports of THUAS faculties. The analysis of these reports is followed by more detailed observations from individual programmes. Analysis and observations are then connected to professional development for internationalisation of teaching and learning. Three elements of THUAS’ extensive programme for professional development are discussed in more detail. The study ends with the identification of priorities to internationalise learning outcomes across THUAS.
DOCUMENT
Learning objects are bits of learning content. They may be reused 'as is' (simple reuse) or first be adapted to a learner's particular needs (flexible reuse). Reuse matters because it lowers the development costs of learning objects, flexible reuse matters because it allows one to address learners' needs in an affordable way. Flexible reuse is particularly important in the knowledge economy, where learners not only have very spefic demands but often also need to pay for their own further education. The technical problems to simple and flexible are rapidly being resolved in various learning technology standardisation bodies. This may suggest that a learning object economy, in which learning objects are freely exchanged, updated and adapted, is about to emerge. Such a belief, however, ignores the significant psychological, social and organizational barriers to reuse that still abound. An inventory of these problems is made and possible ways to overcome them are discussed.
DOCUMENT
This chapter explores international partnerships as an enabler for internationalisation of home curricula, what these partnerships would look like and what the role of academics and other stakeholders would be. Student activities within an internationalised curriculum at home, such as online international collaboration, fall outside the scope of this chapter. Instead, the chapter focuses on the role of academics in building partnerships that support curriculum development through the internationalisation of learning outcomes. The chapter begins with a discussion of the state of flux that resulted from the shift towards internationalisation at home. While many universities have embraced this concept,implementation is not without challenges. Two of the main obstacles are discussed, these being the imperfect conceptualisation of internationalisation at home and the lack of skills of academic staff. A symptom of the former is confusion over terminology. A discussion on terminology has no place in this chapter but a reference is made to recent literature that discusses terminology and definitions. The latter obstacle, the lack of skills of academics,is discussed extensively, particularly with regard to the internationalising of learning outcomes. This will reveal that current professional development does not seem effective in addressing the lack of skills of academics. While academics continue their struggle with the conceptualisation of internationalising learning outcomes, the question is raised as to whether international partnerships could contribute to internationalisation of the home curriculum and if so, how. In order to find an answer, the literature on partnerships is looked at in order to understand to what extent literature is explicit about partnerships that are conducive to internationalisation at home and about the role, character, benefits and requirements of such partnerships.On the basis of the conclusion that literature is implicit on this topic, the chapter builds an argument for using international partnerships as a tool for collaboration on the internationalisation of home curricula. The characteristics of such partnerships for the future then follows. These are partnerships at programme level with academics as key actors focused on benchmarking the internationalisation of learning outcomes, combining mobility with professional development and linked to quality assurance. The benefits of such partnerships, their organisation and the role of stakeholders are subsequently discussed. Finally, the chapter argues that, without a structured approach to learning outcomes, collaboration will not be effective and international partnerships will not reach their full educational potential. Partnerships for the future, by making internationalisation of curricula a cross-border collaboration, can help to achieve the ‘internationalisation’ of internationalisation at home.
LINK
International education is a relatively new field and until recently, there was no formal education to prepare practitioners. This means that people working in international education are a colourful and diverse group, coming from a wide range of disciplines, which definitely adds to the attraction of the field. I call international education a field rather than a discipline since it is composed of a variety of established disciplines, such as languages, educational sciences, psychology, business, anthropology, history and even, in my case, classical archaeology. For this lecture, I have chosen to return to my original discipline and discuss global learning as the stages of an archaeological excavation. Cutting though the subsequent layers represents a history of international education but also my own professional history. By digging deeper down, layer after layer, I hope to uncover the essence of global learning in order to make its benefits available for all our students. This lecture consists of four sections. In the first section, I want to go back to the time when archaeology was a new discipline and see what we can learn from the research conducted at that time. In the second section I will reveal the layers of internationalisation and global learning until we come to the layer that we are currently exploring. In the third section, I will look at some of the factors and trends that will have an impact on global learning in the years to come. This shows that circumstances are quite different from when the excavation started and that global education is therefore dynamic. Finally, I will discuss what research the Research Group Global Learning will conduct, how and with whom, in the coming years.
DOCUMENT
