Archive for March 2012

Should the U.S. State Department Copy the British Council?

31/03/2012

 

The British Council, as an education provider, a research analyst, and a conference convener is an interesting model. At the very least, taking a look at the British Council makes me wonder why the United States government does not pull back and take a big-picture look at what it might do to provide better global support for U.S. universities.

This is the title of a 14 March 2012 piece by David Wheeler of The Chronicle of Higher Education (CHE). I have often asked myself this question, having worked for a quasi-US governmental organization that once had a contract for EducationUSA activities in Vietnam, among other countries.  (Some US diplomats I’ve known over the years have asked themselves the same question.) 

The fact that the ”United States government does not pull back and take a big-picture look at what it might do to provide better global support for U.S. universities” has resulted in the absence of a comprehensive national export strategy for education, a sure-fire recipe for disorganization, conflicting signals and piecemeal policy-making.  The relevant Cabinet-level departments not only do not cooperate but some colleagues in those departments don’t even talk to each other. 

The inability of the US government to present a united front and speak with one voice about all matters related to the promotion of American higher education around the world reflects a lack of vision and leadership at the highest levels.  In a sense, the US is resting on its laurels as the world around it changes, and other countries aggressively and persistently chip away at its international student market share. 

What about EducationUSA, you may ask?  This public affairs activity is constrained by its limited mission, a lack of funding, inadequate staffing, a lack of consistency and coordination, the gaping chasm between rhetoric and reality across countries (i.e., U.S. diplomatic missions) and its steadfast refusal to constructively engage a select group of education consultants.  In a phrase  “it is what it is.” 

The answer to the question posed by the CHE article?  A qualified “yes.”  Not copy but certainly be inspired by and devise ways to adapt this model in a strategic and productive manner. 

MAA

When Federal Agents Come Calling: Educating Campus Stakeholders

26/03/2012

Sounds scary, huh?  This is the name of a webinar offered by NAFSA:  Association of International Educators on 22 March.  For $149 for members ($189 for nonmembers) you could have “come away with strategies for building positive relationships with federal agents and dealing with difficult situations.” 

According to the webinar “U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) recently launched Project Campus Sentinel and began visiting DSOs and schools throughout the United States with the apparent goal (my italics) of visiting every school that hosts international students. The government is closely analyzing the data you provide, paying attention to your international students and faculty, and planning visits. Prepare for contact from federal agents by having policies and procedures in place and educating your campus stakeholders.” 

Webinar objectives were:

  • Understand which federal agencies are contacting campuses and why;
  • Learn how to best manage interactions and establish relationships with federal agents;
  • Gain insights on developing and adapting policies and procedures for your campus. 

It seems to me that the highest priority for “federal agents,” before attempting to achieve the aforementioned “apparent goal,” should be to take a close and careful look – from the comfort and convenience of their laptops – at the list of SEVP-Certified Schools, now available in a searchable database on the Department of Homeland Security’s Study in the States website.  I did and noticed a number of unaccredited schools that are recruiting internationally.  Some made the news last year (e.g., Tri-Valley, University of Northern Virginia), while others – still on the list – are cautionary tales, juicy stories waiting to be written by enterprising investigative journalists.  (Is anyone at The Chronicle of Higher Education or Inside Higher Ed listening?  USA Today?) 

Since the US State Department represents “officially accredited” schools through its EducationUSA advising centers around the world, why does the US government permit international students to attend “rogue provider” institutions?  Does the right hand know what the left hand is doing?  (This is a rhetorical question.) 

MAA

International Student Mobility Research Report

24/03/2012

“…the road ahead for most U.S. institutions of higher education will not be smooth as many institutions grapple with challenges in meeting recruitment goals with limited time and tight budgets.”

This report, recently released by World Education Services, provides some useful information about enrollment trends among international students.  One of the key points is that While China and India are still too big to ignore, there are other emerging countries worth paying attention to, including Saudi Arabia, Vietnam (my bold), Mexico, and Brazil. Recruitment to these countries should also be cultivated not only for campus diversity purposes, but also as a de-risking strategy.

 The report also notes that…

Enrollment growth at the Bachelor’s level is set to outstrip growth at the Master’s and Doctoral levels. Since international students studying at the Bachelor’s level are typically funded by their families, as opposed to financial aid, and provide a longer stream of revenue (four years) versus Master’s programs (two years), some public institutions are viewing this trend as a solution to current fiscal challenges.

Growth in international student enrollment is not restricted to large states like California and New York; non-traditional destinations, including Montana, Oregon and Colorado, are also witnessing significant growth due to more aggressive institutional outreach efforts and state policy reforms that allow for the enrollment of more international students in public institutions.

Undergraduate enrollment among US-bound Vietnamese students increased from about two-thirds to three-quarters in the 2010/11 academic year.  60% of those were enrolled at a community college, the first step in the 2+2 equation (i.e., transfer to a four-year school to complete the bachelor’s degree). 

While California, Texas and Washington play host to over half of all Vietnamese students, there are also significant numbers headed to other non-traditional destinations such as West Virginia.  In an increasingly competitive market and growing but still limited numbers of students, “aggressive institutional outreach efforts” and a long-term strategy are essential to creating pipelines of Vietnamese students to more schools. 

You can download the entire report here.

Views By Country

16/03/2012

I like the new feature on WordPress that allows me and other bloggers to see where many of our visitors are coming from.  On 14 March, for example, it was able to determine that 87% of all visits that day were from the following 11 countries in descending order:

Not surprisingly, given my focus and choice of language, most are from the U.S. and Vietnam with a handful from other countries.  I am (still) planning to launch a Vietnamese language blog, God willing.  It will include some translated posts from this blog (I see many Vietnamese who don’t read English using online translation tools) and content intended exclusively for a Vietnamese audience. 

MAA

Talking Nationalism, Patriotism and Global Citizenship with US Students in Vietnam

16/03/2012

Last month, I was invited by a colleague from Augustana College (Illinois) to meet with a group of her students who were in Vietnam on a short-term study abroad program.  The students had spent five weeks at Augustana, followed by another five weeks in southern, central and northern Vietnam.  The website describes the program as follows:  Vietnam is an exciting destination for a U.S. college student. This international learning community draws upon multiple disciplines – political science, literature, economics, business, and history among them – offering students a rich interdisciplinary context in which to study Vietnam.

One of the assigned readings was a co-authored book chapter of mine entitled “Developing Globally Competent Citizens: The Contrasting Cases of the United States and Vietnam” (with Duong Thi Hoanh Oanh) that appeared in The SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence (2009).  Frankly, I was surprised and delighted to learn that undergraduates were reading this chapter in a book that is probably read mostly by graduate students and academics.  Here’s a brief description:   

The aim of this chapter is to consider global citizenship and intercultural competence, widely debated and often overlapping concepts, against the backdrop of nationalism and patriotism, “isms” that are rarely discussed in the same context. Yet they are the proverbial elephant in the room, towering issues that profoundly influence the methods and means by which global citizenship and intercultural competence are transformed from theory to practice.

This chapter explores ways in which global citizenship and intercultural competence complement and conflict with the national identity of two diametrically contrasting cultures—the United States of America and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. What U.S. Americans and Vietnamese share, according to anecdotal evidence, the binational experience of both authors, and the results of World Values Surveys, is a deep national pride. Yet as we shall see, this national pride is radically different qualitatively for reasons that are rooted in history. Thus, we examine barriers in both cultures that may inhibit the development of globally competent citizens, as well as factors that may smooth the way.

What are the implications of global citizenship in an interconnected world in which nationalism is still very much a force to be reckoned with? To what extent is global citizenship problematic in countries in which nationalism in its more virulent incarnation forms the mind-set of the majority of citizens? We posit that the path to becoming a global or globally competent citizen may be strewn with more obstacles in some societies than in others as a result of potent historical and cultural forces that have shaped national identity and the dominant ideology, the psychic glue that holds societies together.

Differences Between Patriotism and Nationalism

According to a standard dictionary definition, the distinction between patriotism and nationalism is clear. Patriotism is defined simply as “love for or devotion to one’s country.” This is generally thought of as a benign, sentimental, and inward-looking form of national pride. As such, it does not exclude an openness to and even embrace of other cultures, their values, and the concerns and needs of their members.

In a 2003 essay titled A Kinder, Gentler Patriotism, (the late) U.S. historian Howard Zinn speaks of the need to redefine patriotism and notes that “if national boundaries should not be obstacles to trade—we call it globalization—should they also not be obstacles to compassion and generosity? Should we not begin to consider all children, everywhere, as our own? In that case, war, which in our time is always an assault on children, would be unacceptable as a solution to the problems of the world. Human ingenuity would have to search for other ways.” Patriotism, as defined above, does not preclude the globalization of compassion and generosity.

In contrast, nationalism is described as loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups. It is the second italicized part that distinguishes nationalism from its less strident and bellicose cousin, patriotism. Exaltation of one nation over another automatically assumes a degree of cultural superiority, a lack of openness and objectivity, and the assumption that “others” wish to be like us and, by extension, the desire to mold them in our image (i.e., missionary nationalism).

Discussion

Most of our discussion in the engaging 1.5 hours that I spent with them and their professors on a rainy February morning in Hanoi revolved around these concepts as they apply to both countries and how to create globally aware and competent citizens, especially given the fact that most young people do not have the opportunity to study overseas.  (Study abroad is no guarantee that this transformation will occur.)  The students asked a range of thoughtful and thought-provoking questions. 

Nationalism is a type of ideology, defined as “a: a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture; b: a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture.”  Irrational and rooted in emotion, it consists of seemingly unchallengeable and commonsensical assumptions, “eternal truths,” believing in something that does not exist or does not reflect reality and empirical facts.  To question the precepts that form that basis of US nationalism, or any nationalism for that matter, is to challenge a very potent ideology, a black/white world view that resists contradictory facts and conflicting views that could begin to dissolve this psychic glue.  In this respect it represents a formidable obstacle to the development of global competence and citizenship.

While I’m well aware that these students are certainly not representative of most US Americans in terms of social class (tuition, fees, housing and meals for the 2012-2013 academic year at Augustana are $43,398), education and world view, I was encouraged by the thought and reflection that many had invested in these important issues. 

As a side note, I noticed that most were women, a trend described in this 19 February 2012 Chronicle article entitled In Study Abroad, Men Are Hard to Find

As a bonus, check out this 19 February 2012 essay entitled The American Century Is Over—Good Riddance by Prof. Andrew Bacevich, who has written extensively about the notion of American exceptionalism and the origins and effects of US nationalism. 

MAA

Spring 2012 StudyUSA Community College Fairs Promotional Video

15/03/2012

Vietnam Ranks 3rd in International Enrollment at US Community Colleges

12/03/2012

According to the 2011 Open Doors report on international academic mobility, there were 89,853 international students enrolled at America’s community colleges, a 3.2% decrease over the previous year.  (This is out of a total of 723,277 international students in the U.S. during the 2010/11 academic year.)  

Of that number, 9.9%, or 8,895 students, were Vietnamese.  This means that nearly 60% of all Vietnamese students in the US were studying at a community college, nearly all with the goal of transferring to a four-year school to complete a bachelor’s degree.   This was the same percentage as the previous year.  The only difference is that China displaced Vietnam by .2%. 

Rank Place of Origin % of Enrollment

1

South Korea

13.4

2

China

10.1

3

Vietnam

9.9

4

Japan

5.9

5

Mexico

4.8

6

Hong Kong

3.6

7

Nepal

3.2

8

India

2.6

9

Indonesia

2.4

10

Brazil

2.1

In my opinion, this trend will continue for the foreseeable future, given the lower cost and other reasons that explain the popularity of US community colleges in Vietnam and other countries.

“Increasing international relations: University opening Vietnam office”

11/03/2012

Below is a reprint of a press release issued by Kansas State University on 29 February 2012.

Anderson Hall, Manhattan Campus, Kansas State University

 MANHATTAN — Kansas State University is expanding its international outreach to welcome students from Vietnam.

Administrators at the office of international programs recently announced a partnership agreement with Capstone Vietnam and its managing director, Mark Ashwill. Capstone and Ashwill will represent the university in Vietnam, effectively establishing a recruitment office in the country.

“As a leading academic resource development organization in Vietnam, Capstone is in a position to capture a share of the developing student market quickly and effectively,” said Jim Lewis, the university’s director of international admissions and recruiting. “Mark is dynamic and well-versed about academic connections and U.S.-Vietnam relations. This partnership will give us a full-time representative in Vietnam.”

“The Capstone Vietnam office staff background and knowledge of international education both in the U. S. and in Vietnam will be a great asset to Kansas State University’s international operations,” said April Mason, university Provost and senior vice president. “Mark brings to our university years of experience in structuring and establishing mutually beneficial academic partnerships. This ties in nicely with one of the university’s Vision 2025 goals to further internationalize the campus by continuing to diversify its international student population.”

Marcelo Sabates, interim associate provost for international programs, said establishing an office in Vietnam was an exciting opportunity to maximize the university’s reach into an emerging market and a country that places a high value on higher education.

“Vietnam holds promise for U.S. academic engagement because of its population of more than 90 million people, being the 14th largest country in the world and the rise of English as the second most popular language in its territory,” Sabates said. “More importantly, the quality of Vietnamese students, both undergraduate and graduate, is promisingly high.”

The number of Vietnamese students in the U.S. has grown by more than six times in a decade.

Vietnam will be the third international office established by Kansas State University. An office in China was opened in 2006 and an office in India began in 2008.

“In Vietnam, Capstone will elevate the profile that, in the context of Vision 2025, Kansas State University wants to achieve in terms of collaborative research, faculty-led study abroad opportunities and development of partnerships throughout the country,” Sabates said.

Ashwill previously served as country director of the Institute of International Education in Vietnam. Prior to moving to Vietnam, he was director of the World Languages Institute, adjunct lecturer and Fulbright program adviser at the State University of New York at Buffalo. In 2003, he became the first American to be awarded a Fulbright Senior Specialists Grant to Vietnam.

Ashwill will be on campus Feb. 28-29 to meet with Mason, Sabates, Lewis and other university faculty and staff to gain a greater understanding of university programs and initiatives.

From left to right: Jim Lewis, director of international admissions and recruiting; MAA; April Mason, university Provost and senior vice president; Marcelo Sabates, interim associate provost for international programs.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 64 other followers