UWSP International Programs
Strategic Plan
2012-2016
SUBMITTED BY ERIC YONKE, INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS DIRECTOR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
MISSION ........................................................................................................ 3
II.
THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS ........................................................ 4
III.
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES........................................................... 5
IV.
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND ACTION STEPS................................................. 9
V.
TIMETABLE ................................................................................................... 17
VI.
APPENDICES ............................................................................................... 18
Page 2 of 70
I.
Mission
The UWSP International Programs Mission Statement
Mission
Our mission is to advance international education and global awareness through study
abroad programming.
Vision
Our vision is to develop the best possible learning experiences through collaboration with
UWSP colleges and our international partners.
Values
We value the following in all our programs and services:
Academic rigor and curricular relevance,
Cultural awareness and respect for others,
Financial affordability and sound fiscal stewardship,
A healthy sense of adventure and experiential learning.
Goals
Our goals are:
to expand study abroad learning while maintaining academic integrity;
to promote global awareness and internationalization in the community;
to help students and faculty become better global citizens.
Page 3 of 70
II.
The Strategic Planning Process
The strategic planning process for UWSP International Programs began in 2009 with a directive from
the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. As part of a larger initiative to provide future direction to
the campus generally, and to the individual branches that report to the Office of Academic Affairs
specifically, Vice Chancellor Mark Nook called on International Programs to undertake strategic
planning that would dovetail with the university’s comprehensive strategic plan. For International
Programs (I.P.) this constituted an absolutely new venture. I.P. had never undertaken a
comprehensive planning process.
For guidance and support the I.P. Director turned to the Forum on Education Abroad as well as the
I.P. staff and the UWSP International Affairs Subcommittee. The Forum on Education Abroad, a
professionally recognized organization establishing national and international standards, offered a
“guided strategic planning review” process through its Quality Improvement Program. To undertake
the planning review process and prepare for outside reviewers, I.P. needed to complete a selfstudy. This self-study, completed in the early fall of 2010, helped jumpstart the strategic planning for
2010-2011and established a deadline for the completion of data collection. The outside review in
2010 also provided objective analysis of International Programs as well as a set of recommendations.
The International Affairs Subcommittee served as the campus body overseeing the strategic
planning process from 2009 through 2011. The subcommittee’s willingness to oversee the process
meant additional work for committee members, above and beyond the normal duties assigned to
the body. This work included reviewing surveying tools and data (2010-2011), gathering information
from across the campus community (2010-2011), hosting the S.W.O.T. analysis exercise for faculty
and staff (Spring 2011), and reviewing the various drafts of the plan (Fall 2011). To recognize their
efforts, it is important to list the IAS membership in the period 2009-2011/12:
Foreign Language Department:
Richard Barker, 2009-2010 (Chair Sem. I)
Daniel Breining, 2010-2011
Antonio Valle de Anton, 2011-2012
COFAC:
Cortney Chaffin, 2009-2010
Leslie DeBauche, Fall 2011
Mark Tolstedt, Spring 2012
CLS:
Todd Huspeni, 2009-2011 (Chair 2010-2011)
Anju Reejhsinghani, 2011-2012
CNR:
Dennis Yockers, 2009-2012 (Chair 2011-2012)
Bobbi Kubish, 2009-2012
CPS:
Sterling Wall, 2009-2010
Cuiting Li, 2010-2012
ISSO:
Brad Van Den Elzen, 2009-2010; 2011-2012
Marcus Fang, 2010-2011
SGA:
Michael Wilson, 2009-2010
Jennifer Helminski, 2010-2011
Shantanu Pai, 2011-2012
SPECIAL NOTE: Ekaterina (Katya) Leek served as the research coordinator for the plan. She provided
the survey information and analysis attached to this document. Special thanks to Katya for her
substantial contributions to the project.
Page 4 of 70
The planning process involved both the collection of data from past International Programs and
intensive surveying of students, faculty and staff as well as consultation with the outside reviewers.
Katya Leek served as the research coordinator developing and overseeing the survey process,
which occurred during the spring and summer of 2011. The International Programs staff, particularly
Linda Garski, provided invaluable support to the planning process, making available all historical
data and past analysis of UWSP’s study abroad efforts.
III.
Challenges and Opportunities
“Campus Internationalization” has moved from the periphery to the core of U.S. higher education.
As universities become more market-driven and competitive, international programs have become
a key asset as well as a market indicator of an institution’s value in the eyes of prospective students
and their families. UWSP has a proud study abroad tradition, and it now stands at a critical juncture.
As a pioneer institution in the field of study abroad, UWSP once stood apart from other
comprehensive public institutions. Today UWSP is surrounded by peers investing heavily in
international education initiatives. UWSP participant numbers are now matched by peer institutions,
and universities that only a decade ago offered very few study abroad options are eclipsing UWSP
in the number of study destinations. This strategic plan recommends a series of goals and initiatives
to advance UWSP’s campus internationalization by building on our strong tradition of education
abroad.
The University’s Strategic Plan: A Call for Campus Internationalization
The UWSP strategic plan is explicit in its call for broad campus internationalization and especially
education abroad opportunities. In its first goal, the plan challenges the university community to
“provide students with the knowledge and skills to contribute at all levels – locally, nationally, and
internationally.” Under the goal of cultivating an inclusive and ecologically-responsible worldview,
the University’s strategic plan calls for the following:
Expand opportunities for study and/or service learning abroad, via formal semesterlong and short-term credit-bearing arrangements.
Under the goal of developing sustainable relationships between the university and its partners –
local, state, regional, national, and global, the strategic plan calls for the following:
Expand programs that encourage students, faculty, and staff to engage with individuals,
programs, and organizations outside the university through experiential learning,
consultation, and volunteer efforts.
Finally, under the goal of facilitating and encouraging access to university resources through
development of long-term partnerships, the University’s strategic plan calls for the following:
Serve as a source of regional, local and global information for the benefit of external partners.
These goals integrate the University’s local mission with its global perspective. Collectively, these
goals will require campus units to examine their current international relationships and challenge
them to develop new relationships beyond the borders of the U.S. The call for greater education
abroad opportunities specifically is recognition of the importance of international programming to
the University’s future. It is also a challenge requiring greater resources to support expansion.
Page 5 of 70
Trends and Challenges
Approximately 17% of UWSP graduates have studied abroad. For many years this percentage
made UWSP unique among comprehensive public undergraduate institutions. UWSP’s unique
position in study abroad was based on three key factors: 1) institutional expansion in the 1960s-1970s;
2) faculty and staff pioneers in a relatively non-competitive environment; and 3) the international
dominance of the U.S. economy and the U.S. dollar in the 1970s-1990s. In the first decade of the UW
System, stemming from the earlier state college system, UWSP hired faculty and admitted students
based on a large and reliable state funding source. Faculty and students in that environment had
the latitude to develop educational niches, such as study abroad, and the impact on department
budgets and staffing was marginal. Also, study abroad was relatively inexpensive. The strength of
the U.S. dollar meant that students and faculty leaders could live abroad for several months without
extraordinary financial assistance. Overseas partnerships were generally easy to secure and at a
very affordable price.
None of the conditions listed above hold true today. While education abroad retains a high
value for many undergraduates, their ability to afford a semester abroad has declined. Also, the
U.S. dollar continues to sink on international markets, increasing the costs of international travel.
Educational institutions outside the U.S. have increased their costs to run study abroad programs. In
Europe as well as Asia, U.S. students are perceived as a lucrative market. For-profit study abroad
companies have burgeoned over the past decades.
On campus, the ability of faculty and students to commit to study abroad has changed.
Tightening budgets and constraints on degree completion have restructured the environment in
which education abroad operates. Departments that once permitted faculty members to leave
campus for a semester abroad now simply cannot afford the reassignment. The compensation to
program leaders has remained static for many years, thus making program leadership less
attractive. For their part, students opt in increasing numbers for short-term programs rather than a
full semester abroad.
As a result of the trends listed above, some faculty-led semester programs were ended in
recent years due to insufficient enrollment. These were replaced by direct enrollment options,
which require no minimum enrollment to fund a faculty leader and permit UWSP students to study at
universities outside the U.S. At the same time, faculty-led short-term programs have multiplied, now
constituting two-thirds of UWSP International Programs. Currently UWSP offers over thirty-three study
abroad opportunities. The majority are faculty-led programs.
Affordability, time and money have been the key determinants. For faculty members and
their home departments, short programs in summer and Winterim do not interfere with duties of the
standard academic year. For students, short programs cost less as a lump sum, though on a dayto-day basis are more expensive than a semester abroad. Degree requirements for students’ majors
are tightly structured, however, and the traditional faculty-led semester abroad offered general
education credits rather than credits within the major.
The challenges and opportunities today are to build on an outstanding study abroad legacy
and to develop partnerships that serve the needs of the current faculty and students.
Page 6 of 70
Required Resources for this Strategic Plan
The strategic planning process has underscored some pressing resource needs: the need for
more staffing in International Programs, the need to revise leader compensation, and the need to
expand the role of the International Affairs Subcommittee. These issues surfaced clearly in the
report from the outside reviewers (Appendix 1).

I.P. Staffing: As noted in the peer review, UWSP’s International Programs (I.P.) office is a
unique, centralized administrative and full student service center. Where most study abroad
offices provide program advising and administrative oversight, I.P. further provides faculty
planning services, complete financial account management, financial aid counseling and
coordination, collection services, and course registration services. I.P’s centralized service
model is a unique asset to the campus, insuring that all aspects of education abroad receive
full attention from dedicated staff specialists. This model also provides campus
administration with the most efficient use of resources, avoiding redundancy of services and
promoting a unified campus approach. Most importantly, the full service model enables
students and their families to receive all information in one location, a clear advantage in
the recruitment and retention of student participants.
But I.P. is currently stretched beyond capacity in terms of owned and operated study abroad
programming. Future growth will require new resources if UWSP plans to continue with its unique
model of full student and faculty services within one centralized office. Particularly needed are
the following:
•
A fulltime twelve-month contracted administrator for the International Programs office. The
International Affairs Subcommittee and its predecessor (International Affairs Committee)
have consistently remained on record calling for a fulltime director. With the growth in
demand for more study abroad programming, the director’s workload has increased
accordingly as it has for the rest of the I.P. staff. This fulltime position is an immediate need.
•
A new study abroad advising position. With over 30 annual programs, more than 450
students seek advice from the Director, Associate Director, the Budget Supervisor and the
two University Services Associates. I.P. has a pressing need for a study abroad adviser to
help manage the advising load.
•
An additional fulltime budget and finance position. Within current operations, the Budget
Supervisor finalizes all budgets, prepares all student bills, advises all students on financial aid,
collects from all student participants, creates all courses and registers all enrollees, and
enters all final grades from international institutions into the UWSP records system. This is in
addition to the responsibilities of Office Manager and the accounts management required
for any on-campus office. With increased staffing in the directorship and advising, some
tasks could be taken over from the Budget Supervisor but the caseload of student billing,
financial aid advising, and accounts management requires more personnel if UWSP intends
to maintain or expand its study abroad offerings.
Without additional positions and resources I.P. will by necessity cut back on current programs and
services. The ability to implement most of the strategic plan presented in this document will require
an increase in I.P. personnel.

Leader Compensation: Program leader compensation remains a serious concern for the
faculty. While all other costs in study abroad continue to climb, UWSP leader compensation
has remained static for many years. This has helped keep programs as affordable as
possible by not adding further costs to student participants. But the self-sustaining program
Page 7 of 70
revenue model is also stretched to its capacity. In order to improve leader compensation,
either program costs will need to rise further under the current model or the University will
need to find other funding resources to supplement leader salaries on study abroad
programs.
As its first objective under the goal of “deepening the international resource pool on campus,” the
strategic plan calls for a review and revision of program leader compensation.

Reconstituting the International Affairs Committee: In taking on this strategic planning
process, the International Affairs Subcommittee recognizes the tremendous task of
advancing campus internationalization and the need for a campus-level steering
committee. The following plan outlines an ambitious series of goals and objectives that will
require faculty oversight and direction, which only a full Faculty Senate committee can
provide at the Executive Committee level.
This strategic plan calls on UWSP faculty governance and administration to recognize and support
campus internationalization. The responsibilities outlined in this document require more effort and
influence than a subcommittee can provide.
Some Guiding Principles: Ownership, Partnership, and Service
To plan strategically for the future, UWSP’s international initiatives need to recognize the
historical shifts in study abroad programming, adjust to the contemporary expectations of higher
education, and take advantage of the tremendous developments in the field of education abroad.
In addition to improving and updating current operations, UWSP needs an education abroad plan
that is sensitive to current budgetary constraints. The opportunities in education abroad are vast,
but not all of them are cost effective and not all will fit UWSP’s academic mission and goals. This
strategic plan recognizes the need for ownership of a clearly defined set of programs, but it remains
open to partnerships with peer institutions to augment program offerings and capitalize on the most
cost effective means to reach UWSP’s international goals. The combination of ownership and
partnership in education abroad will provide clearly defined pathways of access for students
seeking the widest international exposure.
Page 8 of 70
IV.
Goals, Objectives and Action Steps
A. GOAL: Advance Effective Integration of Education Abroad into the UWSP
Curriculum
The International Programs office exists to advance undergraduate and graduate education
through service to the colleges and their academic units. To serve the university’s academic
mission, education abroad must be relevant to each degree program it serves and the
academic requirements therein. Study abroad programs need therefore to meet specific
educational goals established by the faculty in the university’s General Education Program
(GEP) and in the major & minor degree programs developed across campus. Effective and
clearly articulated curriculum integration is essential, and it must be sensitive to factors such as
time-to-degree completion.
Objective 1: Establish a UWSP “GEP Abroad” database articulating all study abroad courses
meeting General Education Program needs.
Action Steps – GEP Abroad Database
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
1. Identify current UWSP study abroad offerings that
meet, or can potentially meet, GEP goals and
outcomes
IAS and IP Director
Spring 2012
2. Gain appropriate on-campus approvals for study
abroad offerings to meet GEP requirements
IAS and IP
Fall 2012
IP
Fall 2013
3. Create and maintain GEP Abroad Database
Objective 2: Create college-based education abroad task forces to evaluate the current
study abroad array and to articulate each college’s level of participation in
education abroad.
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
1. Work with deans to establish education abroad task
forces in each college (to begin in Fall 2012)
IP Director and IAS
Spring 2012
2. Identify existing course work in each college that has
international or cross-cultural learning objectives
College taskforces
Fall 2012
3. Inventory the education abroad opportunities
currently utilized by the college primarily for its majors
and minors
College taskforces
Spring 2013
Action Steps – College Internationalization
Page 9 of 70
4. Define education abroad options desired by the
college
College taskforces
Spring 2013
5. Integrate college taskforce information into one
campus report for I.P. Director and Provost
IAS
Fall 2013
IP and college
taskforce
Fall 2013
6. Examine current program array and campus
resources to determine means to meet college goals
for internationalization of curriculum
Objective 3: Review existing program array and develop new program partnerships
according to college needs and plans.
Action Steps – New Partnerships
1. Inventory current partnerships and potential
partnerships for college international plans
2. Develop comprehensive program array plan based
on college education abroad goals
3. Establish partnership agreements to fulfill program
array plan
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
IP
Fall 2013
IP Director and IAS
Spring 2014
IP Director and
Appropriate
Campus Units
Fall 2014
Page 10 of 70
B. GOAL: Expand and Strengthen Advising for Education Abroad
The most critical element in helping students understand their education abroad options is
academic advising, and advisers need specialized resources and information to help them
help students. The opportunities for study abroad are generally well known by UWSP
students, but only 17-18% take advantage of the programming. Campus culture is openly
supportive of education abroad and university internationalization, but the campus relies on
individual program leaders and the International Programs office to advise all students. To
support the curriculum integration goal and facilitate the best possible advising, education
abroad advising needs to become a regular component of advising across campus. To
assist all advisers, targeted resources are needed in GEP and major advising.
Objective 1: Design and implement an education abroad advising initiative for personnel
and offices across campus.
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
1. Work with UWSP professional advisers to assess study
abroad advising resources across campus
IP and Campus
Advisers
Fall 2012
2. Inventory advising strategies and resources from
national organizations and universities identified for
best practices in the field
IP and Campus
Advisers
Spring 2013
3. Design a campus-wide education abroad advising
program based on information from steps 1-2
IP and Campus
Advisers
Summer
2013
IP and IAS
Fall 2013
Action Steps – Campus-Wide Advising Initiative
4. Draft and seek campus approval of education
abroad advising program
Objective 2: Implement an online application process and internet-based communication
structure for the preparation and the reintegration of study abroad
participants.
Action Steps – Internet-Based Services
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
1. Complete review process and purchase on online
application software
IP
Spring 2012
2. Begin staff training with appropriate software
providers
IP
Spring –
Summer
2012
3. Launch internet-based services
IP
Summer
2012
Page 11 of 70
Objective 3: Expand course offerings designed to prepare students for their international
experiences and develop course offerings on the integration of study abroad
for returning students.
Action Steps – Preparation & Reintegration Courses
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
1. Create taskforce to review preparatory course
models and determine resource their requirements
IAS and IP
Fall 2012
2. Draft and present preparatory and reintegration
course proposals to IAS and other appropriate
committees
Taskforce
Spring 2013
IP Director and
Instructors
Spring 2013
Instructors
Fall 2013
3. Seek appropriate campus approvals and resources
4. Launch courses
Page 12 of 70
C. GOAL: Deepen the International Resource Pool on Campus
Education abroad depends on faculty and staff across the institution. Efforts toward campus
internationalization, particularly efforts to educate for global citizenship, require ongoing
university-wide personnel development. Some members of the campus community bring
cross-cultural perspectives through their personal and professional backgrounds. These
individuals typically look to campus internationalization not only for their students but for their
own regular connections with the world beyond Wisconsin. Other members of the campus
community have some international experience, but eagerly seek opportunities for personal
and professional growth that enhances their own global citizenship. International Programs
is a natural conduit for the university’s broad international development, as faculty and staff
look to serve as advisers and program leaders. The International Programs office is an
appropriate location for further integration and advancement of international personnel
development.
Over 85% of students currently on UWSP study abroad programs require financial aid
assistance. Student access to education abroad depends on financial support. Thus,
campus efforts to increase student involvement in education abroad will require greater
financial resources to minimize the cost difference between on-campus study and study
abroad options.
Future development will require partnerships within and beyond campus. The existing
operational model combines strict program-revenue budgeting with GPR funding for the
office. This has kept program costs per student as low as possible while ensuring centralized
oversight and accountability. As the colleges embrace internationalization, and with global
citizenship articulated as part of the university’s general educational goals, the demand for
education abroad opportunities will increase. The demand will increase both for the
students and for the faculty. To meet any increased student demand, the program array
will need a sustainable mix of UWSP-owned programs and access to qualified partner
programs. To meet faculty and staff needs for development and appropriate
compensation, International Programs will need to partner with the colleges and other
campus units for support beyond program revenue.
Objective 1: Review and revise the compensation of program leaders.
Action Steps – Compensation for Leaders
1. Inventory study abroad compensation practices at
universities similar to UWSP and specifically within UW
System
2. Develop leader appointment and compensation
proposal based on current program revenue
structure and other campus resources
3. Implement revised compensation policy
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
IP
Spring 2012
IP Director and IAS
Fall 2012
IP Director and V.C.
for Academic Affairs
Spring 2013
Page 13 of 70
Objective 2: Expand fundraising efforts for the International Programs Scholarship
Endowment (IPSE).
Action Steps – Student Scholarships
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
1. Meet with UWSP Foundation leadership to review
current status of IPSE
IPSE Committee
Spring 2012
2. Develop a multi-year fundraising initiative for IPSE
under the auspices of UWSP Foundation
IPSE Committee
Fall 2012
IPSE Committee and
UWSP Foundation
Spring 2013
3. Launch fundraising initiative
Objective 3: Advance opportunities for returning students to showcase their international
experiences with the campus.
Action Steps – Student Opportunities to Showcase
Responsible Group
or Individual
Time Frame
1. Create an ad hoc group to identify current
opportunities within the colleges and International
Programs
IAS and IP
Spring 2012
2. Inventory practices from other universities, including
International Education Week and student
conference opportunities
Ad Hoc Group
Spring 2012
3. Draft and submit proposal to IAS of
recommendations for a campus initiative
Ad Hoc Group
Fall 2012
IAS, IP Director, V.C.
for Academic Affairs
Spring 2013
4. Implement recommendations supported by IAS, IP
and the Office of the V.C. for Academic Affairs
Page 14 of 70
Objective 4: Implement a Personnel Development Plan for International Education.
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
IAS
Fall 2013
2. Inventory pertinent personnel development
opportunities from on- and off-campus sources
Ad Hoc Group
Fall 2013
3. Draft and submit a faculty and staff grant program
proposal to IAS for international education
development
Ad Hoc Group
Spring 2014
IP Director, Grant
Support Office, V.C.
for Academic Affairs
Fall 2014
Action Steps – Personnel Development Program
1. Create an ad hoc group to identify international
resources across campus
4. Implement personnel development program as
supported by the V.C. for Academic Affairs
Objective 5: Establish visiting scholars exchange program for campus.
Action Steps – Visiting Scholars Program
1. Create an ad hoc group to inventory existing
international scholarly partnerships on campus
2. Develop and submit a proposal to IAS for a visiting
scholars exchange program
3. Implement a visiting scholars exchange program
supported by the V.C. for Academic Affairs
Responsible Group
or Individual
Time Frame
IAS
Fall 2013
Ad Hoc Group
Spring 2014
IP Director, ISSO
Director, V.C. for
Academic Affairs
Fall 2014
Page 15 of 70
D. GOAL: Strengthen Evaluation and Assessment of Education Abroad
UWSP International Programs seeks to build on its strong study abroad tradition, and
documented program quality is essential to this task. Accountability and improvement in
higher education requires all facets of the university to assess and evaluate operations on a
regular basis. The International Programs office currently collects program evaluations from
students and leaders, and utilizes them to improve services from one year to the next.
Systematizing and updating the evaluation processes already in place, articulating the
specific learning outcomes for each study abroad program, and creating a regular cycle of
general assessment for education abroad are critical next steps.
Objective 1: Institute standard assessment process for all programs.
Action Steps – Learning Assessment
1. Create ad hoc group to identify learning outcomes
for study abroad programs
2. Inventory and evaluate assessment instruments for
education abroad
3. Implement assessment plan
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
IAS
Fall 2012
Ad Hoc Group
Spring 2013
IP and IAS
Fall 2013
Objective 2: Update student program evaluation instruments, integrating them more fully
with on-campus evaluation instruments.
Responsible Group
or Individuals
Time Frame
IAS
Fall 2012
Ad Hoc Group
Spring 2013
3. Implement new evaluation instruments
IP
Fall 2013
4. Develop and maintain central database of
evaluations organized by program type
IP
Fall 2013
Action Steps – Program Evaluation
1. Create ad hoc group to inventory education abroad
evaluation tools available from professional
organizations
2. Review and recommend evaluation tools to IAS,
including UWSP student course evaluation
instruments for study abroad
Page 16 of 70
V.
Timetable
Please refer to the preceding pages for further information on the goals and objectives,
particularly for the individuals and groups tasked with each item.
Goal
Objective
Spring
2012
Fall 2012
Spring
2013
Curriculum
Integration
GEP Abroad
Database
Organize
Develop
Implement
Curriculum
Integration
College
Internationalization
Organize
Develop
Develop
Curriculum
Integration
New Partnerships
Advising
Campus-wide
Advising Initiative
Advising
Internet-Based
Services
Advising
Preparation &
Reintegration
Courses
Resources
Compensation for
Leaders
Resources
Fall 2013
Spring
2014
Organize
Develop
Fall 2016
Review
Implement
Review
Develop
Organize
Fall 2014
Implement
Implement
Review
Review
Implement
Review
Organize
Develop
Implement
Review
Organize
Develop
Implement
Student
Scholarships
Organize
Develop
Implement
Resources
Student
Opportunities to
Showcase
Organize
Develop
Implement
Resources
Personnel
Development Plan
Resources
Visiting Scholars
Program
Evaluation &
Assessment
Learning
Assessment
Organize
Develop
Implement
Review
Evaluation &
Assessment
Program
Evaluation
Organize
Develop
Implement
Review
Review
Review
Organize
Develop
Implement
Review
Develop
Implement
Review
#Organize
6
4
0
1
0
0
#Develop
0
5
5
0
3
0
#Implement
0
1
4
5
0
3
Page 17 of 70
VI.
Appendices
Appendix 1: Guided Strategic Planning Review Report
Forum on Education Abroad Quality Improvement Program (QUIP)
Guided Strategic Planning Review Report University of Wisconsin Stevens Point
Peer Reviewers: Nancy Stubbs and Lee Sternberger
Information Provided: UWSP Forum/QUIP Guided Strategic Planning Review Application; UWSP
Forum/QUIP Guided Strategic Planning Review Survey; USWP Procedures Manual; UWSP Financial Policy
1996; UWSP Short-term Program Policy 2009; UWSP Student Teaching Abroad Financial Policy
Addendum; UWSP Short-term Leader Compensation Policy Addendum; UWSP/International Programs
Marketing Materials, International Programs Office Policy Document
In addition, the peer reviewers had access to the main UWSP and International Programs Office
websites.
Dates of Visit: November 7, 8, and 9, 2010
The University of Wisconsin Stevens Point (UWSP) is a regional, comprehensive university located in
central Wisconsin. The university offers associate, bachelors and masters degrees to approximately
9,000 students. The student body is predominantly Caucasian and from the state of Wisconsin but
includes a modest but growing number of minority and international students. The university
community values international education and has integrated study abroad into the mission of the
university. Specifically, the university mission statement exhorts the university community to provide
“challenging learning and leadership experiences that prepare students to be global citizens.” The
International Programs Office (IPO) also has a well-articulated mission statement “to advance
international education and global awareness through study abroad programming” with supporting
vision, value and goal statements. UWSP has offered study abroad programs for 40 years and—for a
school of its size and type—is considered a leader in study abroad within the state and region.
Currently, the IPO supports an average of 30 programs per calendar year with five hundred student
participants or approximately 18-20% of the student body. Programs include shorter field research,
semester-long language immersion programs, winter-term and spring break programs, direct enrollment
and exchange, programs, etc. IPO staff members include five full-time and one part-time employee.
Over the last five to ten years, and in keeping with national trends, student demand for study abroad
has grown significantly, stretching the staff and resources of the IPO to the limit. In addition, UWSP now
feels competition from other state schools in terms of study abroad offerings; administrators and IPO
staff are concerned about losing their ‘competitive edge.’ The current administration would like to see
study abroad increase to include 25-30% of the student population.
Page 18 of 70
Thus, in order to meet student need and university goals, the administration and IPO staff initiated a
Forum on Education Abroad QUIP Guided Strategic Planning Review in November 2010. In their QUIP
self-study, IPO staff noted, “We need to examine the balance between short-term and semester
programs within the parameters of our institution’s resources. We also want to examine the differing
needs and requirements of our traditional stand-alone faculty led semester programs, direct enrollment
partnerships, and our latest exchange opportunities.” The office staff also noted the decline in semester
program enrollment and the “sharp increase” in short-term programs, which “requires us to reconsider
our office management and services.” The IPO staff also indicated that they wish to consider how to
provide more service-learning and international internship opportunities. Finally, as the larger
university community is developing a new general education program, revising its assessment protocols,
engaging in university-wide strategic planning, and facing likely budget cuts, the IPO felt an international
education strategic plan was necessary at this time in order to align with these larger processes and
plans.
The International Programs Office staff chose to focus on four QUIP standards for the purposes of this
review:
• Number Two: Student Learning and Development
• Number Three: Academic Framework
• Number Seven: Organizational and Program Resources
• Number Eight: Health, Safety, and Security
Within this report, the Forum asks that each standard be discussed in light of the institutional culture
and mission, “enabling conditions such as existing structure, organization, staff and resources and
challenging conditions (internal and external) to achieving the goals.” This report will highlight best
practices in meeting QUIP standards as well as obstacles to doing so. Recommendations will be made
for each standard, including suggestions for prioritization (immediate, mid-range and long-term) when
possible and appropriate. A summary of recommendations will be provided in the conclusion.
Standard Two: Student Learning and Development: The organization has established and regularly
utilizes internal and external review processes for assuring that its programs accomplish their stated
educational purposes for fostering student learning and development.
The IPO utilizes a number of internal mechanisms for reviewing study abroad programs in order to
ensure program quality and safety. Importantly, the IPO Director, Dr. Eric Yonke, regularly meets with
the Faculty Senate Subcommittee on International Affairs, which serves as a sounding board and
advocate for the IPO to the faculty. Indeed, policies regarding study abroad and the IPO must be
reviewed and endorsed by the Senate. In terms of individual programs themselves, students complete
satisfaction surveys regarding their experiences on study abroad programs, and in many instances
faculty provide course evaluations to students for an assessment of the academic experience. In
developing new programs, the IPO staff meet with faculty to review all processes including pedagogical,
financial and safety/liability practices and issues. Dr. Yonke also meets with faculty leaders to conduct a
‘de-briefing’ upon return from study abroad. Dr. Yonke and his staff have worked very hard to create
Page 19 of 70
open mechanisms for communication with faculty and students, to encourage faculty to work more
closely with his office, and to ‘regularize’ the process by which faculty can suggest and then implement
their own study abroad programs.
However, Dr. Yonke expressed a number of difficulties in implementing internal review processes with
regard to international education, starting with his role and responsibilities. In Dr. Yonke’s job
description, his role is to develop a much larger international education program at UWSP, including a
greater ‘internationalization’ of the campus at home and abroad. In fact, the demand for study abroad
is so great that he and his staff use all their time and energy managing study abroad programs.
Moreover, the role of Director, which is now full time, has been a bit besieged over time. In recent
history the job was part time and at one point, it was suggested to eliminate the position altogether.
With the support of the Senate Subcommittee on International Affairs, the role was established as a fulltime position, a move that helped communicate and underscore the importance of international
education on campus and study abroad specifically. In addition, given Dr. Yonke is a Professor of
History, he comes with credentials needed in order to engage faculty in the process and better address
academic rigor in study abroad. It is clear from everyone with whom the reviewers met that Dr. Yonke is
extremely well regarded and has the respect of faculty, students, staff, and the senior administration.
He was described, routinely, as highly competent, open, helpful, and supportive. Indeed, those we met
expressed this sentiment regarding all the IPO staff. However, faculty also noted the complexities of his
role, the lack of clarity about certain decisions (e.g., to eliminate the faculty leader role in certain
programs, the decision to move programs to direct enrollment), the limited resources (the office runs
mostly on a recovery basis, putting great pressure on program fees to cover office costs), and the
challenges of managing increased demand.
Dr. Yonke also expressed some question of the limits of his authority. He noted that he was quite willing
to take this role (he has been a campus leader with regard to study abroad) but does not consider this to
be a permanent position for him, as he fully expects to return to the History Department. Given that his
job description does not actually match his responsibilities, it is unclear what policies he can establish
and enforce himself. For example, he noted that it is not a requirement that faculty ask students to
evaluate study abroad courses as they do on the home campus. Indeed, he noted that it can be difficult
even to get syllabi from some faculty who are leading students abroad. Some study abroad programs
have well-articulated learning outcomes, goals, and objectives while others do not. Thus, he has felt
limited in what he can ask faculty to do and not do, including course evaluations and other internal
review mechanisms. Moreover, given his limited resources, engaging in a more comprehensive
assessment protocol of international learning is simply not possible at this time.
As well, there is no clear mechanism on how study abroad programs are developed (who gets to lead
what, when, and where). Some study abroad programs are administered at the level of the college but
work closely with the IPO. Other faculty members suggest programs to the IPO directly and develop
them exclusively through that office. As demand has grown, it has become more and more difficult to
manage faculty interest, and in fact Dr. Yonke is in the difficult position of having to turn down or
postpone programs suggested by faculty. From our discussions with him and others, it is clear that
international education is gaining more and more credibility and credence at UWSP and that faculty,
Page 20 of 70
staff, and administrators understand that the roles and purposes of the IPO, the Director, and staff are
also changing rapidly. Thus, as a part of the strategic planning process, IPO roles, responsibilities, and
processes (particularly in selecting, developing, and evaluating new programs) need to be reviewed and
redefined. The university should also reconsider the roles of the Senate Subcommittee on International
Affairs. In our conversations with subcommittee members, they expressed their desire to be more
involved and active. As a supportive and established body, the Subcommittee on International Affairs
(which includes student representation) seems a logical starting point for greater dialogue on priorities
for the university, IPO functions, and necessary resources. This subcommittee, along with many
participants, can start determining the answers to such questions as more service-learning, field
research and/or international internships, participation in long-term versus short-term programs,
course/program development and evaluation, regional and language priorities, the balance between
UWSP-generated study abroad programs versus direct enrollment, exchange, the use of providers, etc.
In essence, UWSP needs to determine what the larger university goals and objectives are for study
abroad and then systematically break down those goals/objectives/outcomes into aligned student and
faculty opportunities.
With regard to an external review process, the UWSP administration and IPO Director and staff are to be
commended for engaging in a Forum QUIP Guided Strategic Planning Review. The Chancellor and
Provost (both of whom have engaged in study abroad)—along with IPO staff—recognize the need for
external evaluation and plan on using this as a starting point for their international education planning
process. A small number of IPO staff attend state and regional meetings, while the Associate Director
attends at least one national international education meeting (usually annually if resources permit), and
the office has now joined the Forum on Education Abroad. As international education has become its
own discipline in the last 20 years, it is very important that resources be made available to staff (and
faculty leaders) to attend national and international conferences (including the Forum’s annual meeting)
in order to take advantage of the immense resources available. In essence, as study abroad and
international education have become professionalized, UWSP is clearly committed to further
‘professionalizing’ the IPO. And when the unfortunate day comes that Dr. Yonke returns to the faculty,
the university may wish to consider engaging in a national search and hiring from within the field of
international education.
Recommendations:
•
Establish a supportive and well-qualified team of faculty, students, and administrators (with
representation from the IPO and Senate Subcommittee on International Affairs) to engage in
transparent strategic planning regarding international education. Among many topics, the
committee may consider IPO staff roles and responsibilities, the relationship of study abroad to
other university priorities, the roles and responsibilities of allied offices (e.g., Bursar, Registrar,
etc.), a mechanism to develop and evaluate study abroad programs, the relationship of the IPO
to colleges, the development of college-level processes that might support the IPO (if they do
not exist), the role of the Senate Subcommittee on International Affairs, and the resources
needed to administer the IPO in an effective manner, one that accommodates growth and
innovation and ensures academic rigor and student and faculty safety. Priority: Immediate.
Page 21 of 70
•
Further draw upon the field of international education through meetings and online information
regarding strategic planning. Many higher/international education organizations have
developed generic strategic plans and planning documents that can serve as starting points and
simplify workload. These include the Association of American Colleges and Universities,
American Council on Education, Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, NAFSA: The
Association of International Education, Association of International Education Administrators,
and the Forum on Education Abroad, among many others. Priority: Immediate.
Standard Three: Academic Framework: The organization maintains clearly stated and publicly available
policies on academic matters related to education abroad.
As noted in the UWSP application for the Guided Strategic Review, academic policies for the University
of Wisconsin System are well-developed, clearly articulated, and accessible online. As a member of that
system, UWSP must adhere to system-wide policies. Moreover, the University of Wisconsin System has
also developed a clear framework and policies for international education which are also clearly stated
and available online. This document, entitled “Conduct of International Programs in the University of
Wisconsin System,” includes policies on “Development and Operations of Off-Campus International
Education Programs,” “Safety and Welfare of Participants,” “Recruitment, Admission, Orientation,
Participation, and Re-entry,” “Host Country Consideration,” and “Financial Management,” as well as a
sample study abroad checklist, and the responsibilities of faculty/staff/institutions/the system with
regard to study abroad.
In addition, the IPO maintains UWSP-specific policies on study abroad as a sub-unit of Academic Affairs.
While the university is engaging in a process to place all policies online, the IPO policies are not yet
posted. However, a copy of the policies is available to faculty and staff if requested. Those policies
include “International Programs Procedure Manual,” which originated in 1996; “Financial Operations
Policy,” also dating to 1996; “Short-term Study Abroad Leader Compensation and the Appointment of
Assistant Leaders,” approved in 2008; “Policy Update for the Administration of Short-term Study Abroad
Programs,” which was approved by the Senate in 2009; and “Financial Operations Policy for Student
Teaching Abroad,” approved by the administration in 2010.
The “International Programs Procedure Manual” is quite comprehensive, covering a wide range of
issues, including student inquiries, recruitment, the application process (acceptance, registration, etc.),
orientation, program development (itineraries, transportation, housing, meals, necessary visas, etc.), the
faculty application process to serve as a director, faculty orientation, the appropriate process to dispose
of records, program evaluation, financial procedures (accounts receivable, payment, collection,
reconciliation, expense reports, accounts payable, credit card statements, etc.), and risk/liability
matters. Dr. Yonke has indicated that this manual has been updated over the years on an as-needed
basis. The “Financial Operations Policy” provides much more detailed information on more internal
financial operations and the interface of the IP processes with larger university processes. While it is still
an active policy, Dr. Yonke indicated this policy needs updating and is on his ‘to do’ list. The 2009 policy
on the administration of short-term programs provides guidance in terms of instruction, course
Page 22 of 70
approval, fees and compensation, and credit- and contact-hour requirements. The policy regarding
student teaching abroad provides guidance regarding what constitutes an appropriate teaching
experience abroad (e.g., length, placement, course section) and tuition. Finally, the policy regarding
short-term study abroad compensation outlines program salaries vis-à-vis size of program and the
presence (or not) of an assistant leader.
Although they are not available online, the IPO is to be commended for developing these policies over
the last 15 years or so. As the university begins its strategic planning, these polices can serve as a point
of departure for discussion (e.g., what policies stay, are eliminated, are updated, etc.). Moreover, the
IPO will need to work with faculty program leaders, department chairs, and deans to ensure that state
policy is actually followed.
In addition to the articulation and availability of policies, the IPO staff noted specifically in their selfstudy that “the current expansion of direct enrollment options as well as new short-term programs
require greater clarity and consensus on how academic credit and coursework abroad is valued and
assessed (standard 3).” Rather recently, the IPO staff made the decision to eliminate UWSP faculty-led
programs at a number of partner universities (in England, Australia, and New Zealand) and instead enroll
students directly in those universities. Thus, programs that once were ‘official’ UWSP programs with
UWSP credit now use transfer credit. In rare instances, faculty departments/colleges have reviewed
relevant partner university credit and ‘matched’ it to UWSP credit. However, in many cases, the IPO,
students, and faculty have to work through credit transfer as students begin to utilize direct enrollment
opportunities. Similarly, the growth in short-term programs has led to questions regarding where the
credit fits in the curriculum of majors, minors, etc., ‘ownership’ of credit (which faculty in which unit can
teach which courses), ‘timing’ of credit for students (e.g., how does earning credit in a summer program
affect graduation, enrollment in courses on campus, etc.), among other questions. Simply put, the
sudden growth in new programs of all forms has raised new, challenging, and exciting questions about
credit, curricula, and curriculum design. As noted in the discussion of Standard Two above, the strategic
planning team (or a ‘curriculum subcommittee’) may wish to take up these questions. Certainly part of
the strategic planning process will be determining structures and processes to address credit/curricular
issues in an open, transparent, and inclusive fashion as well as the appropriate assessment mechanisms
to ensure all credit (UWSP or those of partner universities) meets UWSP academic standards.
Recommendations:
•
•
As a part of the strategic planning process, review current policies and the manner by which
policies are communicated and monitored. Priority: To commence once strategic planning is
underway.
As a part of the strategic planning process, specifically review the issue of credit quality and
integration into the UWSP curricula. This may require a specific faculty-led subcommittee.
Priority: To commence once strategic planning is underway.
Page 23 of 70
Standard Seven: Organizational and Program Resources: The organization provides adequate financial
and personnel resources to support its programs.
The IPO staff is composed of five full-time and one part-time staff plus part-time student employees. In
the past five years, one FTE has been added and the director’s position, which had been cut to half-time,
was restored to full-time. Currently, 10 semester-length and 22 short-term programs are offered per
academic year. While several semester programs enroll students directly in an overseas university or
language school, none are administered by a third party. This, plus the increased responsibilities
common to other education abroad offices in the U.S., particularly in the areas of safety and emergency
management and financial reporting, lead the review team to conclude that the current IPO staff have
neither the time nor the resources to increase the number of students going abroad or to add new
programs. This is a difficult time to talk about funding new resources. Rather than putting all plans for
growth on hold, there are several interim steps that could be explored to help the current IPO staff
handle increased programming or student numbers.
Dr. Yonke broached the subject of merging the Offices of International Students and Scholars and
International Programs. The idea is that a consolidated office would combine some support staff
functions and allow for new synergies that could help expand international contacts, leading to more
international students and more study abroad opportunities. This is certainly worth exploring, though
such a move would entail its own expense, like finding adequate space to house both programs and
determining where such an office would fit in the University’s administrative structure.
Consolidating offices is not a short-term undertaking. A more immediate solution involves a thorough
review of the process of administering programs and advertising, advising, and accepting students.
Virtually all of the work is done in the International Programs office, including advising students about
financial aid, billing and collecting fees, registering students for the term abroad and collecting and
sending visa applications to consulates. Delegating some duties to other offices or asking student
participants to assume more responsibilities could help reduce the IPO staff’s workload.
Collecting program fees is the most obvious example. Students pay tuition, on-campus housing, and
other required fees to the bursar’s office, not the school or college providing their academic program.
From a financial propriety point of view, it is better to separate the budgeting, billing, and payment
functions to remove any question about the integrity of the process. This alone is reason to examine
whether it would be better to work with the Bursar to move both the billing and payment functions to
that office.
Another example is the collection and forwarding of visa applications. This helps assure that
applications are correct and on time, but as participant numbers grow the office may no longer be able
to ‘ride herd’ on students. Taking the time to create accurate and easy-to-follow instructions for each
country’s visa process makes it possible even for those who have never left the state to get a visa
successfully.
In a review of the office’s procedures manual, several other tasks were identified for review and possible
change, though these are likely not the only ones.
Page 24 of 70
Registration for overseas courses: Creating an equivalency for each course a student takes abroad is
time-consuming. In the case of direct-enrollment programs, would it be possible to create variable
credit upper- and lower-division ‘taken abroad at X site’ courses in each academic department? Several
courses could then be listed under the same number (perhaps with different section numbers to avoid
confusing the computer), with the course title used by academic advisers to determine equivalencies.
Registration for courses for the returning term: There is an on-line registration process for students on
campus, yet overseas registration seems to be done on paper. Can students on semester programs be
given their registration appointment time and left on their own to consult their major advisers and
register from abroad?
Arranging group international airfares: In some cases it is appropriate but in others it might be best to
tell students that the program begins and ends at the overseas site.
Handling office paperwork: The paperwork required to offer and administer study abroad programs is
onerous, especially as programs and student numbers grow. The purchase of an online process
management system like StudioAbroad would greatly help to reduce the time spent collecting and
organizing required forms and creating marketing, advising, and orientation materials.
The IPO has run successful study abroad programs for 40 years. No one thought the office had been a
financial drain on the institution. Like many growing education abroad units, the IPO has managed to
grow and prosper without significant support from the institution. Most on-campus expenses are paid
by student participants, with the exception of salaries and benefits for the director, associate director,
and budget supervisor. The IPO is also charged overhead costs such as office rent, telephone service,
etc. All program costs except a replacement support fee for semester faculty leaders are paid by
participants. The replacement fee is paid to the leader’s home department, allowing him or her to
collect a regular salary for the time abroad.
For those programs with a group leader or faculty director, procedures exist for identifying and hiring
candidates and providing standardized compensation. Faculty who spoke to the review team expressed
some concern that the level of compensation was too low for the work and responsibility expected. This
is not an uncommon complaint but seems to have some merit, especially for group leaders and
assistants. The practice of hiring an assistant leader for groups larger than 17 creates an effective way
to train faculty and/or staff to run short-term programs, but compensation levels are so low that
recruitment will be increasingly difficult. Although UWSP is working very hard to keep the cost of
programs low, the need for assistants, even for groups as small as 12, is increasingly important,
especially to safeguard the health and security of participants.
It is impossible to keep study abroad costs as low as on-campus costs at a state institution. However,
lower costs do convince more students to study abroad. UWSP is providing financial aid for study
abroad at the same level as it does students in Stevens Point, so no recommendations are required to
make financial aid policy fit with the Forum’s standards of good practice. One way the institution could
assist in this effort is to cover more of the office’s on-campus expenses so they do not have to be
covered by student participants.
Page 25 of 70
Recommendations:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Given the university’s stated goal of creating more global citizens, a key focus of the
International Program’s strategic planning process must be to work with the campus
administration to develop a reasonable plan for expansion. If International Programs is
expected to expand aggressively the number of students having and international experience, a
systematic approach to the growth, accompanied by sufficient resources to accomplish it, is
necessary to help ensure that the University maintains its current level of service and quality.
Priority: To commence once strategic planning is underway.
Each IPO staff should review his or her job description, with particular focus on whether there
are certain tasks that should and could be done by other offices or even by the students
themselves. Those tasks identified for possible change should be prioritized so they can be
tackled in order of importance. Priority: To commence once strategic planning is underway.
Request grants from the UWSP administration to fund the initial purchase and setup of a
comprehensive study abroad data management system. The request should include funds to
hire hourly employees to organize and enter the vast amounts of data needed to install such a
system properly. Priority: Immediate.
The IPO should continue discussions with the UWSP administration about finding additional
funds to pay larger salaries for group leaders. At the same time, it should determine what level
of increased per-student cost could be tolerated to provide yearly small increases in
compensation with the goal of reaching an agreed-upon percentage increase in salary. Priority:
To commence once strategic planning is underway.
Work with the campus administration to develop a multi-year plan for covering more of the
IPO’s on-campus costs. Begin by examining whether office space and other basic services like
utilities and phone service can be absorbed. Next should be existing staff salaries and benefits.
A five-year plan to add sufficient FTE to meet the institutional goal of sending more students
abroad should be devised during strategic planning, with careful thought given to the funding
source for new positions. Priority: To commence once strategic planning is underway.
As pressure to create more short-term programs grows, more time must be spent advising
interested faculty. The need for one-on-one conversations could be reduced by the creation of
a section of the IPO website for prospective group leaders. This can include a template for
creating a new program proposal, a discussion of the institution’s philosophy for running shortterm programs (purpose, audiences, learning outcomes, etc.) and an updated training manual
for faculty leaders. Past and current faculty leaders should be asked to help prepare materials
by reviewing sections of the current training materials and suggesting changes, helping to
determine the most effective program proposal template, and so forth. Priority: Begin after
strategic planning has been completed.
The director of International Programs should explore the possibility that the UWSP Foundation
could engage in fundraising for the office, either for ongoing office operations or for student
scholarships. The existence of a healthy scholarship fund would allow more students to go
abroad who cannot consider it now because of cost. Even small scholarships can act as a
Page 26 of 70
catalyst to motivate students to find the funds necessary for such an activity. Priority: Begin
after strategic planning has been completed.
Standard 8: Health, Safety, and Security: The organization has established and continuously maintains
effective health, safety, security, and risk management policies, procedures, and faculty/staff training.
The university has an extensive emergency management plan with a comprehensive plan for responding
to international emergencies and crises. The plan, “Managing Real and Perceived Emergencies Abroad,”
takes a step-by-step approach to determining whether an event is truly a threat and whether it affects
an individual or a group. It then outlines a response that includes a discussion of who is responsible for
various actions and how the university will coordinate communication with the media and relatives. The
plan was last updated in 2007 and is scheduled to be reviewed again in 2011.
Staff in the IPO office have been trained to use the plan. It is presented and explained during faculty
and group leader orientations so these important players are aware of its existence and how it will assist
them during a crisis. Throughout the plan the focus is on ensuring that top priority is given to the safety
and well being of program participants.
As part of the orientation to each program, student participants are informed of their responsibilities for
remaining safe and healthy. Students are expected to follow the UWSP Code of Student Conduct while
on the program and are subject to that code’s due-process procedures in case of violations.
Participation manuals discuss general tips for safe and healthy travel and living abroad as well as any
issues specific to the program site. Appropriate warnings are included about the consequences of using
illegal drugs. The review team found no warnings about alcohol abuse, but this may not be a problem
on UWSP programs.
The University of Wisconsin System requires all education abroad participants to be insured by a policy
negotiated for the system (currently through Cultural Insurance Services International). The policy
covers major medical expenses, emergency medical evacuation or repatriation, a personal liability
insurance benefit, security evacuation in case of a natural disaster or political unrest, and limited travel
insurance. Each student is also provided with an International Student Identity Card, which provides
limited insurance coverage. Program leaders are trained to assist students who must file for insurance
benefits. Leaders are also enrolled in a state-wide MEDEX plan that provides worldwide medical
emergency assistance. Because MEDEX is not a health insurance plan, UWSP enrolls leaders and
assistants in the CISI plan as well.
Besides the liability insurance provided in the CISI policy, program leaders are covered by the standard
liability indemnity given to all employees. This helps to ensure that leaders will not be subject to
frivolous claims and provides a mechanism for the university to advise and/or represent leaders as
needed.
The University of Wisconsin System mandates that each institution in the system “maintain a minimum
emergency reserve/contingency fund equal to at least $100 times the number of students sent abroad
Page 27 of 70
each year or an amount adequate to respond to emergencies and unforeseen problems” (“Conduct of
International Programs in the University of Wisconsin System, revised April 2008”). Since UWSP
currently sends 500 abroad annually, this means IPO should have $50,000 in reserve. Funds are
collected at the rate of $100 per student per term; it will take some time to build up an adequate fund,
which will have to be increased as goals to increase the number of students abroad are met.
UWSP has a well-developed crisis management plan for education abroad. The recommendations in this
document represent attempts to make it even better, but the core policy and procedures are already in
place. It is important that the IPO and campus risk management continue to make the review and
revision of its policies a priority. The health and safety of education abroad participants is more than
ever dependent upon this at every sending institution.
Recommendations:
•
Students are given information about what to do in a medical emergency, but there is no
discussion of what to do if other types of emergencies arise. Students should be informed of the
immediate steps they should take in case of a natural disaster, terrorism, or political upheaval.
Instructions should be specific to each program and included in the participation manuals,
perhaps in the form of a step-by-step list of things to do. It is particularly important that each
student have such a form since UWSP accepts students from other institutions who may not
attend program orientations. Priority: Begin after strategic planning has been completed.
• The Procedures Manual does not outline a system for assisting students who cannot pay out-ofpocket medical expenses while on the program. Since the CISI plan does not pay medical
expenses directly, some students will face bills for hospitalization, emergency transport,
doctor’s care, etc., that far exceed their ability to pay. While the international emergency
planning document contains a reference to having the program cover expenses, with
reimbursement from the student at a later date, the IP office should ensure that each program
has a mechanism (and the funds on hand) to do this. It is especially important to decide how
this will be accomplished on direct-enrollment programs where there is no USWP leader
present. Priority: Immediate.
• The IPO should develop a timetable during strategic planning for increasing emergency reserve
funds to a level that the campus agrees will be sufficient to cover most emergencies. Until that
time, a clear policy stating how the campus will pay for emergencies should be developed and
signed off by the appropriate authorities. The policy should consider all types of potential
emergencies, regardless of how unlikely, including forced quarantines, being stranded because
of a disaster or terrorism incident, etc. Even with the security evacuation coverage in the CISI
policy, it may be necessary to pay out significant funds to ensure the safety and well being of a
group stranded overseas. Priority: To commence once strategic planning is underway.
Conclusion
The International Programs Office at UWSP has every reason to celebrate a long and successful history
providing study abroad programming to students in central Wisconsin. The program is well organized
and very well run. In spite of experiencing pressures to grow and to provide more services without any
Page 28 of 70
significant increase in resources, the IPO continues to provide top-quality services at the highest level.
This is due primarily to the hard work and dedication of the IPO staff and the continuing support of the
faculty and campus administration.
The time has come, however, for UWSP and the IPO to have a serious conversation about future goals
and the mechanism for reaching them. The days when education abroad was an afterthought have
passed. UWSP has realized this and is taking the proper first steps toward a comprehensive plan of
action by incorporating study abroad review and planning into the larger process of revising the general
education program and its assessment protocols and engaging in university-wide strategic planning.
This QUIP Guided Strategic Planning report is the first stage in the IPO’s strategic planning process. The
next step is to convene a planning committee to develop action items, timetables, and the methodology
for assessing implementation. Central to this process will be a discussion of how realizing goals for
creating global citizens fits into the university’s master plan and how sufficient resources will be found
to do so. To that end, the review team has made specific recommendations, summarized below, for
moving into the future.
The team wishes to close with special thanks to Chancellor Bernie Patterson, Provost Mark Nook, Dr.
Eric Yonke and his wife Martha, Mark Koepke and Linda Garski of the IPO, the Dean’s Council, and
members of the Senate Subcommittee on International Affairs for taking time to meet with the review
team and to provide valuable information and ideas.
Summary of Recommendations:
Standard Two: Student Learning and Development:
•
•
Establish a team of faculty, students, and administrators to engage in strategic planning
regarding international education. Priority: Immediate.
Draw upon the field of international education to find information and guidelines for effective
strategic planning by attending meetings and utilizing extensive online information. Priority:
Immediate.
Standard Three: Academic Framework:
•
As a part of the strategic planning process, review current policies and the manner by which
policies are communicated and monitored. Priority: To commence once strategic planning is
underway.
Page 29 of 70
•
As a part of the strategic planning process, specifically review the issue of credit quality and
integration into the UWSP curricula. Priority: To commence once strategic planning is
underway.
Standard Seven: Organizational and Program Resources:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
As a part of the strategic planning process, work with campus administration to develop a
reasonable plan of expansion to meet the goal of creating more global citizens. Priority: To
commence once strategic planning is underway.
As a part of the strategic planning process, review each IPO staff job description, focusing on
whether there are certain tasks that can be done by other offices or by study abroad
participants to reduce the staff’s workload. Priority: To commence once strategic planning is
underway.
Request grants from the UWSP administration to fund and set up a comprehensive study abroad
data management system. Priority: Immediate.
Discuss ways to find additional funds to compensate study abroad group leaders to ensure that
qualified persons apply. Priority: To commence once strategic planning is underway.
As a part of the strategic planning process, develop a multi-year plan for covering more of the
IPO’s on-campus costs. Priority: To commence once strategic planning is underway.
Create a section of the IPO website for faculty interested in developing short-term programs so
information needed about the process is available to all. Priority: Begin after strategic planning
has been completed.
Explore the possibility that the UWSP Foundation could engage in fundraising for the office.
Priority: Begin after strategic planning has been completed.
Standard Eight: Health, Safety and Security:
•
•
•
Develop written instructions to tell students what steps to take in the event of a non-medical
emergency. Priority: Begin after strategic planning has been completed.
Develop and get approval for a system for assisting students who cannot pay out-of-pocket
medical expenses while on a program. Priority: Immediate.
As a part of the strategic planning process, develop a timetable for increasing emergency
reserve funds to a level sufficient to cover most emergencies. Priority: To commence once
strategic planning is underway.
Page 30 of 70
Appendix 2: SWOT Analysis
SWOT Analysis Meeting with UWSP Faculty, April 15th, 2011
STRENGTHS
1. Current numbers/percentage of participants
2. Longterm history/experience/momentum/leadership
3. Administrative support (verbal & behavioral)
4. Value of the experience (students see as a positive support)
5. Variety of offerings
6. I.P. Staff
7. Linkages with other programs on campus (for credit)
8. Website: informative, but hard to find from the main campus page
9. New offerings: student teaching & internship expansion
10. CulturePoint class
WEAKNESSES
1. Faculty development/leadership opportunities declining (semester)
2. Lack of permanent full time director
3. No formalized assessment for programs
4. Limited financial resources for leaders (personal impact)
5. Lack of office space
6. Lack of students’ preparation for study abroad (to take best advantage)
7. Lack of “re-integration” for returning students
8. No formalized professional development for staff→ internationalization (threat?)
9. It’s not clear where I.P. fits into structure of the university (organizational chart)
10. Limited compensation as compared to teaching Winterim or summer on campus
11. High workload for leaders during program
12. I.P. working more with individual faculty and not with whole department (programs)
unit
13. Lack of overarching Vision/Statement
14. Lack of learning outcomes
15. Office resources over-stretched
16. Limited scholarship resources currently
17. Promotion of CulturePoint
18. Contingency fund for international emergencies
19. Lack of contingency fund for leaders facing emergencies/impact on programs when
leader must leave
20. Financial impact on spouses or partners accompanying programs
21. Student to leader funding ratio/expansion point for number of leaders
Page 31 of 70
22. Advertizing/Recruitment
23. Financial management centralized?
24. Selection: process & criteria for student participants: liability impacts/program impacts
25. Tension between filling a program and making best student selection/choice
26. Current evaluation tools being utilized
27. Continuity from year-to-year in some programs/international partnerships
28. Programs with only one leader; ability to train up new leaders
OPPORTUNITIES
1. Direction of General Education Program
2. Connecting with ISSO
3. Utilizing returning students
4. Financial Independence (?)
5. Externship Programs
6. Service Learning
7. Current trends toward visioning and data collection (analysis) assessment
8. General education alignment integration with G.E.P. goals
9. Variety of international experiences
10. System-wide cooperation (?)
11. International students on study abroad
12. Developing synergies with foreign languages and other departments to prepare and
promote students to study abroad
13. On-line resources to prepare leaders and students
14. Scholarship/Foundation/Development
15. Connecting to FYS
16. Graduate students as assistant/leader
17. Faculty leader shared by colleagues/splitting semester
18. Advertising/Recruitment structures – options on campus:
a. as part of advising
b. in classes, etc.
19. (On-line) returning student classes helping with recruitment
20. Faculty recruitment efforts
21. Coordinating international travel & contacts; developing institutional connections
22. Developing leaders trough workshops, etc.
23. Models developed for multi-disciplinary, interdisciplinary programming
Page 32 of 70
THREATS
1. Changing mindset of students toward travel abroad
2. Financial vulnerability
3. Budgetary support for leaders to develop programs & manage & recruit & release time
4. International problems: terrorism, health, natural disasters
5. Cost increases = Market Forces
6. U.S. currency fluctuation
7. Academic Tourism
8. Changes to Financial Aid
9. Financial impact of the international crises
10. Structure of Advising: When to fit into a student’s study plan: Time to Degree
11. Maintaining our partnerships – consistency of academic programs
GLOBAL
1. Recognition of Study Abroad related to tenure/promotion
Page 33 of 70
Appendix 3: Student Survey Report
Background Information
Organization: International Programs Office, University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point
Researchers: Eric Yonke, PhD, Director of IP Office, UWSP
Ekaterina Leek, MS, Research Assistant
Timeframe: December, 2010 – May, 2011
Survey Process Phases:
• December, 2011 – January, 2011: Design of the survey with feedback and input from
the International Affairs Subcommittee members.
Implemented by: Dr. Yonke
• February, 2011 – April, 2011: Data Collection
Implemented by: Dr. Yonke
• April, 2011 – May, 2011: Data cleanup and analysis
Implemented by: Dr. Yonke, Ekaterina Leek
Sample: Student Population at UWSP taking courses from the faculty members who agreed to
survey participants during their class time. Priority was given to general Education Courses with
majority students taking General Education Courses in their First and Sophomore Years.
Data Collection Tools: Turning Technologies Interactive Polling Software.
Data Analysis Tools: Minitab Statistical Software
Page 34 of 70
Survey Description
Introduction
The student survey was conducted as a part of a larger strategic planning process that the IP
office has been engaged in since [] 2010. It was essential to learn opinions of student population
and faculty members as main audiences that the IP Office serves. [elaborate here]
The goal of the student survey was to assess student needs in and attitudes toward study abroad,
the place of study abroad in their college plans and to [to be completed]…
The objectives of the survey were:[or to be completed]
1. To gather demographic information relevant for analysis of the survey results, such as
students’ declared majors and year at UWSP.
2. To study student attitudes toward study abroad in alignment with their academic plans,
career plans and graduate school plans.
3. To gather information on students’ preexistent international experiences, as well as their
perception of their family’s view of study abroad.
4. To gather information on students’ perceived plans to study abroad.
5. To gather information on students’ views of significance of study abroad as a part of their
college education/experience.
6. To learn about students’ obstacles to study abroad.
7. To learn about students’ familiarity with UWSP study abroad offerings.
8. To learn about student geographical and logistical preferences of study abroad, such as
geographical destination, program duration, academic preferences etc.
The survey consists of 25 questions combined in sections defined by objectives. The detailed
description of survey results by each question will be offered in the next chapter of this report.
Sample [to be explained]
Software Choice [to be explained]
Data Gathering Process [to be described]
Note about skipped questions []
Page 35 of 70
Survey Results by Question.
I. Demographic Section.
1. Respondents’ year at college.
Q.1: Indicate your student status:
First Year
Student
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Super Senior
Other
Total
NN
%
318
214
116
106
40
5
40
839
37.9
25.51
13.83
12.63
4.77
0.6
4.77
Comments: The responses of a representative random sample of 839 students were gathered in
10 data collection sessions. 67.24% of the sample are students in their first, sophomore and
junior years. The majority of students at UWSP study abroad during those years.
2. Respondents’ Major Distribution by College
Q.2: Do you have a declared major?
COFAC
CLS
CNR
CPS
No - not
declared
No - in
transition
Total
N
117
213
85
269
%
13.95
25.39
10.13
32.06
87
10.37
44
24
839
5.24
2.86
Page 36 of 70
3. Respondents’ Distribution by Major in Discipline.
Q.3: My major is primarily in:
Fine arts
Humanities
Physical sciences
Social sciences
Professional
studies
Not
sure/undeclared
Total
N
49
45
221
107
%
5.84
5.36
26.34
12.75
299
35.64
95
23
839
11.32
2.74
4. Previous Study Abroad Experience.
Q.4: Have you already studied abroad (meaning you earned academic credit):
No
Yes
Total
N
796
33
10
839
%
94.87
3.93
1.19
5. Study Abroad Plans
Q.5: I am definitely planning to study abroad before I graduate:
N
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Total
142
139
216
163
169
10
839
%
16.92
16.57
25.74
19.43
20.14
1.19
Page 37 of 70
6. Benefits of study abroad for academic achievement.
Q.6: “Study abroad would make me a better student”
Count Percent
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
N=
176
268
243
59
44
49
839
20.98
31.94
28.96
7.03
5.24
5.84
7. Benefits of study abroad for a resume
Q.7: “A study abroad experience would look really good on my resume”
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
N=
Count
204
267
254
75
26
13
839
Percent
24.31
31.82
30.27
8.94
3.10
1.55
8. Benefits of study abroad for future employment
Q.8: “A study abroad experience would make me more employable for the career I want to
pursue.”
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
N=
Count
204
267
254
75
26
13
839
Percent
24.31
31.82
30.27
8.94
3.10
1.55
Page 38 of 70
9. Benefits of study abroad for future graduate education
Q.9: “Study abroad would help prepare me for the graduate school programs that I want to
pursue.”
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
-
N=
Count
86
179
366
120
59
29
Percent
10.25
21.33
43.62
14.30
7.03
3.46
839
10. International background
Q. 10: “What have been your “international experiences”? Choose as many as apply
Traveled more than once
Interact with international
students
Family hosted international
students
Involved in international club
Plan international service/trip
None apply
N=
251
29.91%
98
11.79%
109
41
133
295
178
1105
13%
5%
15.97%
35.16%
21.21%
11. Peers and siblings international experiences
Q.11: Do you have friends or a sister or brother who studied abroad?
No
Friends only
Siblings only
Friends and siblings
N=
Count
222
409
29
96
83
839
Percent
26.46
48.75
3.46
11.44
9.89
12. Family’s international background
Page 39 of 70
Q. 12: Did your mother or father study abroad?
Yes
No/don't think so
N=
Count
65
721
53
839
Percent
7.75
85.94
6.32
13.
Q.13: Have you discussed a specific study abroad opportunity with your family?
No
Yes
N=
Count
Percent
482
316
41
839
57.45
37.66
4.89
14.
Q.14 Which statement most closely describes your family’s view of study abroad?
Want me to go
Good complement
They are neutral
Not affordable extra
Opposed to SA
travel is dangerous
N=
Count
118
198
258
191
14
34
26
839
Percent
14.06
23.60
30.75
22.77
1.67
4.05
3.10
Family's View of Study Abroad
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
30.75
23.6
22.77
14.06
1.67
3.1
4.05
Page 40 of 70
15. View of study abroad as a part of education/college experience
Q.15 Which statement most closely describes your view of study abroad?
Count
109
314
156
202
24
4
30
839
SA is essential
Good complement
I'm neutral
Not affordable extra
I'm opposed to it
Safety concerns
N=
Percent
12.99
37.43
18.59
24.08
2.86
0.48
3.58
16) What is the biggest hurdle [further down: needs formatting]
Count
479
96
155
72
37
839
Financing
Time to completion
Personal obligations
Coping w/being away
N=
Percent
57.09
11.44
18.47
8.58
4.41
17) Can you afford it?
I can afford it
Enough Debt
Don't plan for loans
No family support
No value of SA
N=
Count
260
321
110
34
78
36
839
Percent
30.99
38.26
13.11
4.05
9.30
4.29
18) Information from IP office
Haven't heard much
Not sure where
Received enough
Info inundated
N=
Count
66
200
425
107
41
839
Percent
7.87
23.84
50.66
12.75
4.89
Page 41 of 70
19) Information from adviser
Instructor in person
Adviser in person
Instructors in class
Nobody mentioned
N=
Count Percent
26
3.10
79
9.42
528
62.93
161
19.19
45
5.36
839
20) Familiarity with IP office
Never contacted IP
IP not helpful
IP helpful
Appl difficulties
Application started
Studied Abroad
N=
21)
Count
655
19
66
7
29
25
38
839
Percent
78.07
2.26
7.87
0.83
3.46
2.98
4.53
Location
Central America
South America
Western Europe
Eastern Europe
Australia
East Asia
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Middle East/North Af
N=
Count
20
40
341
46
264
31
14
30
20
33
839
Percent
2.38
4.77
40.64
5.48
31.47
3.69
1.67
3.58
2.38
3.93
22) The Best Time
Fall semester
Spring semester
Winterim program
Spring break program
Summer program
N=
Count
135
210
179
77
203
35
839
Percent
16.09
25.03
21.33
9.18
24.20
4.17
Page 42 of 70
23) The Best Type
Semester/UWSP facult
Direct enrollment
Foreign lang enroll
Short-term/UWSP
N=
Count
137
260
33
34
375
839
Percent
16.33
30.99
3.93
4.05
44.70
24) The Best Fit
Major focused prog
GDR/Major combined
Wide electives range
N=
Count
314
327
163
35
839
Percent
37.43
38.97
19.43
4.17
25) SA- major requirements: will you go?
I'd go
I'd consider options
I wouldn't go
N=
Count
311
405
98
25
839
Percent
37.07
48.27
11.68
2.98
Page 43 of 70
Findings and Suggestions
Student attitudes toward benefits of study abroad for academic performance and
career
Overall results show that students see study abroad experience as positive and beneficial.
53% of respondents agree (question 6) that study abroad will be valuable for their
academic performance (“make them a better student”). However, a high percentage of
respondents remained neutral (29%) or skipped this question (5.8%), which might be a
sign that students are not sure if study abroad will help their academic progress.
Comparison to study abroad evaluation data gathered over the past 5 years might be
useful to further investigate the question of students’ perceptions of academic benefits of
study abroad programs.
Page 44 of 70
Similar results are seen in the responses to the question of whether study abroad will
make students more employable after graduation: 55% of respondents answered
agree/strongly agree, whereas 30% remained neutral, 13% disagree/strongly disagree and
1.67% skipped this question. Again, a relatively high percent of neutral responses
suggests that students might not be familiar or aware of the connection between study
abroad and career . Considering that majority (97%) of entering UWSP students indicated
that their main goal of education is career improvement [reference here from UWSP
R&R website], the IP office might consider taking steps in increasing student awareness
on this topic. One way to address this issue would be collaboration with UWSP Career
Services. On the other hand, research of professional literature and a possible research at
UWSP Colleges and Departments that do not have strong presence in international
programs, but would benefit from study abroad for their field of study and therefore for
students’ future employability, e.g. Geography majors [+data from majors database] will
open new opportunities, new directions and new programs.
Students’ views on the significance of study abroad as a part of their college
education/experience
In response to question 15: “Which statement most closely describes your view of study abroad”,
the largest percent of respondents (37.43%) indicated that study abroad is a good complement,
while 24 % indicated that it is not an affordable extra and 18% remained neutral. Along with the
responses for question 5 about plans to study abroad while at UWSP, the compared numbers of
responses represent a prospective audience for the IP office:
View of Study Abroad
37.43
40
35
30
25
20
15
24.08
18.59
12.99
10
5
0
2.86
SA is
essential
Good
complement
I'm neutral
Not
affordable
extra
I'm opposed
to it
0.48
Safety
concerns
3.58
-
Page 45 of 70
I am definitely planning to
study abroad
30
25.74
25
20
19.43
16.92
20.14
16.57
15
10
5
1.19
0
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
-
The numbers of positive responses to questions about plans to study abroad and about views of
study abroad show favorable attitudes of sampled student population to study abroad.
Responses to question 13, “Have you discussed a specific study abroad opportunity with your
family” and to question 14, “Which statement most closely describes your family’s view of study
abroad” can also be interpreted as a positive trend in students’ and their families’ perceptions of
study abroad: 37.66% of students indicated that they discussed a specific study abroad
opportunity with their family, 14% of the respondents indicated that their family “really wants
them to go”, and 23.6% of the families see study abroad as a good complement to a university
degree. In comparison to the percentage of students currently participating in study abroad (1820% of all students enrolled) at UWSP, the data from the survey show that more students are
interested in study abroad than participate.
Page 46 of 70
Study Abroad discussed with Family
70
57.45
60
50
37.66
40
30
20
4.89
10
0
Yes
No
-
Family's View of Study Abroad
30.75
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
23.6
14.06
ge
ro
us
SA
to
ex
da
n
d
Tr
a
ve
l is
os
e
O
pp
ot
a
N
Th
e
y
ffo
r
ar
e
da
bl
e
ne
u
em
pl
co
m
d
G
oo
tra
l
tra
en
t
go
to
e
4.05
-
3.1
1.67
tm
W
an
•
•
22.77
Perceived Challenges to Study Abroad
[]
Study Abroad Preferences
Time: Short vs. Long
Major Requirements
[]
Page 47 of 70
Appendix 4: Faculty Survey Report
Background Information
Organization: International Programs Office, University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point
Researchers: Eric Yonke, PhD, Director of IP Office
Ekaterina Leek, MS, Research Assistant
Timeframe: March, 2011 – May, 2011
Survey Process Phases:
• March – April, 2011: Design of the survey with feedback and input from the
International Affairs Subcommittee members.
Implemented by: Dr. Yonke, Ekaterina Leek
• April, 2011: Data Collection
Implemented by: Dr. Yonke
• May, 2011 – June, 2011: Data cleanup and analysis
Implemented by: Ekaterina Leek
Sample: Self-selected sample
Data Collection Tools: Online survey software SelectSurvey.NET
Data Analysis Tools: PASW Statistic Software
Page 48 of 70
Introduction
The faculty survey was conducted as a part of a larger strategic planning process that the IP
office has been engaged in since October, 2010. The goal of the survey was to learn about
faculty perceptions of study abroad, the place of study abroad in the institutional culture, and
preferences and challenges in leading study abroad programs. In comparison to the student
survey that studied students’ views and perceptions of study abroad opportunities, the faculty
survey was mostly focused around faculty needs for leading a study abroad program, and
program preferences. This report analyzes the results of the respondents who indicated that they
have a teaching appointment, as the majority of study abroad leaders are instructional staff.
Summary
The responses of self-selected sample of faculty and staff were gathered using online software
ClassApps.com during April, 2011. After the data gathering process, the responses of
instructional staff with the status “complete” were analyzed using PASW statistics software
(former SPSS). The response rate was 21.5% of the entire instructional staff at UWSP.
The goal of the survey was to learn about faculty perceptions of study abroad, the place of study
abroad in the institutional culture, and preferences and challenges in leading study abroad
programs. The majority of respondents indicated that study abroad is a good complement to
university education and is the best way to develop global citizens. Academically, preferences
were given to programs and internships that focus on major requirements or combine general
education courses with major requirements. Spring semester was chosen as a slightly better
option among semester-long programs for most students, and the most popular were short-term
summer programs both for students and leaders. The majority of respondents consider study
abroad to be an important professional development opportunity with personal enrichment and
teaching opportunity as the main reasons to lead study abroad. Personal obligations at home and
financial considerations were voted to be the largest challenges for faculty and staff to lead both
semester and short-term study abroad programs with added department support and replacement
challenge for leading a semester program. Half of the sampled audience agreed that study abroad
deserves significant recognition in evaluation, promotion and tenure decision, and 44.6 % do not
perceive administrative barriers preventing them in leading study abroad. However 30% of
respondents agree that administrative barriers make it difficult to lead study abroad.
Page 49 of 70
The majority of respondents would like to lead a study abroad program to Western Europe or
Australia/New Zealand. However interest was shown in each region indicated in the survey. 60%
of respondents are interested in leading either fall or spring semester study abroad, while the
most popular choice among short programs is summer, and the least popular choice was spring
break.
Page 50 of 70
Thematic Overview of the Results
I. Demographics
1. Sample representation: 21.5% of UWSP instructional staff participated in the
survey.
What is your employment status at UWSP?
Frequency
Valid
Administrator
Percent
1
1.0
Assistant Professor
20
19.8
Associate Professor
23
22.8
Full Professor
33
32.7
5
5.0
19
18.8
101
100.0
Staff - Classified
Staff - Unclassified
Total
UWSP
Instructional
Staff Count 1
469
Sample/
UWSP %
21.5
1
Common Data Set 2010-2011, retrieved from
https://campus.uwsp.edu/sites/chancellor/policyplanning/web/Documents/CDS2010_2011.pdf
Page 51 of 70
2. College Distribution
I teach in . . .
Other: My teaching is not
defined by these categories.
the fine arts.
the humanities.
the physical sciences.
the professional studies.
the social sciences.
Total
Frequency
25
Percent
24.8
6
24
15
14
17
101
5.9
23.8
14.9
13.9
16.8
100.0
3. Study Abroad Experience
Have you led a study abroad program at UWSP?
No
Yes, I have led multiple
semester long programs.
Yes, I have led one shortterm program.
Yes, I have led both shortterm and semester long
programs.
Yes, I have led multiple
short-term programs.
Yes, I have led one
semester long program.
Total
Frequency
58
4
Percent
57.4
4.0
7
6.9
9
8.9
11
10.9
12
11.9
101
100.0
II. View of Study Abroad as a Part of College Experience for Students
The majority of respondents indicated that study abroad experience is a good complement to
university education (56.4%) and an essential part of undergraduate education (39.6%).
Which statement most closely describes your view of study abroad?
Frequency
Valid
I'm really neutral about it.
It is a good complement to a
Percent
1
1.0
57
56.4
3
3.0
40
39.6
101
100.0
university education.
It is an 'extra'.
It is an essential part of
undergraduate education.
Total
Page 52 of 70
III. Study Abroad and Global Citizenship
The majority of respondents (87%) agree that global citizenship is important, and 59% agree that
study abroad is the best way to develop global citizens, while 27.7% view study abroad as only
one way to develop global citizens.
Which statement comes closest to your view of study abroad and global citizenship?
Frequency
Global citizenship is
important to our curriculum
and study abroad is the best
way to develop global
citizens.
Global citizenship is
important, but study abroad
is only one way to develop
global citizens and only for a
minority of students.
I prefer to remain neutral on
the global citizenship issue.
While global citizenship is
laudable as a curriculum
goal, it remains secondary or
tertiary to other essential
items.
Total
1
60
Percent
1.0
59.4
28
27.7
6
5.9
6
5.9
101
100.0
IV. Working with Students
1. Advising Students on Study Abroad
The majority of respondents speak about study abroad to individual students either frequently
(37.62%), or occasionally (30. 69%), 9% announce it in their classes, 9% do not know much
about study abroad opportunities and 13.86% know about study abroad but do not announce it in
classes.
Page 53 of 70
2.
Program Choice for Students: Academics
Preference was given to programs that focus on major requirements or combine general
education requirements with a few courses in their major, as well as to an internship or
externship that meets a major requirement.
Academically, which program types are best for the students with whom you work?
(One that allows students to focus primarily on course work in their majors)
Frequency
Valid
No Opinion
Percent
11
10.9
3
3.0
OK for Most
29
28.7
OK for Some
24
23.8
Probably Best
34
33.7
101
100.0
Not a Good Option
Total
Academically, which program types are best for the students with whom you work?
(One that combines general education requirements with a few courses in their major)
Frequency
Valid
No Opinion
Percent
12
11.9
6
5.9
OK for Most
35
34.7
OK for Some
14
13.9
Probably Best
34
33.7
101
100.0
Not a Good Option
Total
Academically, which program types are best for the students with whom you work? (A
general educational program with one independent study option)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
No Opinion
13
12.9
Not a Good Option
17
16.8
OK for Most
29
28.7
OK for Some
33
32.7
Probably Best
9
8.9
101
100.0
Total
Page 54 of 70
Academically, which program types are best for the students with whom you work? (An
internship or externship that meets a major requirements)
Frequency
Valid
No Opinion
Percent
10
9.9
6
5.9
OK for Most
29
28.7
OK for Some
30
29.7
Probably Best
26
25.7
101
100.0
Not a Good Option
Total
3. Program Choice for Students by Term
Preference was given to summer programs and the least favorite choice was spring break.
Which academic term is best for the students with whom you work? (A fall semester
program)
Frequency
Valid
No Opinion
Percent
27
26.7
9
8.9
OK for Most
22
21.8
OK for Some
25
24.8
Probably Best
18
17.8
101
100.0
Not a Good Option
Total
Which academic term is best for the students with whom you work? (A spring semester
program)
Frequency
Valid
No Opinion
Percent
26
25.7
9
8.9
OK for Most
27
26.7
OK for Some
24
23.8
Probably Best
15
14.9
101
100.0
Not a Good Option
Total
Page 55 of 70
Which academic term is best for the students with whom you work? (A summer
program)
Frequency
Valid
No Opinion
Percent
21
20.8
5
5.0
OK for Most
28
27.7
OK for Some
17
16.8
Probably Best
30
29.7
101
100.0
Not a Good Option
Total
Which academic term is best for the students with whom you work? (A Winterim
program)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
No Opinion
22
21.8
Not a Good Option
10
9.9
OK for Most
16
15.8
OK for Some
30
29.7
Probably Best
23
22.8
101
100.0
Total
Which academic term is best for the students with whom you work? (A spring break
program)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
No Opinion
26
25.7
Not a Good Option
20
19.8
OK for Most
16
15.8
OK for Some
29
28.7
Probably Best
10
9.9
101
100.0
Total
Page 56 of 70
4. Perceptions of Students’ Challenges to Studying Abroad
The majority of respondents (95%) agree that finances are the major challenge to studying
abroad for their students along with need to complete their degree “on time” (73%).
Personal obligations at home and insecurity and fear of the unknown might not affect their
students’ decision to study abroad as much as the financial issues, and the majority of
respondents indicate that their students are adequately prepared to take full advantage of the
opportunity.
The following issues may negatively affect your STUDENTS' decision to study abroad:
(Financing the opportunity)
Frequency
Agree
96
95.0
5
5.0
101
100.0
Neutral/ No Opinion
Total
Percent
The following issues may negatively affect your STUDENTS' decision to study abroad:
(Completing their degree 'on time')
Frequency
Agree
73
72.3
7
6.9
21
20.8
101
100.0
Disagree
Neutral/ No Opinion
Total
Percent
The following issues may negatively affect your STUDENTS' decision to study abroad:
(Taking care of personal obligations here)
Frequency
Agree
Disagree
Neutral/ No Opinion
Total
Percent
64
63.4
6
5.9
31
30.7
101
100.0
Page 57 of 70
The following issues may negatively affect your STUDENTS' decision to study abroad:
(Being adequately prepared to take full advantage of the opportunity)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
37
36.6
Disagree
25
24.8
Neutral/ No Opinion
39
38.6
101
100.0
Total
The following issues may negatively affect your STUDENTS' decision to study abroad:
(Insecurity/fear of unknown culture/language/people)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
56
55.4
Disagree
15
14.9
Neutral/ No Opinion
30
29.7
101
100.0
Total
Page 58 of 70
V. Study Abroad and Institutional Culture
1. Departmental Support and Promotion of Study Abroad
The majority of respondents (54.5%) agree that their department actively advises students into
study abroad.
Evaluate the following statements for your unit/department. My unit/department . . .
(actively advises students into study abroad programs)
Frequency
-
Percent
1
1.0
Agree
35
34.7
Disagree
14
13.9
Neutral/ No Opinion
28
27.7
Strongly Agree
20
19.8
3
3.0
101
100.0
Strongly Disagree
Total
Departmental support for faculty who is willing to lead study abroad programs differs for shortterm programs and semester- long programs. While 45.5% of respondents indicated that lack of
support by their departments may impact their decision to lead a semester abroad, only 23.8%
agree that lack of departmental support can be a reason preventing them to lead a short-term
program. However, a high percentage of neutral responses (38.6%) to the question about
departmental support and leading a short-term program might indicate that respondents are not
sure about their departments’ support for short-term programs.
50% of respondents agree that it is important for their departments that they stay on campus
during academic year and 59.4% agree that replacement issues might negatively affect their
ability to lead a semester abroad.
Page 59 of 70
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SEMESTER abroad:
(Department support for leading)
Frequency
Percent
Agree
46
45.5
Disagree
28
27.7
Neutral/No Opinion
27
26.7
101
100.0
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SHORT-TERM study
program (summer, Winterim, spring break):
(Department support for leading a
program)
Frequency
Percent
Agree
24
23.8
Disagree
38
37.6
Neutral/ No Opinion
39
38.6
101
100.0
Total
I would like to lead a semester abroad program, but it is important to my unit that I stay
on campus for the regular academic year.
Frequency
Percent
Agree
28
27.7
Disagree
24
23.8
No Opinion
20
19.8
Strongly Agree
23
22.8
6
5.9
101
100.0
Strongly Disagree
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SEMESTER abroad:
(Replacement problems/colleague coverage in my department)
Frequency
Percent
Agree
60
59.4
Disagree
21
20.8
Neutral/No Opinion
20
19.8
101
100.0
Total
Page 60 of 70
2. Recognition of Leading Study Abroad
The majority of respondents (66.3%) agree that study abroad deserves significant recognition in
evaluation, promotion and tenure decision, and 44.6 % do not perceive administrative barriers
preventing them in leading study abroad. However 30% of respondents agree that administrative
barriers make it difficult to lead study abroad.
Leading study abroad deserves significant recognition in evaluation, promotion and
tenure decisions.
Frequency
Agree
Percent
36
35.6
8
7.9
Neutral
24
23.8
Strongly Agree
31
30.7
2
2.0
101
100.0
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Total
I would like to lead a study abroad program, but the administrative barriers make it
difficult.
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
19
18.8
Disagree
30
29.7
No Opinion
25
24.8
Strongly Agree
12
11.9
Strongly Disagree
15
14.9
101
100.0
Total
Page 61 of 70
3. Challenges for Leading Study Abroad
Personal obligations at home and financial considerations were voted to be the largest challenges
for faculty and staff to lead both semester and short-term study abroad programs with added
department support and replacement challenge for leading a semester program and other
professional obligations for short-term programs
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SEMESTER abroad:
(Financial considerations)
Frequency
Percent
Agree
66
65.3
Disagree
11
10.9
Neutral/No Opinion
24
23.8
101
100.0
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SEMESTER abroad:
(Personal obligations at home)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
83
82.2
Disagree
12
11.9
6
5.9
101
100.0
Neutral/No Opinion
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SEMESTER abroad:
(Personal interest in leading)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
36
35.6
Disagree
45
44.6
Neutral/No Opinion
20
19.8
101
100.0
Total
Page 62 of 70
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SEMESTER abroad:
(Department support for leading)
Frequency
Percent
Agree
46
45.5
Disagree
28
27.7
Neutral/No Opinion
27
26.7
101
100.0
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SEMESTER abroad:
(Replacement problems/colleague coverage in my department)
Frequency
Percent
Agree
60
59.4
Disagree
21
20.8
Neutral/No Opinion
20
19.8
101
100.0
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SEMESTER abroad:
(No value toward merit/tenure/promotion consideration)
Frequency
Percent
Agree
18
17.8
Disagree
33
32.7
Neutral/No Opinion
50
49.5
101
100.0
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SHORT-TERM study
program (summer, Winterim, spring break):
Frequency
(Financial considerations)
Percent
Agree
55
54.5
Disagree
19
18.8
Neutral/ No Opinion
27
26.7
101
100.0
Total
Page 63 of 70
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SHORT-TERM study
program (summer, Winterim, spring break): (Personal obligations at home)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
60
59.4
Disagree
21
20.8
Neutral/ No Opinion
20
19.8
101
100.0
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SHORT-TERM study
program (summer, Winterim, spring break): (Personal interest in leading a program
during a break period or off-contract period)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
38
37.6
Disagree
39
38.6
Neutral/ No Opinion
24
23.8
101
100.0
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SHORT-TERM study
program (summer, Winterim, spring break): (Department support for leading a program)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
24
23.8
Disagree
38
37.6
Neutral/ No Opinion
39
38.6
101
100.0
Total
Page 64 of 70
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SHORT-TERM study
program (summer, Winterim, spring break): (Other professional obligations)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
47
46.5
Disagree
25
24.8
Neutral/ No Opinion
29
28.7
101
100.0
Total
The following issues may negatively impact my decision to lead a SHORT-TERM study
program (summer, Winterim, spring break):
(No value toward merit/tenure/promotion
considerations)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Agree
18
17.8
Disagree
36
35.6
Neutral/ No Opinion
47
46.5
101
100.0
Total
Page 65 of 70
VI. Study Abroad Preferences
The majority of respondents would like to lead a study abroad program to Western Europe or
Australia/New Zealand. However interest was shown in each region indicated in the survey. 60%
of respondents are interested in leading either fall or spring semester study abroad, while the
most popular choice among short programs is summer, and least popular choice is spring break.
If you could lead study abroad, where would you prefer to lead a group (first choice)?
Frequency
-
Percent
7
6.9
22
21.8
East Asia
6
5.9
Eastern Europe
8
7.9
Mexico or Central America
5
5.0
South America
4
4.0
South/Southeast Asia
5
5.0
Sub-Saharan Africa
4
4.0
40
39.6
101
100.0
Australia-New Zealand,
South Pacific
Western Europe
Total
Page 66 of 70
If you could lead a study abroad program, when would you want to lead? Evaluate
the following choices for leading a study abroad program: (A fall semester program)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Interested
32
31.7
Not Interested
40
39.6
Very Interested
29
28.7
101
100.0
Total
If you could lead a study abroad program, when would you want to lead? Evaluate
the following choices for leading a study abroad program: (A spring semester
program)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Interested
30
29.7
Not Interested
41
40.6
Very Interested
30
29.7
101
100.0
Total
If you could lead a study abroad program, when would you want to lead? Evaluate
the following choices for leading a study abroad program: (A summer program)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Interested
31
30.7
Not Interested
31
30.7
Very Interested
39
38.6
101
100.0
Total
If you could lead a study abroad program, when would you want to lead? Evaluate
the following choices for leading a study abroad program: (A Winterim program)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Interested
27
26.7
Not Interested
47
46.5
Very Interested
27
26.7
101
100.0
Total
Page 67 of 70
If you could lead a study abroad program, when would you want to lead? Evaluate
the following choices for leading a study abroad program: (A spring break program)
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Interested
29
28.7
Not Interested
56
55.4
Very Interested
16
15.8
101
100.0
Total
VII.
Why bother?
To be personally enriched! :)
Page 68 of 70
Page 69 of 70
Page 70 of 70