Dr. Lee Sternberger
Assistant to the Vice President
September 2002

Global Education at James Madison University
Table of Contents
Introduction…………………………………………………………..3 I.
II.
Global Education at James Madison University and Beyond…….6
Recommendations…………………………………………………....9
III.
Administrative Structure and Planning…………………………...14
Recommendations…………………………………………………..15
IV.
Global Education and Faculty Development……………………...17
Recommendations…………………………………………………..18
V.
Global Education and Curriculum Development………………...21
Recommendations…………………………………………………..21
VI.
Funding and Assessment of Global Education…………………....25
Recommendations…………………………………………………..25
VII.
Source Documents………………………………………………….28
2

Global Education at James Madison University 3
I. Introduction:
The Potential and Promise of Global Education at James Madison University
Our time is now! Because global renewal or rebirth is dependent upon education. Madison, himself, believed that education diminished prejudice, encouraged ingenuity and multiplied opportunity for social harmony. That is why we shouldn’t restrict our enrollment to those just like us. Instead, we should invite learners from other cultures and other lands. That is why our native students need to know students from countries other than their own and why they should study abroad.
Dr. Linwood Rose
President, James Madison University
Faculty Address, August 24, 2001
As President Rose declares, we at James Madison University have both an opportunity and obligation to facilitate and participate in a wider process of “global renewal or rebirth.” This charge is ours not only because our namesake embodied the highest and best of an enlightened citizenry, but also because our legacy as a community of innovation and distinction has prepared us well for this timely calling.
The essential ethic of James Madison University has always included a profound commitment to learning, service, innovation, and responsiveness to the needs of our larger community, broadly defined. This tradition is articulated in our mission statement, which maintains, “We are committed to preparing students to be educated and enlightened citizens who lead productive and meaningful lives.” In this respect, the JMU Centennial Commission—established by President
Rose—clearly emphasized the valued role of global education at JMU in its 1999 report. In addition to frequent reference to an “increasingly global society” that is “rapidly changing,” the
Commission highlights the prominence and relevance of global education through Core
Characteristics III, IV, and V.
For example, Core Characteristic III—A Harmonious and Diverse Environment—maintains that:
JMU will be a diverse community that fosters an understanding of and respect for differences and provides opportunities for interaction with people from many different backgrounds, and prepares members of the university community to live and work in a globally-interdependent world.
These aspirations are codified further in the “defining characteristics” of JMU, which describe our institution as a “diverse community whose members share a common JMU experience”
(characteristic 7) in which we will “develop and offer international experiences that enhance the global awareness of the student” (characteristic 29). Among other specific priorities, the
Commission recommends that JMU “Increase the number of minority and international speakers selected for programs that sponsor speakers on campus” (III.2.1), “Increase international exchange opportunities for faculty, administrators and staff, where appropriate” (III.2.2), and
“Expand our current international programs in order to increase the number of students studying abroad and the number of international students attending JMU by 2008” (III.2.3).

Global Education at James Madison University 4
These relevant means and ends have been emphasized in other recent and pertinent contexts, as well. For example, at a state level, the Virginia Council for International Education (VACIE) was established to study and promote these very issues, mainly because:
Our country’s continued peace and prosperity depends upon government officials, businesspersons, and citizens who are competent in international issues. The United
States needs many more citizens who understand how other peoples think, how other cultures work, and how other societies are likely to respond to U.S. actions…The key lesson learned to date is that whether the issue involves the European, Asian, African, or
American worlds, whether it touches on diplomacy, foreign affairs, or commerce and finance—what nations do not know can hurt them…For successful workforces and congenial communities, it behooves us all to increase our understanding of other cultures and our comfort with cultural diversity…In other words, we need a strong international education program.
Our governor, Mark Warner, has repeatedly emphasized similar themes about the inevitability and need for international exchange in a number of forums, including his May 2002 speech to our graduating class. Here at JMU, our Commission on Community exists to emphasize diversity and internationalization of the curriculum, a perspective that received strong support from the June, 2002 report of the General Education External Team, which recommended that:
The University should reaffirm its commitment to diversity, by proclaiming—in word and deed—acceptance of the reality that our students will live in a world that is diverse, both within the United States and elsewhere in the world. The bold new General Education curriculum provides a remarkable opportunity to incorporate both a worldview and a deeper understanding of the uneven power relationships that are inherent in a diverse society.
Clearly, numerous individuals and constituencies—both internal and external to our institution— have recognized that global education is integral to the mission and objectives of James Madison
University. In this regard, the tragic events of September 11 th
, 2001 confirm the grave relevance of this emphasis for higher education in general, and our institution in particular. Students, faculty, staff, and administrators at James Madison University are scions of an increasingly global world, in which Madison’s assertion that “knowledge will forever govern ignorance” has a renewed urgency. If ever we needed to “arm” ourselves with “the power which knowledge gives,” this new millenium and era would certainly seem to be such a time. For all of these reasons then, now is a propitious time to reconsider the purpose, place, and process of global education at James Madison University.
This report is divided into five interdependent sections: global education at JMU and beyond, possible administrative structures and planning processes, faculty development, curriculum development, and funding and assessment. Each section begins with context and background

Global Education at James Madison University 5 information, and includes a series of related recommendations.
1
At the outset, it should be noted that this document is not meant to represent the definitive or final word on how James Madison
University can achieve its potential and promise as a leader in global education, but rather should be construed as a beginning effort to catalyze and organize further discussion, planning, and action.
1 The report is derived from the following sources of information: a comprehensive review of approximately 50 “top ranked” and/or innovative global education programs in the United States; conversations with international education leaders at 15 colleges and universities around the country; relevant source documents at JMU (e.g., the
Centennial Commission Report) and in the professional literature (e.g., see the list of source documents at the end of the report); extant global education agencies and organizations; and interviews with over 40 relevant individuals at
JMU.

Global Education at James Madison University 6
II. Global Education at James Madison University and Beyond
The eyes of the world being thus on our Country, it is put the more on its good behaviour, and under the greater obligation also, to do justice to the Tree of Liberty by an exhibition of the fine fruits we gather from it.
James Madison to James Monroe
December 16, 1824
The Office of International Programs (OIP) offers semester abroad programs in London,
Salamanca, and Florence throughout the academic year (fall, spring, and summer) and Paris (fall and spring). A new program in International Business has just been established in Antwerp, and students are currently enrolled for the Fall 2002 semester. In addition, the OIP offers—in conjunction with other individuals and academic units on campus—summer programs in Ghana,
Ireland, Honduras, Malta, Martinique, Rome, Austria, and Scotland (among other locations over the years). The OIP staff assists individual faculty who wish to develop specific global education experiences (e.g., summer programs) for various groups of students. Moreover, the
OIP coordinates international internships and participation in non-JMU study abroad programs, and works collaboratively with the Director of International Student/Faculty Programs to facilitate the experiences of the international members of our campus community. For more information on the many complex activities of this office, consult the OIP website at www.jmu.edu/international/.
James Madison University has been recognized by the Institute for International Education—in their annual “Open Doors” report—for the numbers of students we send abroad each year
(approximately 700 students in 2000/2001); within our “peer group” of “Masters Institutions,” we rank behind only the University of St. Thomas (St. Paul) on this important criterion.
2
Students who participate in our international programs consistently report that this experience is among the most meaningful and relevant of their academic career. At the same time, it should be emphasized that global education has become an increasingly prominent component of a university’s overall portfolio. Consistent with the institutional and societal emphases noted in
Section I, global education/experiences are increasingly an expectation of undergraduate and graduate education and an important criterion used by high school students to select a college or university. For example, a recent (2001) national survey of college-bound seniors, found that:

98% studied a foreign language in high school and planned to continue such studies in college;

86% planned to participate in international courses and programs;

85% believed that proficiency in a foreign language would help them find a better job;

80% believed that acquiring international skills and competencies would help them in the workforce; and
2 It should be noted, however, that relative to overall enrollment, we send a much smaller proportion of our student body abroad than this peer institution.

Global Education at James Madison University 7

75% wanted the institution they attended to offer foreign languages and international courses, study abroad programs, and opportunities to interact with foreign students.
3
Clearly, those universities who respond proactively to these larger trends will attract students who expect a diverse and high quality range of global education options from which to choose.
Moreover, an ethic of flexibility and responsiveness to such interests will allow current and future students to achieve their professional aspirations, which will increasingly include global and international education and experiences.
Therefore, despite our notable accomplishments (e.g., our established programs and the numbers of students sent abroad), it should be recognized that across the United States, many universities
(large and small) have more comprehensive and variegated “global education” programs than
JMU (in Virginia, these include Old Dominion, George Mason, and William and Mary among others).
4 Moreover, universities have either established or have publicly committed to more comprehensive global education opportunities for students; in many cases, such universities have established goals that will dramatically increase the number of students who study abroad at their institutions. Among many other exemplars, the University of Minnesota has committed to a study abroad experience for all of its students; University of Virginia has committed to a goal of
80% of its students studying abroad by 2020; Elon University has a goal of 60% of its students by 2007; and Michigan State set a goal of 40% by 2006. Moreover, a number of colleges and universities have already met significant goals regarding students set abroad: Boston College sends 50% of its student body abroad; William and Mary sends 40%; Oberlin 35-45%; Wesleyan
40%; and Emory over 50%.
5
By way of contrast, approximately 4.5% of the student body at
JMU currently participates in a semester abroad experience each calendar year (or approximately
18% over four years).
6
At a basic level, the implications are clear: if we are to achieve our stated goals (e.g., in our defining characteristics) and remain competitive in attracting, retaining, and educating global citizens, we must move toward greater internationalization of campus activities. More specifically, if we can expand our conceptual framework of global education, create new opportunities, and encourage innovation by faculty and students alike, it would be possible for a majority of students at JMU to have a global education experience prior to graduation, in the
3 This information was taken from A Report on Two National Surveys About International Education (2001), published by the American Council on Education.
4 ODU labels itself as “the state’s gateway to the rest of the world and the world’s gateway to Virginia.” Moreover, a number of Virginia universities are in the process of globalizing campus activities. The University of Virginia began its initiative in the late 1990s, which has since resulted in numerous campus-wide activities, including the appointment of an interim Vice Provost in 2000. Virginia Commonwealth University announced a new Vice
Provost for International Education in May 2002. This job announcement states that, “VCU will focus on increasing its international reputation and presence during the next five years.”
5 Wesleyan, Oberlin, and Emory were among “America’s Hot Schools” published in the 2001 How to Get Into
College guide produced by Newsweek and Kaplan. JMU has been selected as a 2002 “Hot School.”
6 It is difficult to establish the precise number and percentage of JMU students studying abroad. The number of
JMU students studying or working abroad may be higher, given this number does not include service learning, alternative spring break programs, and travel abroad sponsored by an office other than the OIP. Perhaps the most important statistic to calculate is the number of JMU students—at graduation—who have had an academically grounded study abroad experience (including service learning) during their enrollment here. To date, this information has not been gathered.

Global Education at James Madison University 8 form of long-term and short-term study abroad, service learning opportunities and internships, research projects, exposure to international students and faculty, and an internationalized curriculum.
Although the market and milieu for global education has become increasing competitive at the collegiate level, JMU is well positioned to capitalize on its historic strengths in international education, while offering new and innovative opportunities that are both cost-effective and appealing to the undergraduate and graduate students of today. In short, JMU is poised to assume a national and international leadership role in global education. At a general level, guidance on how we might approach this overall task is available from many professional and academic sources, including a rich array of organizations and scholarly forums that can provide ideas, support, and “win-win” solutions for interested institutions such as ours. Along these lines, a recent (2000) document developed by the National Association of State Universities and
Land-Grand Colleges (NASULGC) speaks to these very issues. This report, entitled Expanding the International Scope of Universities , provides a wealth of suggestions and recommendations for universities who wish to develop or upgrade their international curriculum and focus, and move “from conceptualization to implementation.” Among other recommendations, this report advises universities to:
 Make internationalization an integral part of the university’s mission and strategic plan.

Promote greater involvement of all students in significant international education experiences.

Create and maintain a stimulating and supportive academic and cultural environment for international students and scholars.

Increase the international activity of faculty and professional staff;

Internationalize the curriculum.

Assure that research and scholarship pertaining to international matters permeates disciplinary and interdisciplinary fields.

Ensure that international awareness is an integral part of appropriate outreach and extension activities.
7
These recommendations and guidelines indicate that the most successful global education programs—whether generated by individual faculty members or the administrative team—have the support and full participation of the larger university community, and are well integrated into the curriculum. In addition to this report, the American Council on Education and the Center for
Institutional and International Initiatives have published a report entitled Beyond September 11:
A Comprehensive National Policy on International Education . This document highlights that the fact that:
Global peace and prosperity rest now more than ever on mutual understanding and productive engagement among all nations…the attacks of September 11 have brought
America’s international preparedness to a crossroads. The global transformations of the last decade have created an unparalleled need in the United States for expanded
7 National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, Expanding the International Scope of
Universities: A Strategic Vision Statement for Learning, Scholarship and Engagement in the New Century , (2000), p. 1.

Global Education at James Madison University 9 international knowledge and skills. But the nation is unready. And our future success or failure in international endeavors will rely almost entirely on the global competence of our people.
8
Such perspectives are certainly borne out by a systematic review of other “top ranked” international programs around the country, approximately 50 of which were examined for purposes of this report. It is inspiring and occasionally daunting to see the many and varied ways in which the higher education community is responding to the increasing need for global education opportunities and initiatives. At the very least, it is clear that JMU must consider additional and alternative global education opportunities for its students and faculty, and achieve a higher, more campus-wide profile if we are to remain competitive over the long term.
Therefore, the following recommendations are offered on the basis of both general academic, programmatic, and institutional guidance and a specific review of our primary “competitors”: namely, fifty other top-ranked or otherwise innovative international programs across the country.
9
1.
Develop more short-term programs. Shorter programs should not substitute for long-term programs; however, they offer significant flexibility. Many universities exploit all breaks, including summer, spring, and winter break. For example, GMU utilizes all shorter breaks, with select programs open to undergraduates, graduate students, and the public.
The most popular programs run every year/break; others run less frequently.
2.
Consider concurrent programs where able to support them (e.g., London). Programs can run on “alternate semester” schedules (e.g., Liberal Arts in Paris in the spring, Hospitality and Tourism Management in Paris in the fall).
3.
Expand the programs that are already in place/successful (e.g., London). Ithaca College sends 75-80 students to London each semester (a full-time faculty member lives in
London and serves as Director; students live in six-person flats). As another example,
UVA sends 360 students/year to their program in Valencia, Spain (operated in conjunction with the University of Valencia). FSU offers a wide array of courses in their
London program (drawing upon FSU faculty and locals) that include British art, history and culture, nursing, computer science, marketing, speech, advertising, business law, interior design, religion, geology, education, etc. Moreover, a number of FSU’s semester abroad programs are designed this way, to accommodate a very wide range of students/interests (and are open to some graduate students).
4.
Consider more intensive language programs. For example, a set of intensive language courses may be equally effective and more cost efficient than several semesters at JMU.
8 American Council on Education and the Center for Institutional and International Initiatives, Beyond September
11: A Comprehensive National Policy on International Education , (2002), p. 7.
9 Much of this information was gathered from top-ranking schools published in the Institute of International
Education’s annual Open Doors report, which examines the degree to which universities engage in certain types of international activities, including the number of students who study abroad. JMU is ranked second in the number of students sent abroad, when compared with other “Masters Institutions.” Additional information was collected from
Kaplan and Newsweek’s “America’s Hot Schools,” other Virginia colleges and universities, and colleges and universities outside of Virginia.

Global Education at James Madison University 10
George Mason has a number of summer intensive-language study abroad programs that run from two to eight weeks. These are open to undergraduates, graduate students, and the public.
5.
Consider expanding JMU study abroad and language programs to non-Western countries and languages. Although JMU has considerable strengths and a strong presence in
Western Europe, the University has fewer opportunities for study, research, and service learning in non-Western countries/cultures. As the Beyond September 11 report notes,
“Only five percent of all higher education students taking foreign languages study non-
European languages, that is, those spoken by roughly 85 % of the world’s population.” 10
Given the number of JMU faculty with appropriate language skills and connections, the
University may wish to investigate expanding student and faculty opportunities in non-
Western regions, including Asia, Africa, Central and South America, and the Middle
East.
6.
Consider models that combine language and internship/professional development experiences (if language requirements allow it). In other words, there may be a number of students who would like intensive language training and discipline-based activities as well as the opportunity to participate in cultural activities. JMU’s May session program in Malta and semester-long International Business program in Antwerp are based upon integration of cultural and professional experiences.
7.
Develop more internship and service learning opportunities for students who participate in JMU study abroad programs (particularly long-term programs). Ithaca College has developed a number of internships in London, which accommodate a range of student interests. GMU has developed an internship program in conjunction with the United
Nations Volunteers. This program is specifically associated with the UN Information
Technology Service and is based on students going to developing countries to share computer expertise (GMU states that they are the only university to have this arrangement, but perhaps the UN would be interested in other universities). FSU has developed many internship opportunities at almost all of their sites. A small number of these are open to graduate students (e.g., in social work).
8.
Investigate settings in which one program/place can support differing curricular emphases. For example, Istanbul and Berlin (among many other cities) could serve as the hub for a semester-long program in which all students attend a general course on local culture and history, but then branch out into different areas, such as language, government and history, art and architecture, business, area studies, etc. This type of program may work best when tied to a local university or institute.
9.
Consider a fifth year scholarship for a very select number of students, modeled on the
Junior Fulbright program. After developing a study abroad plan (perhaps as an outgrowth of a senior/Honors thesis), students would receive a generous fellowship from
JMU. A program of this sort can be conceptualized as an extension of work at JMU, and preparation for graduate work.
10 American Council on Education, Beyond September 11 , p. 27.

Global Education at James Madison University 11
10.
Develop closer ties to the Honors program. For example, GMU has developed a semester-long study abroad program at Oxford for Honors students only. This program involves a month-long lecture series entitled “British History and Culture” and then two customized tutorials, taught by Oxford dons. GMU’s program was developed in conjunction with the “Oxford Program for Undergraduate Studies” or OPUS. This office works to facilitate US students studying at Oxford for a semester (or longer). Other
American universities also work with OPUS to establish programs there.
11.
Ensure summer semesters are maximally flexible in order to facilitate study abroad and intensive language programs (including the administering of summer financial aid for study abroad). For example, FSU has developed a number of short-term programs (many in London) that run from two to sixteen weeks. These programs are very content-specific
(e.g., comparative employment law, world film, art therapy, topics in social work). FSU also administers short-term programs at their other major study abroad sites (e.g., Paris).
12.
A number of universities open their study-abroad programs to the public (students take the course for credit while the public does not). Although this practice presents complications, JMU may want to investigate this possibility on a limited basis. JMU currently offers a short-term trip to London that is open to the public. Moreover, under the direction of Rich Harris, the Office of Community Service Learning directs a service learning trip to Dominica (a Windward Island in the Caribbean) for alumni. This program is very popular and has led to a number of donations for student service-learning scholarships and programs.
13.
Consider investigating and implementing more exchange programs at the graduate level.
For example, the Combined Doctoral Program at JMU is currently investigating the possibility of a doctoral-level exchange program for its students with British institutions.
14.
Consider developing short-term, content-specific graduate level work. For example, the
University of St. Thomas offers a course entitled “London Risk and Insurance
Management,” for 20 graduate students. St. Thomas had also developed a number of study abroad agreements for graduate students at other foreign universities. FSU has developed a system of graduate-level courses at their major study abroad sites. These courses always include a supervised research component (many are organized in conjunction with short-term undergraduate programs). GMU allows graduate students to participate in many programs; the courses are modified to reflect graduate-level work.
15.
Exploit English-speaking countries/cities (e.g., Dublin, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Australia,
New Zealand, Canada). For example, since a high number of JMU students travel to
Australia each semester (approximately 25), such a country might be a logical contender for a new study abroad program. Moreover, given the success of JMU’s summer program in Ireland, Dublin or Galway might be investigated for semester-long programs.
Similarly, consider foreign universities that offer courses in English (e.g., Sophia and
Tsukuba Universities in Japan). Along these lines, JMU already has relationships with a small number of foreign universities.

Global Education at James Madison University 12
16.
Consider developing programs/experiences in appropriate USA cities/states (e.g.,
Washington, NYC, Hawaii). American University has a rich study program in DC (part of their “World Capitals Program”). Notre Dame has developed a DC program and uses
Boston University space (the Washington Center). It may be possible to re-evaluate
JMU’s program in Washington to strengthen and/or expand opportunities there.
Dartmouth has developed an Earth Sciences program that starts in the Chesapeake Bay, moves to Yellowstone, and ends in the desert basins in the west. George Mason
University has a number of programs in Hawaii (the islands of Oahu, Maui, and Lanai) in
“intercultural communication.” Dartmouth has arranged several exchange programs with other American universities (e.g., Stanford, UCSD) and Canadian universities (e.g.,
McGill). Similarly, Vassar has developed “domestic exchange programs” with eleven top US universities.
17.
Develop more service-learning opportunities. For example, Pepperdine has placement sites in Thailand and Honduras, while Boston College has “service education” opportunities in many countries (mainly volunteer positions). Notre Dame has developed a summer service-learning program (May to August) with sites in Cambodia (various projects of a Catholic mission), Chile (an orphanage), a number of sites in Africa
(medical clinics associated with a Catholic order), Ecuador (with a non-profit working on health issues), Haiti (a hospital), Honduras (children’s home), and other places. Students receive credit for their summer experiences (3 hours) at the 300-level. Service learning, like internships, could be integrated into existing study-abroad programs. Additional global education initiatives would build upon JMU’s strong tradition of service learning and Peace Corps participation.
18.
Develop more teacher-exchange/student teaching opportunities. Miami University has a student teaching abroad program in conjunction with the Department of Defense in
Germany, and a number of private schools in Antwerp, Brussels, Luxembourg, and
Waterloo. Teacher exchanges/student teaching could also be tied to service learning projects.
19.
Develop partnerships with other foreign universities for study abroad, student/faculty exchange programs, and other faculty development opportunities. Many American universities have programs at a range of universities in England, Wales, Ireland,
Scotland, Australia and New Zealand (including Oxford and Cambridge). For example,
UVA has developed a rich three-week program at Oxford (at University College). Each session accommodates 60 students from UVA and elsewhere. Miami University has established a program with Selwyn College at Cambridge (one of the newest colleges there, established 1882). GMU has agreements with a relatively small number of wellselected (in terms of range) foreign universities. In the 2000/2001 academic year, 130
JMU students participated in non-JMU programs (via direct enrollment, consortia agreements, and exchange); that number is up from 35 students in 1996/1997. Thus, there is a clear interest in/need for additional partnerships with foreign universities
(including institutions in which English is not the language of instruction).

Global Education at James Madison University 13
20.
Develop opportunities in the context of faculty research/interests. In this regard, JMU’s summer program in Malta could serve as a model of integrating travel abroad/service learning with specific faculty research interests.
21.
Consider mechanisms for encouraging students of color to engage in more global education opportunities.
22.
Develop relationships (e.g., consortia) with other universities that take students to places we cannot support at present. For example, UVA has a program with Emory to go to
India. State-supported universities in North Carolina have an agreement to share study abroad opportunities in 35 countries (an initiative implemented in 1995).
23.
Develop specific relationships with other Virginia universities in order to sponsor trips together, share resources, and develop faculty connections. For example, William and
Mary participates in UVA’s large Valencia, Spain program.
24.
A number of universities have purchased (or been given) property abroad, and have created international campuses/institutes. For example, Virginia Tech owns the Center for European Studies and Architecture in Switzerland, while Miami University owns the
John E. Dolibois European Center in Luxembourg. FSU owns a seven-building complex in London. Queen’s University in Canada was given a castle near Hastings. Therefore, it seems important to explore the possibility of purchasing or renting large-scale complexes abroad.

Global Education at James Madison University 14
III. Administrative Structure and Planning
You are here to enrich the world, and you impoverish yourself if you forget the mission.
Woodrow Wilson
Many of the top ranked programs in the country demonstrate their commitment to global education in at least four interdependent ways: public declarations of intent (e.g., we aim to offer the best global education programs of their type in the country); articulation of ambitious plans and measurable objectives (e.g., we will serve X number of students in these programs by Y date); strong financial support; and the establishment of a prominent administrative presence and infrastructure. For example, in a recent national survey of four-year institutions in the U.S., 44% include “international education” in their mission statement and 38% list internationalization among their top five priorities.
11
At James Madison University, our impressive accomplishments in international programming are all the more so since by and large, these characteristics do not define our approach. Therefore, of all the recommendations offered in this report, those related to administrative structures and planning processes seem most pertinent, since the success of a more comprehensive approach to global education would seem contingent on planning and organization from the outset.
At present, the Office of International Programs consists of an Executive Director, an Assistant
Director, seven separate Directors, three Area Coordinators, an Administrative Coordinator, an
Enrollment Coordinator, a Programs Assistant, a Program Administrator, and an Administrative
Assistant, who together are responsible for various tasks and initiatives, ranging from the management of internships overseas, to the processing of student visas, to the management of semester-long programs.
12
Staff and directors appear to be effective in the jobs they do, and while considerably stretched in some cases, enjoy the support and respect of the student constituency they serve. From an administrative perspective, then, the challenge for global education at James Madison University is one of integration within the larger academic community, and a more deliberate expression and realization of institutional goals.
Overall, the trend in global education is to organize international activities at a campus-wide level (rather than through targeted but discrete activities), and to designate a centralized office as having an organizing, integrative function in addition to leadership responsibilities in identifying and facilitating university global education initiatives. This tendency appears to result from a growing conviction that international activities and experiences (student and faculty) should be encouraged and expected of the larger community, rather than the province of a small minority; thus, universities are restructuring not only around increasing their portfolio of “international programs,” but around “global education” in general, which is conceptualized as a more encompassing, integrative, and inclusive approach than simply adding or refining opportunities
11 American Council on Education and the Center for Institutional and International Initiatives, The Brave New (and
Smaller) World of Higher Education: A Transatlantic View (2002), p. 21.
12 Five of the seven directors have primary responsibility outside the OIP, but administer an OIP program (e.g., semester in London). The three area coordinators are also assigned primary responsibility outside the OIP. The
Director of International Student/Faculty Programs and the Programs Assistant are not full-time positions. Thus, the
OIP, in effect, is comprised of seven full-time staff members/administrators and two part-time staff members and administrators.

Global Education at James Madison University 15 for study abroad. Along with the enhanced profile and more comprehensive mandate that
“global education” implies, many universities—regardless of size—have established administrative representation at the Dean, Vice Provost, VP, or AVP level, as the following sample of titles/roles illustrates:
Boston College: Director, Office of International Partnerships and Programs
Elon University: Dean, International and Special Programs
GMU: Director, Center for Global Education
Michigan State:
ODU:
Penn State:
Dean, International Studies and Programs
Executive Director of International Programs
Dean, University Office of International Programs
Pepperdine: Dean, International Programs
UNC-Greensboro: Associate Provost, International Programs
UVA: Vice-Provost for International Activities
VCU:
Virginia Tech:
Vice-Provost for International Education
Associate Provost (pending)
William and Mary: Dean of International Affairs
Consistent with the trends noted above (e.g., regarding the need for a representative and campuswide structure), such administrators often create an integrated organizational infrastructure internally as well as an advisory council or committee of sorts that includes representatives from the larger academic community, other relevant campus constituencies, and members external to the university.
In summary then, colleges and universities are increasingly emphasizing the importance of global education, and are according such activities a more prominent and integrated role within the larger academic community. Given these trends—and in light of our 2008 centennial—if we are to remain competitive and prepare students to “live and work in a globally-interdependent world,” it will be necessary to reconceptualize the scope and nature of global education at James
Madison University. Toward these ends, the following recommendations are offered.
1.
Develop a strategic plan and a clear mission statement. Such activities should capitalize upon historic strengths of the Office of International Programs, evaluate current program/faculty strengths and weaknesses, and seek to expand our approach in a way that is institutionally congruent (e.g., by looking to the Centennial Commission report, and in consultation with a wide range of campus representatives).
2.
In the context of our current infrastructure, or as a fundamental change to the way the
Office of International Programs is organized, consider incorporating the term and role of
“global education” in the larger infrastructure (as in a Center for Global Education) to denote our more comprehensive approach to these issues (see 3 below).
3.
Current resources in the Office of International Programs are not sufficient to oversee a more comprehensive approach to global education at JMU. Therefore, in line with the activities of other “leading” universities, consider establishing the position of Associate
VP of Global Education, Director of Global Education, or some other role that illustrates

Global Education at James Madison University 16 the centrality of global education at JMU. Under Academic Affairs, and in collaboration with all study abroad and international internship programs, such an individual would work to ensure global education initiatives are integrated/organized at all levels of the campus, and be charged with implementing other global education recommendations and initiatives. This individual could also serve as a liaison to Student Affairs (the Center for
Multicultural and International Student Services, Community Service Learning), colleges and Deans, Development/OSP/Foundations, ESL and other language programs, the
College of Graduate and Professional Programs, the Commission on Community, and other campus offices that deal with diversity/internationalism.
4.
Consider better integrating international student admissions/advising with the Office of
International programs. In addition, expand opportunities for shared initiatives between the Office of International Programs, the Office of International Faculty/Student
Programs, and CMISS, building upon the strengths and shared goals of each.
5.
Develop a university-wide “International Council” that meets periodically to share notes on international research initiatives, curriculum development, faculty development, and student/faculty diversity. Determine who/which offices should be represented. This group might also serve as the advisory board for a Center for Global Education, and include external members (e.g., Penn State has a large and interconnected global education committee structure).
6.
On the web page and in other materials, our global reach, programs, and initiatives should be prominently displayed (e.g., George Mason and ODU include links to the offices that administer global education on their main web pages).
7.
It is important that we have a consistent presence and provide leadership at national and international levels (e.g., in the context of state, national, and international organizations and conferences). Given the rapidly changing nature of international education, there are many opportunities for JMU to establish itself as a leader. For example, a new organization—the Forum on Education Abroad—has asked JMU to consider becoming a charter member. The Forum and its official journal, Frontiers , are dedicated to scholarship within the field of international education and the academic integrity of study abroad.
8.
Consider assigning the promotion/administration of selected fellowships/grants (e.g.,
Fulbright exchanges) to one office/administrator within the global education infrastructure. The University should support faculty in the pursuit of these types of grants, and publicly acknowledge their accomplishments (e.g., it is currently unclear how many students and faculty have secured Fulbrights, Guggenheims, etc.).

Global Education at James Madison University 17
IV. Global Education and Faculty Development
We cannot live only for ourselves. A thousand fibers connect us with our fellow men; and among those fibers…our actions run as causes, and they come back to us as effects.
Herman Melville
Over the past several years, a number of documents and initiatives at JMU have converged around a central theme that we must find new, creative, and realistic means by which faculty can participate in activities that benefit their own professional development, the students they teach, and the overall institution. Nowhere is the promise and potential of global education more evident than in the natural reciprocity between the professional interests of faculty and the needs of our students and institution, an emphasis that is central to the Centennial Commission Report.
For example, Core Characteristic IV, an Intellectual Culture of Academic Excellence, notes that:
The educational environment will be infused with opportunities for experiential learning, community service and study abroad that augment students’ experiences in class, give them opportunities to apply in real-life situations what they have learned in the classroom, and connect them to both the local and global community.
Along similar lines, but with a complementary focus on the specific needs of faculty,
Characteristic VI, Leaders and Mentors in Faculty, Staff and Administrators, maintains the following:
JMU employees are significant assets of the university, and the university will invest in their well being and professional development…In today’s rapidly-changing world, even the most well-trained professionals must continue to upgrade their skills to stay current in their field. Therefore, the university will provide time and resources to support systematic and regular employee development and retraining programs, both on and off campus and in a variety of settings, that help faculty, staff, and administrators achieve professional and personal goals that will enable them to carry out the mission of the university.
As with global education in general, the Defining Characteristics also provide specific statements relevant to faculty development within a broad context, including (but not limited to) “The university’s strength is its people and thus, we will invest in both professional development and instructional innovation and excellence” (characteristic 5), “the university will be a diverse community whose members share a common JMU experience” (characteristic 6), and “the university’s faculty will integrate scholarship, service, and teaching to enhance student learning”
(characteristic 26).
The idea that faculty development should be not be subordinate to, but reciprocal and complementary with, student and institutional development is clearly recognized not only in our own documents, but in the above-mentioned source document— Expanding the International
Scope of Universities
—which suggests universities “promote greater involvement of all students in significant international education experiences,” “increase the international activity of faculty

Global Education at James Madison University 18 and professional staff,” and “assure that research and scholarship pertaining to international matters permeates disciplinary and interdisciplinary fields.” It should be noted that most of our
“competitors” clearly understand the interdependence and reciprocity between the breadth, depth, quality, and appeal of an institution’s global education opportunities, and the need to tap the interests and professional development wishes of its faculty. More specifically, the following recommendations are offered.
1.
Expand opportunities for faculty development regarding international activities, including the development of research projects/courses, language skills, professional contacts, new study abroad programs, etc. For example, the Council on International Educational
Exchange (CIEE) conducts a wide variety of faculty development programs each summer, held throughout the world. The University of St. Thomas (St. Paul) awards
$3000 to two faculty members per year who participate in this program. The CIEE programs generally run one to two weeks, cost $1500-$2000 (not including airfare), and are cross-disciplinary in nature. Priority could be given to faculty who are attending a
CIEE program with the intent to globalize their curriculum, design a new course or study abroad program, etc.
2.
Establish faculty exchanges around teaching and research development. Boston College has developed a number of faculty exchange opportunities (they send 20 to 30 faculty per year on exchanges) varying in length from one week to one to two semesters. In each case, the host institution provides housing (and usually supplies some institutional support), while Boston College pays a stipend and travel expenses (stipends range from
$1000 to full pay).
3.
Establish administrator exchanges. For example, CIEE faculty development programs permit a limited number of administrators to participate (about 15%). The Institute for
International Education (IIE) also has a small number of administrator exchanges in
Japan, Korea, and Germany.
4.
Consider the development of a “fellows” program for JMU faculty engaging in international scholarship, service, and/or teaching. For example, the University could provide administrative support and course release time for faculty to engage in external activities. Moreover, investigate the development of a “fellows” program with advanced graduate students from other countries. Graduate students are relatively less expensive that faculty members yet may still provide expertise/alternative perspectives in teaching and research. A program of this nature might be especially relevant for JMU’s doctoral programs.
5.
Recruit more international faculty (and students). Currently, 78 members of JMU’s faculty are “international,” up from 58 faculty members in 1997/1998. A number of universities assist international faculty and students (and their family members) through a language center that provides short- and long-term ESL programs (including “summer institutes” for incoming international students and faculty).

Global Education at James Madison University 19
6.
In conjunction with the Office of Sponsored Programs, Foundations, and other relevant campus offices, identify grants and foundations that might support cross-disciplinary global initiatives, individual faculty research programs, curriculum development, etc. For example, the U.S. Department of Education administers a wide variety of grants, including a number of “The Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education” or
FIPSE grants. There are several federal programs that provide support for international activities (see also Section VI of this report).
7.
Develop a directory of campus international activity to include faculty/staff discipline/ research, countries of interest, international awards/grants received, language skills, areas of interest within JMU structure (e.g., research, exchange programs, development of study abroad program, graduate student work, service-learning, etc.), current/future opportunities for student involvement, and potential international collaborators.
Michigan State and ODU have developed comprehensive databases on campus international activities that might serve as models.
8.
Provide grants for curriculum development/travel. Virginia Tech awards International
Curriculum Mini-Grants (up to $1500), International Travel Fellowships (up to $5000) each year, and grants for the development and administration of study abroad programs
(e.g., site visits). ODU presents two $1000 Provost Awards for excellence in international activities to faculty members each year. The University of St. Thomas awards two $1200 grants for curriculum development per year.
9.
Develop grants/fellowships for cross-disciplinary, large-scale international projects, which specifically build upon JMU’s strengths. For example, the Center for Innovation in Health and Human Services might gather faculty/students in health education, nursing, social work, and psychology for study/research in an appropriate under-served country
(e.g., Viet Nam); the Malta program could also serve as an appropriate model. Moreover, there are grants/fellowships specifically designed for group travel abroad (e.g., Fulbright-
Hays Group Projects Abroad Program).
10.
Develop an international faculty forum in which JMU and outside scholars share research, information on travel, study abroad program development, pedagogical ideas, and so forth. This group could function as a sub-group of a University “International
Council.” In addition, JMU may want to develop informal subgroups of faculty and administrators (e.g., brown bag groups) around specific issues within global education
(e.g., service learning research and opportunities) with a speaker’s forum.
11.
Consider a consortium relationship with other Virginia/non-Virginia universities with the purpose of sharing facilities, faculty, housing, and overall costs. For example, the
Director of Global Education at William and Mary has expressed an interest in developing mutually beneficial programs/processes (e.g., study abroad, funding opportunities).
12.
An estimated 8 to 10% percent of Harrisonburg’s population is foreign/international; thus, outreach programs to the larger community would seem entirely congruent with a

Global Education at James Madison University 20 global education initiative. The Center for Innovation in Health and Human Services might be one logical forum for developing cross-disciplinary practica with an intercultural focus.
13.
Consider the development of a university-wide “International Scholarship Day” (or week) in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Education/U.S. Department of State
International Education Week. These government agencies jointly sponsor a week of activities each year during November. They encourage colleges and universities to engage in activities that spotlight international scholarship and in turn, publish this information on their website. JMU might consider a day or more of symposia dedicated to international scholarship, culminating in a banquet and awards ceremony.
14.
Faculty must have incentives to conduct international research, engage in curriculum development, apply for grants and fellowships, and administer service learning and study abroad programs. Efforts at globalizing the campus must be a part of JMU’s reward system (for merit pay, tenure, post-tenure review, etc.). Along these lines, Virginia Tech
(among others) has a coordinated system of acknowledging faculty for their international work via awards, grants, and public recognition.

Global Education at James Madison University 21
V. Global Education and Curriculum Development
I am a part of all that I have met.
Yet all experience is an arch where-thro’
Gleams that untravell’d world, whose margin fades
Forever and forever when I move.
From Ulysses, by Alfred, Lord Tennyson
The integrity of academic programs is ultimately defined by the quality of students and faculty working together in the context of a thoughtful and coherent curriculum. In addition to our demonstrable historic emphasis on pedagogical innovation and excellence, the reality that curriculum is at the heart of it all has long been recognized at James Madison University. For example, as the Centennial Commission asserts under Core Characteristic IV, An Intellectual
Culture of Academic Excellence, JMU will create: integrated academic, developmental, artistic, and cultural programs that stimulate intellectual curiosity, prepare students for professional pursuits, foster personal growth, enhance social and global awareness and instill a commitment to lifelong learning…The educational environment will be infused with opportunities for experiential learning, community service and study abroad that augment students’ experience in class, give them opportunities to apply in real-life situations what they have learned in the classroom, and connect them to both the local and global community.
Fortunately, we have both the experience and expertise necessary to actualize this ambitious agenda, both in the context of our established international programs, and in the emerging interests and activities of faculty and administrators across campus (e.g., as exemplified in the recent “CISAT International” initiative). However, there is much more we could do to build upon this momentum, and “internationalize” our curriculum (as the source documents at the end of this report clearly illustrate).
Toward these ends, the following recommendations are offered.
1.
The university should identify how, why, and under what conditions global education is
(or would be) meaningful to faculty, students, and the curriculum, as well as the major obstacles to developing global curriculum initiatives. Such a process (e.g., surveys, focus groups, strategic planning) should look to individual faculty, undergraduate and graduate programs, and colleges across campus to ascertain what sorts of international experiences students (and faculty) want/need, where they would like to go, and the goals and objectives of international education programs. Other questions would include identification of necessary resources (e.g., technology/library support; release time) as well as the degree of interest in acquiring knowledge of specific languages. As part of this process, it might be helpful to convene a forum to bring interested individuals together in the context of a larger discussion about curriculum. We should also develop and disseminate materials (such as the source documents for this report) that can assist faculty in the development of such curriculum.

Global Education at James Madison University 22
2.
Explore mechanisms and incentives to assist and support faculty in their efforts to
“internationalize” their courses. For example, the University of Minnesota is currently engaged in an externally-funded, university-wide initiative to internationalize its curriculum by:
 infusing international content and perspectives into the curriculum;
 comparing, across national boundaries, important interdependencies, similarities, and differences of people, ideas, cultures, or institutions in today’s world;
 incorporating pedagogical strategies that teach to and reward multiple learning and cultural styles;
 utilizing technology (internet, listserves, etc.) to provide forums for dialogue within and between students, classes, institutions, and nations;
 involving international faculty and students as resources and encouraging them to relate their home country context to curricular discussions;
 referencing knowledge from international sources, including sources that may be fragmented, conflicting, and multidisciplinary; and
 integrating content studies abroad with content in the U.S.
13
3.
Consider developing an elective program that allows students to gain global knowledge and experience in a specific area of interest. For example, at Boston College, students can enroll in a “Global Proficiency Program,” which is a voluntary 18 credit-hour program that is included on transcripts and includes language, study abroad, and campus/extra-curricular service activities to include international and diversity experiences. Both the Provost and VPSA sign the resulting transcripts. Similarly, Old
Dominion University has developed an upper-level General Education option for students in all its colleges; this “International Certificate” program requires 12 hours of credit, and includes a study abroad experience.
4.
Explore mechanisms to better integrate language (Western European and non-Western
European) with the curriculum (ideally, this should go beyond the basic requirements, and also provide opportunities for fluency). Again, short-term intensive language and/or those focusing on oral proficiency may be a cost-effective solution. For example, UVA is developing a “language quarter” where students can live and learn language in close proximity to its international residence hall. UVA is also developing short term, noncredit courses which provide an introduction to students about the basics of different foreign languages and cultures. These are based on NYU’s “Speaking Freely” program in which courses are held once a week, for 90 minutes, across 10 weeks. ODU is developing a “Foreign Language Institute” which will focus on oral proficiency for study/work abroad. Their program employs native speakers in non-tenure track positions. Such a model could also be relevant in the context of adult or CE courses.
13 From Internationalizing the University of Minnesota: Pilot Project on the Twin Cities Campus . The web address is http://www.umabroad.umn.edu/bush/faculty/umtc.html
.

Global Education at James Madison University 23
5.
Consider developing junior/senior courses that follow-up on study abroad experiences, and are well integrated into the curriculum; such courses could be a part of Honors theses and Capstone experiences. Students who have studied abroad could periodically join these and other courses to discuss their experiences in order to stimulate interest and capture what is essential about such programs.
6.
Other curriculum development/enhancement options should also be considered such as grant-writing in pursuit of research and study in a specific content area (perhaps linked to theses or dissertations, and occurring over a relatively short span of time); the development of global curricula for K-12 (again, JMU has considerable interests and experience in this area); and the establishment of specific CE and Elderhostel opportunities (with the intent to generate some funds through CE). Expanding our current ESL opportunities might also be a curricular method of responding to larger needs in the community and elsewhere.
14
7.
Consider introducing students to the global education from the outset of their experience at JMU to begin even during orientation. Along these lines, UVA is instituting ways of getting freshman involved—within the first six weeks of the first semester—in some international experiences. An engaging short-term course in language/culture (no credit but required) could also be a made a part of a “Global Proficiency” program.
8.
Consider integrating international travel into coursework in the context of a spring break trip. ODU has developed a number of courses in which a spring break trip abroad is part of the curriculum.
9.
A number of universities have developed “model United Nations” programs at home or abroad (e.g., based on travel to Geneva); NYU offers just such a program of summer study abroad in Geneva. Likewise, George Mason has developed a program entitled
“Summer Institute on International Conflict and Humanitarian Action.” For this tenweek program, weeks one through eight occur in D.C. (where students can participate in related internships), followed by a four-day trip to NYC, and concluding with a week in
Geneva. This program offers nine undergraduate and six graduate credits, and students are housed in Boston University’s Washington Center. Such model UN groups also participate in national conferences/competitions; notably, such a group at William and
Mary recently won Harvard’s International Model United Nations Conference. Similar to a United Nations program and given JMU’s resources and connections in Antwerp, it might be possible to develop a program with ties to NATO, the EU, and other international organizations in Belgium.
10.
As noted above, higher education institutions within the U.S. increasingly are seeking partnerships with universities abroad that allow students to take courses from participating institutions and earn degrees (undergraduate and graduate). For example, the Global University Alliance (GUA) is comprised of universities from Canada,
14 According to ODU’s Executive Director of International Programs, their ESL program provides a “revenue stream” where some of the profit is shared with the Office of International Programs.

Global Education at James Madison University 24
Australia, the U.S., the Netherlands, the U.K., and Wales. The GUA—a for-profit subsidiary of the member institutions—focuses on the “applied technology” online courses of its members. The institutions collaborate on course development and share costs. GUA degrees are seen as comparable to on-campus degrees and range from certificates to the doctorate.

Global Education at James Madison University 25
VI. Funding and Assessment of Global Education
The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeing new landscapes but in having new eyes.
Marcel Proust
According to the state legislature’s recent analysis of higher education, James Madison
University is the most underfunded of all universities in Virginia. Not surprisingly, the fundamental reality that James Madison University must generate additional sources of revenue is recognized throughout the Centennial Commission report and other recent documents. It is important to address this reality in a proactive manner, not only because global education is subject to the same fiscal pressures that affect all programming at JMU, but because such activities could be perceived as unduly expensive or a “fringe benefit” rather than central to the
University’s mission. Although the Commission’s report clearly states otherwise (i.e., that global education has been and should be central to our mission and plans), it seems reasonable that global education should be cost-effective, and strive insofar as possible to generate additional funds.
In this regard, a review of other global education programs around the country and relevant source materials illustrates that strategies and resources are available to generate funds for global education. Therefore, at the very least, it seems prudent to engage in a more deliberate and systematic effort to try and identify and secure such funds in the context of an expanded and more comprehensive approach to global education at JMU, and in consultation with other offices on campus.
At the same time, the Centennial Commission Report also recognizes that, “Students, parents, legislators, and employers alike call for more efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability from higher education.” Therefore, we should take advantage of the unique expertise and tradition of excellence in assessment and outcomes-evaluation at JMU, and seek—whenever possible—to find ways to evaluate our international and global education programs and initiatives, and use relevant findings both to refine what we do, and demonstrate the benefits of global education in general. Toward these ends, the following recommendations are offered:
1.
Conduct a systematic review of proven and potential funding sources (public and private) for global education, from established systems (e.g., Fulbright Scholarship) to more targeted state and federal grants and initiatives (e.g., through the Department of
Education); to international education organizations (e.g., NAFSA: International
Educators, which offers small grants for curriculum development, international student advising, etc.). In addition to the Office of Sponsored Programs, extant source materials
(see the source documents for this report) and the proven strategies of other universities would be a logical point of departure for investigation/development of such information.
At the very least and as part of a “Funding Global Education” resource manual, relevant guidelines and procedures should be established and ultimately disseminated to interested faculty, staff, and administrators. In essence, we must create a partnership between our institution and federal, state, and local governmental agencies as well as the private sector.

Global Education at James Madison University 26
2.
At the federal level, the U.S. Department of Education provides Title VI monies specifically for programs and activities related to global education.
15 The Department also manages the Fulbright-Hays program, the Fund for the Improvement of
Postsecondary Education (FIPSE), and the Foreign Language Assistance Program
(FLAP, which is designed to improve foreign language teaching and learning at the K-12 levels). As examples, Georgetown has succeeded in securing Title VI monies to assess learning outcomes in study abroad programs, while the University of Minnesota has been awarded a FIPSE grant to “internationalize” their professional and technical degree programs.
3.
The U.S. Department of State administers a variety of educational and cultural exchange programs, including the Fulbright-Hays Program, the Educational Partnership Program, and other academic, professional, and cultural exchanges. In addition, the Department funds the Russian, Eurasian, and East European Research and Training Program (Title
VIII) and Foreign Study Grants (determined on the basis of need) for U.S. undergraduates who study abroad.
4.
Other federal departments and agencies sponsor international educational programs, including the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Department of
Defense, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Science
Foundation.
5.
Investigate appropriate corporations and foundations for funding, particularly by targeting those corporations/foundations that currently invest (or will in the future) in international activities that are in support of the University’s mission (e.g., the travel industry, technology markets).
6.
Consider strengthening ties between international activities and Development and
Alumni Relations. For example, the Dean of International Affairs at William and Mary is assigned a development officer (on a half-time basis) for fund-raising related in international activities. As noted earlier, the Office of Community Service Learning has developed a service-learning program for alumni that has resulted in a small number of gifts for student travel scholarships and program development.
7.
Many universities help support international programs/offices using international student fees. Although JMU does not currently have such a system, it may be worth investigating the potential strengths and limitations of this approach.
15 Title VI is the 1965 Higher Education Act [amended in 1998 to incorporate international and foreign language studies (see section 601)] and includes the following programs: National Foreign Language and Area Studies
Resource Centers; Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships; Centers for International Business Education and Research; National Foreign Language and Area Studies Resource Centers; American Overseas Research
Centers; Undergraduate International Studies and Foreign Languages, Research and Studies; Technological
Innovation and Cooperation for Foreign Information Access; Business and International Education; and the Institute for International Public Policy.

Global Education at James Madison University 27
8.
Some of the costs of international education may be offset by recruiting non-JMU students to participate in JMU study abroad programs (by paying out-of-state tuition).
9.
In order to secure additional funds in the context of viable new programs, it may be helpful to provide seed and “start up” funds for faculty. Perhaps a system could be established for soliciting and evaluating faculty “global” proposals and initiatives that seem promising, both academically and in terms of the potential for external funding.
10.
International and global education programs and initiatives should identify their goals and objectives and valid and meaningful ways of assessing them. Moreover, concurrent processes could be established for enhancing quality and effectiveness. Such assessment activity is not only relevant for its own sake, but could help demonstrate the value-added nature of global education while attenuating the perception that such activities are costly if not frivolous. Likewise, universities such as ODU publish a report (available online) each year that describes the many and varied benefits of global education for their institution, from the numbers of students who study abroad each year, to the types of other “international” academic activities (e.g., grants, scholarship) that characterize the campus as a whole.
11.
For many reasons (e.g., our historic mission and current expertise), JMU would seem well positioned to provide leadership in researching pedagogical approaches to global education. For example and more specifically, valid assessment strategies are needed to understand why “study abroad” programs are so frequently experienced as
“transformational” for students and faculty alike. Because assessment of learning outcomes for study abroad is in its infancy, such research would be relevant in its own right, would be of great significance to the larger field of international education, and would help answer legitimate questions about why global education is important and justifiable.
In conclusion , this report is not meant to represent the definitive or final word on how James
Madison University can achieve its potential and promise as a leader in global education, but should rather be construed as a beginning effort to promote and organize further discussion, planning, and action. On the one hand, we are certainly well positioned to build upon our historic strengths and achievements in international programming, and heed the call of President
Rose, the Centennial Commission, and so many others. On the other hand, there is much we must do if we are to realize our stated objectives, tap the profound intellectual and creative energies of our faculty and administrators, and remain compelling for our students, who are increasingly sophisticated about the options available to them, and more motivated than ever to secure a global education that is personally and professionally meaningful. In this new and global era, our students—like people everywhere—are ready to embrace St. Augustine’s admonition that, “The world is like a book and those who never leave home read but one page.”
Together, we can pen our own text of global education at James Madison University that can be referenced and read, time and again.

Global Education at James Madison University 28
VII. Source Documents
American Council on Education, One Year Later: Attitudes About International Education Since
September 11 , 2002. http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pdf/2002_one-year-later.pdf
American Council on Education, Preliminary Status Report 2000: Internationalization of
U.S. Higher Education , 2000. http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pdf/2000-intl-report.pdf
American Council on Education, Public Experience, Attitudes, and Knowledge: A Report on Two
National Surveys About International Education , 2001. http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pdf/2001-intl-report.pdf
American Council on Education and the Center for Institutional and International Initiatives,
Beyond September 11: A Comprehensive National Policy on International Education ,
2002. http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pdf/2002_beyond_911.pdf
American Council on Education and the Center for Institutional and International Initiatives, The
Brave New (and Smaller) World of Higher Education: A Transatlantic View , 2002. http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pdf/2002_brave-new-world.pdf
Association for Studies in International Education, Journal of Studies in International Education ,
Vol. 6, Numbers 1-3, 2002. http://www.asie.org/journal.htm
Association of International Education Administrators, Guidelines for International Education at
U.S. Colleges and Universities , (no date given). http://wings.buffalo.edu/intled/aiea/guidelines.pdf
Institute for International Education, Higher Education in the 21 st
Century: Global Challenge and National Response , 1999. http://www.iie.org/PDFs/Publications/report29.pdf
National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, Expanding the
International Scope of Universities: A Strategic Vision Statement for Learning,
Scholarship and Engagement in the New Century , 2000. http://www.nasulgc.org/publications/Visions.pdf
National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, Major Obstacles and Best
Practices in International Educational Exchange, 2001. http://www.nasulgc.org/publications/Agriculture/obstacles%20and%20best%20practices
2.pdf