Tokyo, Japan
March 18, 2013
Eva Egron-Polak, IAU Secretary General

• IAU and internationalization
• Evidence-based concern with quality
• Approaches to improving internationalisation
– Macro level
– National/regional level
– Institutional level
• At systemic level = IAU Call for Action
• At institutional level = ISAS
© IAU – March 2013 2

• A raison d’etre for the Association since its creation in 1950
• A top priority theme since late 1990s
• Focus on normative Policy Statements and
Advocacy:
– Statement on cooperation in 2000, on Cross Border education in 2004, Checklist for Good Practice in cross border education for HEIs in 2006 (in cooperation with ACE, AUCC and CHEA)
– Call for Action to focus on academic values in 2012
© IAU – March 2013 3

Research and Analysis : focus on monitoring trends, gathering evidence, stimulating reflection - 3 IAU Global Surveys; 4 th underway
2005
2003
2010
© IAU – March 2013 4

Evidence and research show that:
• Internationalization of HE continues to grow in importance
– To higher education institutions, especially leadership
– To students: mobility continues to grow
– To policy makers, national policies being developed by many
– To industry/employers, first external driver according to IAU research
• Institutions wish to ‘do it right’, to succeed
• High accountability demand when resources are tight value, impact and benefits must be shown
• Failure is not an option in a competitive environment
© IAU – March 2013 5

• Expected benefits are different according to world regions
• Rationales for internationalization are multiple and not always academic or education-related
• Risks and unintended negative consequences are also noted by HEIs in certain parts of the world
• Access to opportunities and capacity to participate fully are highly unbalanced
• Clear goals, strategies and approaches are required and need to be respected by partners
• These should be tailored to specific institutional and national contexts
© IAU – March 2013 6

• Internationalization
– for quality improvements shifting towards internationalization for revenue generation?
– through cooperation for capacity building shifting to alliances to beat the competition?
– to meet demand for education where supply is unavailable, shifting to competition for the best brains worldwide?
– based on partnerships of solidarity shifting to strategic partnerships for non-academic purposes?
– in pursuit of mutual understanding shifting to pursuit of economic competitiveness?
– In search of diversity of perspectives and experiences shifting to a search for similar institutions in level of prestige and status in rankings?
© IAU – March 2013 7

Approaches to Improving Internationalization at systemic level: the IAU Call for Action (2012)
IAU survey results, international experts, scholars and researchers raise systemic level questions of impact and quality
NOT about the need or imperative for internationalization
BUT RATHER
• about the general need to re-focus on quality, on academic benefits, on impact and on the ways in which internationalization is implemented
• about ways to improve internationalization to increase benefits for learners, to expand and enrich knowledge, to build bridges of understanding rather than gaps in wellbeing
• about the global responsibility of HEI to address major societal challenges through internationalization, not simply focus on national imperatives
© IAU – March 2013 8

IAU Call for Action
Developed in consultation with an International ad hoc
Groups of Experts in order to:
• To s tress benefits of internationalization , but raise awareness of major changes and criticisms too
• To underline that internationalization is a dynamic concept , shaped by changing political, economic and social forces, past and current local conditions, but mostly by globalization which define goals, purposes, capacities, approaches and actors in internationalization
© IAU – March 2013 9

- Commitment to academic values, scientific integrity, ethics, equity and social responsibility at local and global levels
- Placing academic purposes at centre of all efforts and an integration of all aspects of internationalization – moving beyond mobility
- Creating international academic communities that search for solutions to global challenges and problems
- Reciprocal benefits, respect and fairness as basis of all partnerships
- Innovation to address resource differences among HEIs
- Value of cultural, linguistic, institutional diversity for all HE systems
- Monitoring of impact at home and abroad (positive and negative)
© IAU – March 2013 10

• Wide dissemination, numerous articles, media attention, various seminars related to issues raised
• 4 th IAU Global Survey will pay more attention to values promoted in the Call and will monitor developments on different dimensions of internationalization
• Survey will document new trends especially in times of economic crisis
• Advocacy for Values enshrined in the Call in numerous ways – vis a vis EU policy makers, at national level as policies are drafted, with partners and sister organizations to raise awareness at all levels
© IAU – March 2013 11

• Increasing number of countries develop national policy
– Canada, Norway, Brazil, Japan, UK, Australia, etc. many more in the works: India, Malaysia, SA, etc.
• EU and Bologna Process focusing on HE modernization and building EHEA and beyond, including through internationalization
• Diverse national initiatives to strengthen human resource capacity (Brazil); to generate revenue (UK,
Australia) and foreign investment, to improve global standing in research (Gulf States)
• Primary concern: national interest; academic purpose of internationalization of secondary importance
© IAU – March 2013 12

Approaches to Improving Internationalization at
Institutional Level:
IAU Internationalization Strategies Advisory Service
(ISAS) – one approach among others
• Builds on HEIs interest in Global Surveys and
IAU advocacy and normative actions
• Multipurpose and tailored to institutional context, needs, interests and goals
• A process that accompanies institutions to develop, or revitalize or assess their internationalization strategy
• IAU draws on International Expert as Panel members, including those from the Ad hoc
Group responsible for drafting Call for Action
© IAU – March 2013 13

• Numerous initiatives of benchmarking, audits, evaluations, rankings, etc.
• ISAS is a formative means of policy development
• With ISAS, IAU assists institutions to:
- identify strengths and weaknesses of current policy and strategy,
- discover inconsistencies between institutional goals and strategies,
- question rationales, goals and impacts
- explore issues of ‘fitness for purpose’ and ‘fitness of purpose’
- locate gaps in data and information,
- deliberate on unique features to maximize internationalization efforts,
- locate internal obstacles, management and communication breakdowns and policy levers to ‘exploit’ for improving internationalization
- Consider how to ensure that impact is sustainable, of benefit to all stakeholders
© IAU – March 2013 14

In light of diversity of rationales and multiple purposes of internationalization
– In different national contexts
– At different levels – national, institutional, departmental
– For students, faculty, researchers and staff
– For employers and society more generally can we agree on the indicators of quality that will be suitable for all?
Are all impacts of internationalization measurable and if so, what is the suitable time-frame? What is the suitable level?
If partnership and collaboration are central values, can quality be measured without reference to impact on all partners?, without considering the impact/responsibility on the global higher education landscape?
© IAU – March 2013 15

• Info on IAU Global
Surveys
• IAU Policy Statements
Available online: www.iau-aiu.net
• The Call for Action
• Description of ISAS
Contact:
Eva Egron-Polak e.egronpolak@iau-aiu.net
© IAU – March 2013 16