If you have mentioned international students around me lately you may have been one of the people to hear my concerns regarding Colorado State Unviersity internationalizing. I recently heard at my college meeting that CSU was possibly partnering with INTO University Partnerships for international students. I was not sure what this was so I did a search in Google. INTO is a British based company that recruits international students to study at university in the U.S. and CSU is soon to be one of those universities joining the University of Florida and Oregon State.
Now, if you have read my other blog on commission based admission you are probably aware that I am not for commission based admissions. I again ask are we seeking diversity or dollars? But back to this blog.
Since my college meeting I have not heard much about INTO except for a brief discussion with a few colleagues at our staff meeting. So today over lunch I thought I would see if I could find more information about INTO and I found this article in the Coloradoan. The focus of the article is money - my opinion. How much money will INTO bring to CSU with international student enrollment? Turns out that 500 new international students, according to the article, would bring CSU an extra $12 million dollars! That is almost $8million more dollars than adding 500 instate students. The article goes on to mention that CSU has been aggressively recruiting out of state students but goes on to say that federal law prohibits the university from hiring agents to recruit U.S. students. Now why would we as a higher education institution agree to hire agents to recruit international students but federal law prevents us from using those practices with U.S. students?
One of the issues I have with the article is that it only gained the perspective from CSUs president Tony Frank and a couple of faculty. How about student affairs? The staff and administrators that will be working with these students day in and day out with living on campus and transitions. Faculty quoted in the article stated that they were frustrated with CSU administration because when the INTO partnership was presented they felt it was "a done deal" and they did not give "faculty a real chance to participate in the decision". Sound like neo-liberalism? The article does state and I have heard from an administrator that the incoming students from INTO would enter some kind of INTO-CSU academy but detail on what that would do are limited. And what about the international office? Are we replacing them with this new private partner?
After reading the article I have to admit I was a bit conflicted. On one hand I knew bringing in INTO would increase revenue to CSU (if the deal goes through) but on the other hand what about the incoming international students and their welfare here in the U.S. I am more concerned with their welfare and transition then the money but maybe my role in higher education allows me to think that way. It could also the influence of my experience with incoming international roommates, e.g. a university staff member knocking on your door at 2am dropping off an international student with nothing but a suitcase and leaving it up to you as the roommate to accommodate them.
Karla,
ReplyDeleteCU Boulder has also added "internationalization" into our strategic plan (Flagship 2030), in part because of the extra tuition funding that international students bring. Our lobbyists are also pushing to keep the international student population out of the count of resident to non-resident student ratios mandated by Colorado law (55% resident / 45% non-resident). If that were to happen, the university could technically allow an unlimited increase in international student enrollment without consideration of the consequences of additional demand on certain schools/colleges/departments. More specifically, I don't envision too many students from wealthy countries (because, face it, college in the US is expensive and students from resource limited countries are not likely to be able to afford non-resident tuition) coming to the US to obtain liberal arts degrees. (No offense intended - just a personal belief of mine). If graduate enrollment is an indicator of undergraduate enrollment trends, international students will flock to professional schools of business and engineering leaving those programs the benefits and drawbacks of student body growth at unsustainable rates.
At my institution, we are "globalizing". I guess regardless of which buzz word each institution decides to use, it all means the same thing. We need more international money plugged into our economy, and we have run out of ways to do it, so we are trying something new, we are internationalizing and globalizing undergraduate education. This makes me nervous. I am worried that institutions have not done the necessary legwork to ensure that we are doing it in an ethical and appropriate way. We cannot just be collecting the money that international students bring into the local economy; we need to ensure that these students are successful. Admittedly, I never took advantage of study abroad opportunities- let’s say I never knew the options were there, but in reality, I was probably too afraid. I cannot imagine that there is not a similar level of fear among the students who are coming to the US for an education. Any 18-22 year old is going to struggle with transition, and many services are in place to support those transitions. Are we really ready to support a whole new level of transition?? I am not saying that we should not accept international students. I believe add even more diversity in life experience can only enhance a students education and improve a college campus, but we need to make sure we do what it takes to not only collect the money in the first year, but retain students beyond that first year- and not just for more money!
ReplyDeleteMichle
One of your biggest concerns, at the beginning of the article, is whether the university is seeking dollars over diversity. I say that with this model CSU would be getting the best of both worlds. They will be receiving the additional revenue that you spoke of, and the diversity of 500 additional international students will add a ton to the university culture.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of a student being dropped off at a dorm room with a suitcase and no guidance is ridiculous. Fortunately in 2011 higher education administrators, faculty, and staff understand the importance of support structures. Luckily at CSU there are already currently many programming options and cultural events and centers for international students. If anything I would say this is a great way to force these services and support structures to become the best that they can.
I believe that the merits of this approach to recruitment transcend mere budgetary issues (though I would agree that it certainly doesn't hurt revenues). However, I am afraid that - to tout the contribution to "university culture" which international students will make is to insinuate that the sucking chest-wound that is American ethnocentrism can be treated with a band-aid. While they do liven things up a bit, I think it would be very naive to assume that simply having more international students on our campuses will provide our students with the experience they need to succeed in entrepreneurial enterprises which slip the bounds of our nation's borders. The impereatives at play in doing business with foreign customers are, I feel, seldom "caught" and even more rarely "taught" in American classrooms. However, the market works both ways. By increasing - on the national level - the number of international students in the American system of Higher Education, those students will be shaped by their experience here and will return to their native lands more open to American values and practices. In this way, these students become a "softening" influence on the marketplaces they inhabit. IF we can't convince our populace to become more well-traveled and worldly wise (in the truest sense of the notion) then it is wise of us to inseminate those from other cultures with American ideals so that the markets are primed for American ingenuity. Is this imperialism? Or simply the nature of living in a "Global Village"?
ReplyDelete~David Dorr
It is interesting to me to see the responses to this post. A few thoughts to add:
ReplyDeleteRegardless of an institution’s motivation to recruit more international students, contracting with a firm to manage international recruiting makes a lot of sense. International recruiting is expensive and complex. Diverse international recruiting requires familiarity with the educational systems of different countries, visa regulations (both for the recruiter and for the students), language, and an understanding of cultural components which impact student and family decision making re. higher education. I am not familiar with INTO specifically, but know the model of private international student recruiting firms and believe that it can indeed work well, and in some cases emulate the institutional recruiting values and philosophies, but with an international twist.
Certainly the institutions who are increasing their international enrollment should also be proactive in addressing the myriad of possible social, academic, and other concerns which may arise with an influx of international students. I would think that any responsible institution would take some of the increase in revenue from the international enrollment and turn it around for the requisite support services. Minimum advising for international students is mandated through ICE, but there are excellent models out there that go well above and beyond the minimum and truly serve the students and the institution well. NAFSA is the professional association for higher educational professionals working with international students- check out their website for more information on the resources and professional development available so that institutions can indeed meet the needs of the growing international student body.
After reducing federal government support and the lack of state appropriation support, is natural that universities in general are looking for alternative sources of income and the issue of attracting international students one of the new sources of income for universities, and universities have obligations and must fulfill the legitimate as long as the sources that are fine.
ReplyDeleteBut there are two questions are very important , exceeding the size of the importance in the financial figures (12 million dollars) questions are:
What the expectation of International students (Needs, Performance, outcomes?)
What are the benefits of International students for the US (Economy, Education, society?)
Finally, the communities that we are building should include people and ideas from beyond American borders.
Thanks Karla for this post.