1

Martin Tillman, Editor

Complied by the American Institute For Foreign Study Foundation

Study Abroad:A 21st Century Perspective, Volume II

The Changing Landscape

2

3

Table of contents

Prefaceby Martin Tillman............................................................................................................................. 5

The Globalization of Community Collegesby Frank M. Falcetta ........................................................................................................................ 7

An Effective Consortial Model for Study Abroad: A History of the CollegeConsortium for International Studies

by Harlan Henson .......................................................................................................................... 10

Demographic Factors Redefining Education Abroadby Gail A. Hochhauser ................................................................................................................... 12

The Impact of Communications Technology on the Study Abroad Fieldby Clay Hubbs ................................................................................................................................ 14

The Role of the Institutional Setting and its Impact on Education AbroadPolicy and Programs

by John Pearson ............................................................................................................................. 17

Hitting the Ground Running: The Impact of A Pre-Departure Class on StudyAbroad Participants

by Andrea Poehling ....................................................................................................................... 20

Study, Service and the Self-Transformedby Humphrey Tonkin ..................................................................................................................... 22

Partner or Perish—Study Abroad in the 21st Centuryby Jack Van de Water...................................................................................................................... 26

New Study Abroad Destinations: Trends and Emerging Opportunitiesby Carl U. Zachrisson .................................................................................................................... 28

Afterwardby Bill Gertz .................................................................................................................................... 31

American Institute For Foreign Study Foundation......................................................................................................................................................... 33

4

5

Study Abroad: A 21st Century Perspective, Volume IIThe Changing LandscapePrefaceby Martin Tillman, EditorAssistant Director, Office of Career ServicesJohns Hopkins University, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies

In the ever changing world of international educa-tion, the landscape of the study abroad field is con-stantly challenged by a myriad of complex forces:from within the academy, by socio-economic, politi-cal and demographic forces and by new technology.And it’s fair to add, in the spring of 2001, by infec-tious disease. Witness the ravaging of the Britisheconomy by the epidemic of foot and mouth disease(which is impacting both tourism and overseasstudy), and the ever-widening impact of the HIV pan-demic in Africa. Adding further confusion to the policyand program landscape is the unexpectedly steepeconomic downturn in both the United States andother global markets. Despite growing budget sur-pluses, projected new government spending at boththe state and federal levels appears more uncertain.Study abroad professionals must skillfully negotiatethe implications of these challenges to sustain themomentum of their programs, and remain on thecutting edge of social, economic and political changein the world community.

In this second collection of essays by leading in-ternational educators, the issues raised above areexamined. Frank Falcetta describes the challengesof increasing access to study abroad for communitycollege students.

Harlan Henson chronicles the design of a uniquestudy abroad consortial arrangement providing ac-cess to under-served community college students.

Gail Hochhauser discusses demographic factorsand trends shaping the design and focus of studyabroad programs.

Clay Hubbs reviews how technology has changedthe patterns of communication with students and theprocess of study abroad advising.

John Pearson reviews how education abroad pro-fessionals must carefully navigate the internal aca-demic and political landscape within their institu-tions.

Andrea Poehling describes an innovative non-credit course to increase the intellectual “readiness”of students prior to departure for a period of over-seas study.

Humphrey Tonkin explores the transformative na-ture of the service-learning experience—both on thestudent and the community.

Jack Van de Water describes the new imperativefor developing public-private partnerships to copewith the irony of decreasing resources available foran increasing number of programs.

And, Carl Zachrisson analyzes the recent statisticsin Open Doors and how these numbers impact the flowof student to new overseas destinations.

We hope you find these essays to be of interest,and we welcome your comments.

6

7

The “junior year or semester abroad” is a stereo-type that is as applicable to community colleges asa 500 student lecture hall. When one profiles the com-munity college student on campuses across thecountry, we are likely to find a 28 year old part timelearner who is working an average of 20 hours perweek. This student is more likely to be female thanmale and is probably a first generation college stu-dent. The thought of spending even a semesterabroad is a foreign concept to this learner.

Even the younger full-time learner at a commu-nity college would have difficulty “getting away” foran extended period of time. This is due to the cost ofthe time away from employment opportunities. Manycommunity college students need to work year roundto fund the cost of their education and lifestyle.

This clearly places community colleges in a di-lemma. The need for a broad global perspective isan increasingly acknowledged component in astudent’s education but there is so little time (andmoney) for the cost of a traditional study abroad ex-perience.

Some community colleges have met this challengeby creating shorter-term study abroad opportunitiesfor their students. At Middlesex Community College(Bedford/Lowell, Massachusetts) we have createdfour short-term study abroad fellowship programs.When designing our programs one of the most im-portant criteria was student access. Community col-leges are institutions of access. It is therefore an im-portant value that this access exists for all activitiesat a community college.

This of course presented us with a challenge – howdo you create student access, keep costs to a mini-mum and also provide a quality program? If thesewere not seemingly insurmountable challenges wedecided to add one more—the country with whomthe first program would be developed was thePeople’s Republic of China. Why not choose England,France, Italy or some other country where travel ar-rangements would be easy to make? The best re-sponse I can provide 10 years later is we had an op-portunity and there was significant interest in Asiaon both campuses. We had just been designated bythe East-West Center at the University of Hawai’i as

an Asian Studies Regional Development Center. Ad-ditionally, Lowell the site of one of our campuses,had recently experienced a significant populationchange with the recent arrival of an estimated 25,000to 30,000 Southeast Asians. An Asian country becamethe logical choice for us.

Through a series of seemingly unrelated events, Ihad found myself a year earlier sitting in a hotel lobbyin Jinan, Shandong Province in the People’s Repub-lic of China, having a conversation with senior offi-cials from the Shandong Tourism Bureau. We werediscussing their desire to attract more tourists espe-cially from the United States. One “solution” that Ioffered was what was needed is more familiarity withthe United States and a deeper understanding ofAmerican values toward cleanliness, neatness, ac-commodations, etc.

I offered, “It would be wonderful if we could pro-vide training to some of your employees. We haveboth a Travel and Tourism Program and a Hotel Res-taurant Management Program. Why not have someof your employees come to Middlesex to study?“ Costwas their immediate response.

I quickly responded “What if we provided scholar-ships to these students?” Slowly but surely the planbegan to fall into place. We would provide a scholar-ship for two employees of the travel service for anacademic year and cover their living expenses. Thetravel service would provide a study tour for 12 stu-dents and two faculty escorts for two and a half weeks.The study tour would include Beijing, Quingdao,Jinan, Qufu, Shanghai and Hong Kong. All costs ofhotels, meals, travel guides and admissions wouldbe covered by the travel service.

The missing link was the international airfare. TheStudent Union Government Association (SUGA) atMiddlesex had expressed an interest in internationalopportunities for students. A presentation of the pro-posed program with China was made. SUGA agreedto fund the air tickets. They have done this for thelast 10 years.

Shortly after reaching the agreement we had to de-sign the program, develop a student selection pro-cess, appoint a selection committee, publicize theprogram, design application forms and much more.

The Globalization of Community Collegesby Frank M. FalcettaAssociate Provost, Middlesex Community College, MA

8

All had to be established. The selection process in-cluding forms, criteria (GPA and number of creditsearned) and the selection committee were pulledtogether. After several very intense days of interview-ing and even greater intensity for the final selectionprocess, all the pieces fell into place. We had ourdozen fellows.

It became very apparent early in the selection pro-cess that our fellows were not seasoned travelers.Most did not have passports, many had never flown,and those who had flown, had flown to Orlando. Sig-nificant time was devoted to “Travel Ed101.” B asicssuch as what to pack, what to carry on, are hair dry-ers needed? do we tip?, etc. It was even more impor-tant that we prepare them intellectually. A philoso-phy professor who was very knowledgeable aboutConfucius was selected. This was important since thefellows would spend three days in Qufu, Confucius’birth and burial place. A course focusing on Chinesehistory, society, social institutions, government, artsand economy was developed. The course met for 18hours prior to departure. The fellows also gained in-sights by a visit to the Asia galleries at the Museumof Fine Arts in Boston, a tour of Boston’s Chinatown,enjoying an authentic multicourse banquet withoutsilverware, and viewing Chinese film.

The fellows experience for many was life chang-ing. It was often described as “one of the highlightsof my life.” We realized our judgment was accurateand three weeks was the optimum length of time.Significant signs of homesickness developed formany of the fellows after two weeks. We also discov-ered the importance of building group cohesion.Three weeks of travel under sometimes stressful con-ditions can sometimes cause tempers to flare, andthey did.

In response to some of the group dynamics prob-lems that occurred, we instituted an all day retreatwhich all fellows and all faculty escorts must attend.The retreat stresses team-building exercises designedto build group cohesiveness.

New Fellowship Programs

Since our original program with the People’s Re-public of China, we have added three additional fel-lowship programs for our students—Europe, The Re-public of Ireland/Northern Ireland and a Spanishspeaking country.

The European program is a partnership with theNoordelijke Hogeschool Leeuwarden (NHL) in theNetherlands. Every year, NHL implements a two weekinstitute for 100 students from colleges and univer-

sities throughout Europe. The institute is builtaround a common theme such as crossing bordersor water. The institute’s location varies from year toyear. One year it was the Netherlands, Germany,France and Italy. Another year it was Austria, Hun-gary, Romania and yet another it was the Nether-lands.

For the last three years we have had a program witha Spanish speaking country. For two years it wasCosta Rica and this year it was Spain. This programis different from the others since it occurs in January.The other programs occur at different times through-out the summer. The programs are spaced outthroughout the year to ease the administrative bur-den.

In 2000, we added our fourth fellowship program –the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Thiswas an outgrowth of our Wider Horizons Programwhich brings recent teacher college graduates fromboth the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland toparticipate in a program focusing on peace and rec-onciliation. This has proven to be our most popularfellowship program. Given the Greater Bostonregion’s large Irish heritage population, it is no sur-prise that this program was so popular.

Lessons Learned

We have been designing and implementing theabove short-term study abroad programs for 10 years.During this period, we have learned some valuablelessons we would like to pass on to our colleagues:

• Access, access, access. Community colleges areinstitutions of access. Your study abroad programsshould also provide that access. Programs that havehigh costs or require a semester of even six weeksabroad create barriers that are difficult if not impos-sible for many community college students to over-come. The program’s design should carefully considerthe needs and lifestyles of your students.

• The program’s education value. There are crit-ics who refer to short term (one to three week) studyabroad programs as “academic tourism.” Their ratio-nale is how can one learn about a country or itspeople in such a brief period of time? If there is astrong academic component built into the experi-ence, short-term programs can be dynamic, thoughtprovoking and life-changing experiences.

• Our students are Neophytes when it comes totravel. Many of our students are inexperienced trav-elers. It is our responsibility to not only prepare ourstudents intellectually, but also to prepare them tobe travel savvy: to understand that packing light is

9

not a phrase, but a necessity; to always carry valu-ables on their person, and to also carry one days’travel needs on the flight in case baggage is delayed,etc.

• The selection process and criteria should beclear and well publicized. Academic communitiescan be highly politicized environments. The selec-tion process should be broad based and the estab-lished criteria should be rigorously adhered to. If yourequire 12 earned credits to apply do not interview astudent with nine.

• Positive group dynamics are critical and shouldnot be overlooked. When a group of near strangersis traveling together, occasional friction betweenpeople is inevitable. When assembling the partici-pants consider group dynamics. After all, there is notribal council.

What does the future hold? Community collegeshave been engaged in the global education move-ment for a little more than a decade. The number ofprograms and participants will only increase. Increas-ingly, the community college movement is realizingthe value of study abroad. Lourdene Huhra, Execu-tive Dean, Bunker Hill Community College remarked:“Community college students are increasingly see-ing the value of the skills gained through the studyabroad experience. With the availability of studentgrants and other financial supports, study abroadopportunities at community colleges will only grow.”

10

The new millennium coincides with a vigorous in-terest in globalization, particularly as global activi-ties impact international commerce. One part of thisinterest is manifested in the demand that more U.S.students gain international educational experiences,particularly by going abroad. Since study abroad haslong been promoted for the contributions it makesto students’ personal, academic and career goals,these current commercial concerns are not incon-sistent with some of the values traditionally associ-ated with education abroad.

It is the contemporary emphasis on increasing par-ticipation coupled with the mounting financial con-straints faced by study abroad providers, both pub-lic and private, profit and non-profit, that makes edu-cation abroad a more complex and potentially ex-pensive issue today than it has been in the past. Oneresponse, thus, to the pressures for international-ization in the educational community has been a re-newed emphasis on the need for forms of coopera-tion that would allow the sharing of costs, as well asof benefits. While such arrangements have a longhistory, one finds that ideas such as “linkages,” in-ter-institutional cooperation,” “partnerships,”“partnering,” “alliances,” “councils,” “secretariats,”“coordinating committees” and “consortia” are be-coming increasingly prominent in discussions aboutexpanding international education.

As professionals explore ways to provide effectiveand efficient means of delivering the expansion ofeducation abroad, it is instructive to examine pastcooperative efforts. This article will use the exampleof the College Consortium for International Studies(CCIS) to demonstrate how cooperation can be in-novative, cost-effective, participatory and successful.The beneficial aspects of sharing capital and humanresources will be illustrated.

CCIS began nearly 30 years ago as the Tri-StateConsortium (1973). The three inaugural colleges wereSUNY Rockland Community College (NY), MercerCommunity College (NJ) and Harrisburg Area Com-munity College (PA). In 1975, this Consortium be-came the College Consortium for International Stud-ies as it is known today.

The motivation for forming the Consortium had

An Effective Consortial Model for Study Abroad:A History of the College Consortium for International Studiesby Harlan Henson, Executive DirectorCollege Consortium for International Studies

less to do with now popular concerns like “globalcompetition,” than did they with issues of access toeducation abroad in the early 1970’s. They were“populist” in spirit, if not in the strict political senseof “meeting the needs of the common people andadvocating more equitable distribution of wealth andpower.” The Consortium’s founders were aware thatmost existing study abroad programs did not pro-vide opportunities for two year college students, norfor students from many regional and/or smaller fouryear institutions. The available programs were largelylimited to students of means who were primarily fromprominent private colleges. The participants oftenmajored in European languages. Cost factors discour-aged students of lower and middle income back-grounds, as did lack of linguistic preparation andspecialization in certain academic disciplines.

The Consortium’s approach was profoundly inno-vative as seen from the perspective of today’s globalrealities, and it was one of the earliest attempts tobroaden the base of study abroad participation. TheCCIS example illustrates how an organizational ap-proach can transcend a single institution’s hesita-tion to engage in study abroad programming.

With hindsight, it is useful to note it was only inthe early 1970’s that a national voice for the promo-tion of study abroad, the Section on U.S. StudentsAbroad, was given recognition by the National Asso-ciation of Foreign Student Affairs (NAFSA). It was alsoduring that time that several major state universi-ties began the development of university-wide (orsystem-wide) activities that would initiate the pro-cess of facilitating study abroad beyond traditionalsubjects like the study of foreign languages. Andwhile study abroad in some form or another has oc-curred at least since the time of Herodotus (fifth cen-tury B.C.), its more “populist” aspect surfaced in theUnited States with activities like those started by theCollege Consortium for International Studies.

The Consortium continued to increase member-ship first in two year and then in two and four yearcolleges and universities though the 1970’s and intothe 1980’s when, in 1982, it was incorporated as anon-profit, tax-exempt organization.

11

The goals were clearly articulated. It was to:

1) Coordinate international/intercultural programsfor students in participating colleges;

2) Coordinate and disseminate information con-cerning international courses, programs and activi-ties; and

3) Promote ease of transfer of international coursesand credits among participating institutions.

Early study abroad programs were first offered inEngland, Israel and Sweden, and currently 83 CCIS-approved programs are administrated by 19 mem-ber institutions in some 30 countries around theworld. The programs are arranged by the CCIS spon-soring member in cooperation with host institutionsabroad. The latter may be language institutes andprivate or public colleges and universities. Faculty isprovided by the host institution and students areusually housed with local families. Consistent withthe early goals of CCIS, subject matter may be taughtin English with direct matriculation possible and withthe provision for the study of local languages. Cur-rently these languages include: Arabic, Bulgarian,Chinese, French, Gaelic, German, Greek, Hebrew,Hungarian, Japanese, Italian, Korean, Portuguese,Russian and Spanish. All programs are approved bythe Consortium’s Academic Programs Committeeand its Board of Directors. The sponsorship and ad-ministration of each program remains with the CCISmember institution.

The founders of the Consortium were not only con-cerned with the paucity of programs available to theirstudents, but also with the lack of international edu-cational opportunities open to their faculty and ad-ministrators. Thus, in the early 1980’s they beganCCIS Professional Development Seminars organizedby member institutions. The seminars were to pro-vide faculty and staff with “condensed” study abroadexperiences. The seminar context might be of an in-troductory nature to a particular country or culturalarea, or it might be specific to an academic disci-pline or to a contemporary political, economic orsocial issue. In 1984, for example, Professional De-velopment Seminars were held in Belgium, India andSweden. CCIS continues the tradition of sponsoringseminars, and during 2001 seminars were offered inGhana, Israel and Russia.

The organization that began with three commu-nity colleges nearly three decades ago has expandedto become a partnership of approximately 130 U.S.colleges and universities with 50 associated mem-bers abroad. Membership is almost evenly balancedamong two and four year institutions, and the blend

includes rural and urban, large and small, public andprivate campuses. A wide range of higher educationalinstitutions in the United States is represented. Mem-bers continue to offer a variety of study abroad pro-grams which include foreign language study and sum-mer, semester and academic year options. Profes-sional Development Seminars remain a focus andhave recently been enhanced with the introductionof a “featured” seminar which provides grants for cost-sharing between CCIS and seminar participants. TheConsortium provides a modest, but growing, schol-arship fund for students from member institutions,and awards are available for professional programsite visitation.

The continued growth and vitality of CCIS demon-strates cooperative efforts can broaden and expandparticipation in study abroad. Consortia are able toprovide an extensive range of programs and a rangeof program fees by drawing from a large and diverseapplicant pool. In addition, sharing costs, benefitsand governance yields a sense of “ownership” thatoften results in greater institutional involvement andultimately in greater student participation.

Consortia can be innovative and proactive in thatthey can capture and channel the energy that comesfrom a shared philosophy that education abroad is aviable and necessary component of higher educationfor U.S. students, regardless of academic major, priorknowledge of foreign languages, income level or in-stitutional affiliation.

12

There is no blueprint for predicting success in edu-cation abroad programming. How can an adminis-trator plan for future sites, for example, when a re-port issued in November, 2000 by the American Coun-cil on Education noted that while 48% of high schoolstudents said they planned to study abroad, only 1%of college students do so annually? What to make ofthe fact (according to Open Doors 2000) that educa-tion abroad stays are getting shorter – one semesteror less—and access to education abroad programsby minorities remains very low? What are the impli-cations—for education abroad program development—of the growing partnerships between the privatesector and U.S. colleges and universities, and theresulting increase in development funds from cor-porations who want institutions to target certaincountries and/or fields of study as terms of their sup-port?

Analysis of trends and factors affecting studyabroad in the future indicate that a redefinition ofeducation abroad is just beginning. A study in June2000 by NAFSA: Association of International Educa-tors, points to changes in the population of studentslikely to participate in study abroad. Certainly en-rollment trends and changes in demographics of theU.S. population will impact study abroad programplanning. The NAFSA study highlights the followingtrends:

• The rise in the overall number of school-age chil-dren in the United States, and the resulting babyboomlet, is expected to continue over the next de-cade. More students are coming through the pipe-line to higher education. The U.S. is also experienc-ing growth in the traditional college age populationover the next seven years. This growth insures that apool of students in colleges and universities can berecruited for study abroad. Minorities will accountfor the most population growth according to the Mi-nority Business Development Agency. From 1995-2050, for example, minority population growth willaccount for nearly 90% of the total growth in the U.S.population.

• Incoming freshmen are better prepared in a num-ber of ways for higher education. Entering classes,for example, are diverse in language studies, com-puter literate, comfortable with taking part in com-

Demographic Factors Redefining Education Abroadby Gail A. HochhauserSenior Director, Special Programs, NAFSA: Association of International Educators

munity service and volunteer projects and have someexperience working while in high school.

• More students enroll directly into higher educa-tion upon graduation from high school. At the sametime, however, students are taking longer to com-plete their B.A. degree. In 1995-96, four out of fiveundergraduates worked while enrolled, and one halfof these students reported that the primary reasonfor working was to help pay for their education.

• Students are used to matriculating at more thanone institution over the course of their undergradu-ate years. To the extent that the home institution al-lows it, students will pick up courses at more thanone institution and location. Students are used totravel to different institutions. They are also becom-ing used to participate in distance education pro-grams.

• Adults in the United States are more educatedand are active participants in continuing educationprograms. While the latter is usually related to work,adults are also participating in short-term studyabroad experiences through social institutions, suchas museums, alumni organizations and groups suchas Elderhostel.

• Paying for higher education continues to be aserious consideration for most students, and thenumber of students receiving some form of financialaid has grown. This support has come mainly fromfederal loan programs, supplemented by federalgrants, and state and institutional loans. Fortunately,it has become a more prevalent practice in recentyears for students to apply their federal aid to studyabroad, as long as they are being awarded credit bytheir home institution for the course work takenabroad.

• Along with demography, occupational trends andeducational choices of higher education students arechanging, reflecting employer needs in a global so-ciety. For example, according to projections by theBureau of Labor Statistics, from 1998-2008, some ofthe fastest-growing occupations will be computer-related. Other fast growing areas include legal assis-tants, medical and health aides, social and humanservice personnel. At this time, the proportion of U.S.students studying abroad who are majoring in lan-

13

guages, social sciences and humanities has beendropping, while the proportion majoring in businessand management and technical fields has been ris-ing.

• Enrollments in foreign language classes show adecrease in registrations for French classes, and asubstantial increase in student registrations for Span-ish classes. If students are increasingly motivated to‘learn to earn,’ as noted above, Spanish is the ‘ca-reer’ language for an increasing number of students.

The demographic shifts and occupational forecastshave already been incorporated by some adminis-trators in their education abroad program planning.For example, study abroad for high school – and evenmiddle school – students have increased in popular-ity. These students will participate in college anduniversity study abroad programs, and are increas-ingly the target of higher education’s study abroadrecruiters. The study abroad community has alreadydiversified the kinds and duration of programs, of-fering students an array of short-term practical train-ing opportunities and internships as part of theirstudy abroad program.

The development of short-term programs (i.e., onemonth) lends itself to more faculty involvement forsome institutions. The timing is good for faculty andthere are incentives to participate, such as the op-portunity to travel, conduct research, receive a sti-pend and renew academic networks abroad. Devel-oping faculty support outside of the traditional lan-guage areas is critical to the sustainability of moststudy abroad programs. Faculty members can be thegreatest asset a school has for developing or expand-ing programs abroad, or they can be a stumblingblock in the process.

Study abroad program administrators are alsoworking with alumni organizations on campuses todevelop programs that can be marketed to the agingbaby boom generation. Retirees tend to travel, oftenlook to venture off the beaten tourist paths abroadand seek to incorporate a learning facet into theirtravel programs.

With more students taking Spanish as undergradu-ates, there is an expected increase in students look-ing to study Spanish abroad, and thus an increase ininterest in programs in Spanish-speaking countries.However, students without language capability arealso looking for programs abroad and locations wheresome course work – if not all – is conducted in En-glish.

Study abroad has entered the radar screen of na-tional and international organizations, with groupscalling for greater growth in the numbers of students

studying abroad. The first national International Edu-cation Week took place November 13-17, 2000; fo-cused support on U.S. campuses and communitiesincreased the visibility of international education andexchange. NAFSA has recently established a nationalTask Force on Study Abroad to examine barriers toaccess to study abroad, and the legislative and pro-grammatic implications for overcoming the barriers.There is also a number of college and universitymandates to increase overall study abroad signifi-cantly.

The Association for International Practical Train-ing (AIPT), committed to improving internationalunderstanding through on-the-job practical trainingexperiences, has recently cited a large imbalance inthe composition of their training exchanges: 90% oftheir program participants are foreign nationals com-ing into the United States, while only 10% of theirparticipants are Americans going abroad. An “Ameri-cans Abroad Campaign” launched in Spring 2001, willexamine long and short-term strategies to increasethe number of U.S. students in the organizations’experiential programs.

And then there is the mid-West liberal arts institu-tion which proposes to eliminate all classroom in-struction in foreign languages. This radical planwould send students abroad to learn a foreign lan-guage. The idea is both a reaction to decreasing en-rollments in their foreign language programs, andan acknowledgment that learning a language is bestaccomplished via immersion in the host country. Theplan by this college is certainly not a trend, but anexample of how institutions are examining demo-graphic shifts and occupational forecasts, and alsore-examining accepted curricular practices.

So what does the immediate future of educatingU.S. students abroad look like? It seems clear thatparticipants’ numbers will increase, in real terms andin the capacity of institutions to better documentstudent participation. Education abroad programswill continue to be developed for a student popula-tion that is increasingly varied—by age, backgroundand ethnicity. Programs will be shorter in length, toaccommodate the needs of students who work and/or have family obligations and who, therefore, can-not afford to be away for a semester or academic year.There will be efforts to diversify the curriculum foreducation abroad to attract students interested ineducation for careers in the new economy. And alongwith these efforts, program administrators will alsolook to diversify program locations to better attractolder students with the interest, income and flexibil-ity to travel abroad.

14

Before computers there were index cards and shoeboxes. That’s where I began. From there to here hasbeen an interesting journey.

It all started in 1977, when my college asked me tobe its study abroad adviser. The first person I turnedto for advice in setting up a resource library was Lilyvon Klemperer (editor’s note: in whose name NAFSAannually makes an award honoring a young memberfor their contribution to the field of study abroad).But Lily did much more than help me identify andassemble resources. For many years, she made thefive hour bus ride from her apartment in GreenwichVillage (in New York City) to the apple orchards andsheep pastures of Amherst, Massachusetts. She wasthe annual guest of honor and speaker at an enthu-siastically attended and festive Study Abroad Nighton the Hampshire campus. The next day, she metwith students singly and in groups until she answeredall their questions—or assured the rare studentwhose question she couldn’t answer that she wouldgo home and search through her box of index cardsuntil she found the answer and get back to themthrough me. (During these daylong advising mara-thons, I mostly sat still and listened.)

Without her box of cards, Lily relied on the NewGuide to Study Abroad, her own selection of U.S. pro-grams abroad and courses open to U.S. students inoverseas schools. Unfortunately, much of the infor-mation in the book soon went out of date and thebook itself eventually went out of print. Before it did,I enlisted Lily’s help to introduce a periodical guideto international educational opportunities so that wecould systematically gather, update and share mate-rial on study, work and educational travel abroad. (Iwas interested in introducing students to all the waysto gain international experience and adults to waysto include an educational component in their travel.)

While some compiled lists of study abroad pro-grams already existed, none, except Lily’s New Guide,provided judgments about the quality of the pro-grams—judgments that were largely implicit in whatwas left unsaid. One of the first things I did with Tran-sitions Abroad was design an evaluation form and sendit to all overseas program directors for their studentsfill out and return to me. I then edited the responsesand printed my summaries in the magazine. The vol-

ume of responses and increasing unreliability of thesources meant I had to give up this part of the project.Lily, meanwhile, continued to write her own overviewof programs: “Study Abroad Advisor.”

After I abandoned my perhaps naïve attempt toevaluate programs through questionnaires, I turnedto evaluating resources. In 1980, I published “Intern-ships, Traineeships and Work-Study ExperienceAbroad: References and Resources.” A few years later,I connected with a young man in Toronto, Jean-MarcHachey, who was compiling a list of work abroadopportunities for Canadians. Hachey agreed to sharehis disks containing all that he had discovered. Icould edit and add to them. I don’t recall the nameof the software, but for me it was a fantastic revela-tion! The first comprehensive guide to work abroadresources was published that year.

Other resource guides followed, including not onlyguides for undergraduate study abroad (already be-ing assembled by other SECUSSANs), but ones toprograms and resources for high school students,seniors, persons with disabilities, etc. Meanwhile,William Nolting, the Director of International Oppor-tunities at the University of Michigan (this year’sSECUSSA Chair-Elect), picked up on our Work AbroadResource Guide and created a valuable set of handoutsfor his students on all types of overseas opportuni-ties. From this evolved Bill’s own extraordinarily richweb site [www.umich.edu/~icenter/overseas] and hisselection and description of other important websites for international educators and students. (WorkAbroad: The Complete Guide to Finding a Job Overseas, ed-ited by William Nolting and Susan Griffith and pub-lished by Transitions Abroad, now in its third edition).

Meanwhile, my work with Transitions Abroad had ex-actly the same purpose as my work as the facultymember responsible for international education atHampshire College: to gather information on inter-national education, evaluate it and share it. Com-munications technology made this possible to anextent that I could not have imagined when I enteredthe field in the l970s. Transitions Abroad now maintainsan active mailing list of nearly 30,000 organizations,divided into “Programs” and “Resources.” Frequentmailings assure us that none of our information canbe more than a few months old (much of it is up-

The Impact of Communications Technologyon the Study Abroad Fieldby Clay Hubbs, Founder, Editor and Publisher of Transitions Abroad; Former Associate Professor of Humanities andArts and International Studies Director, Hampshire College

15

dated directly on the Internet by the organizationsthemselves).

By the early 1990s advisers had begun to use com-puters to track and communicate with students, andby the mid-1990s, as Bill Hoffa points out in his well-argued piece on “E-Mail and Study Abroad: The Prosand Cons of Travel and Living in Cyberspace” (in theJanuary/February 1996 issue of Transitions Abroad), elec-tronic technology played a central role in interna-tional education.

Simultaneously with its appearance as a majorcommunication and tracking device, the Internetbecame a major marketing tool for program spon-sors.

Mark Landon, who, with Mark Shay, startedStudyabroad.com on Labor Day weekend 1995, re-cently told me that program directors as well as stu-dents loved the site from the beginning, and thatthere was little resistance from international educa-tion advisers to the use of the Internet as a market-ing tool. If a potential client lacked a web site, Landonand Shay would create one for them at a nominalcost so that their sites could be linked toStudyabroad.com. At Transitions Abroad, although wenever planned to sell banner advertising on our website, a number of the magazine’s advertisers insistedthey wanted to be represented there. So we changedour minds.

Heather O’Conner, the Study Abroad Adviser atBentley College, argues in the March/April 1999 is-sue of Transitions Abroad (“Marketing on the Internet:Using the Web to Sell Your Programs and SupportStudy Abroad”) that promoting your own overseasprograms and promoting international education gohand in hand. With a web site, program sponsors canreach a large and growing audience of students, par-ents and international educators without spendinga fortune. Web sites can promote programs day andnight and update as changes occur. In short, the In-ternet is a natural for promoting study abroad pro-grams.

But is the Internet equally as valuable to advisers?In researching the article mentioned above, Hoffareceived responses from 40 schools of all sizes anddescriptions. Students at half of them reported thatthey already used the Internet to get informationabout where they were going, particularly by linkingto the receiving school’s web site. Once the possibil-ity for students to do their own research existed, stu-dents apparently took full advantage of it.

Another respondent to Hoffa’s survey, John Pearsonat Stanford University, put it this way: Student ac-cess to overseas host institution information puts

them “ahead of their advisers (me!) in figuring allthis out…We can’t control this information anymore.”

Pearson thinks this is good (or at least he did atthat time). Others have reservations.

Kathleen Sideli, writing on “Technology and StudyAbroad: Lessons I Have Learned,” in the Fall 2000issue of International Educator, describes five “ironies”associated with the uses of technology in interna-tional education advising. The first is that the moreinformation the students have to choose from, themore they seem to resist absorbing any of it. Thesecond, which follows from the first, is that schoolshave become so sophisticated in their ways of pre-senting information that students do not easily dis-tinguish between quality and the lack of quality: “Oneeffect of the rise of dot.coms has been that advisershave lost ground as the chief sources of informationabout programs. The obvious lesson here is thatflashy web sites are not necessarily representativeof the quality of a program. How do we ensure thatstudents somehow get this message in time to savethem from a costly error?”

In my own experience, we often don’t get to stu-dents in time. Sometimes we may not get to them atall. Compared to my early years as an advisor, I foundmy last years much less satisfying. It was wonderfulto be in instant e-mail contact with students whowere in schools abroad where, by working together,the student and I had located the right match. It wasalso great to be able to talk directly with the on-sitedirectors and hear their versions of what was hap-pening with the students. In short, I found e-mail aboon to advising. But not web sites, not even ourown. While modest, I thought our web site was prettygood (after all, I copied much of it from my neigh-bors down the road at the University of Massachu-setts). I thought it communicated what needed tobe said. But our students didn’t seem to use it. Ourmessage couldn’t compete with those of dot.comsand fancier institutional web sites.

At the end of my tenure as international studiesadvisor, despite all the computers and databases andlistservs with knowledgeable advisers standing by, Imissed the early days when Lily von Klemperer satbeside me with her dog-eared copy of the New Guideto Study Abroad and answered students’ questions.Obviously, she didn’t know everything, but studentstrusted and believed her because she had done herresearch on the quality of the programs. Finally, listsof programs are only lists of programs, whetherthey’re on my web site or someone else’s, and thelooks of a web site depends upon how much you canafford to spend to develop it.

16

After nearly 30 years as an advisor on internationaleducation, I agree with Kathy Sideli in the articlementioned above (and I’m glad a younger and muchmore technically proficient adviser than me said it):“Study abroad, although enhanced by technology, isbasically a field with core objectives and results thatremain virtually untouched by technology. . . .We havea long way to go before we know how to marshal thepower of technology to enhance the academic andintercultural components of study abroad.”

17

Institutionally based education abroad profession-als, whether they are program directors or advisors,often find themselves playing the role of advocate,historian, guide and persuader as their day to daywork and longer term objectives come into contactwith various institutional policies, philosophies andpractices. To be successful, we often must balancethe desired goals of our office with the impact onthese goals of institutional forces. As there is no typi-cal U.S. institution of higher education, so there canbe no standard set of guidelines that assist us inworking within our institutions.

Nevertheless, we need to keep in mind the indi-vidual characteristics and peculiarities of institutions.For while there may be national action intended toincrease, or encourage an increase, of the numbersof students pursuing some form of academic experi-ence overseas, it remains the case that almost allstudents who study abroad are, at the time of theirdecision, enrolled in a U.S. college. Institutional is-sues, policy and commitment therefore remain asimportant, if not more so, than national gestures andactions.

However, institutions of higher education are com-plex; it is often difficult to understand how they op-erate and difficult to predict how they will respondto internal and external pressures. It is also a chal-lenge to impose a new and different way of doingthings. It is therefore important to understand thepolitics, and indeed policies, of an institution in or-der to be able to develop and encourage educationabroad. Being a leader means, in the manner of howRichard Neustadt described the challenge of beingPresident of the U.S.A., having the power to persuadeand the patience to understand, to know what is pos-sible in the context of the realities of the institution.

What are some of the internal complexities thathelp determine the climate for education abroad andwhich may need close attention for anyone hopingto affect change? Many of these issues do not existin isolation from each other; they not only often in-tersect, but they also involve the same campus play-ers. The following questions frame the complex na-ture of the academic environment and shape the cli-mate in which education abroad professionals mustperform their work.

The Role of the Institutional Setting and its Impacton Education Abroad Policy and Programsby John PearsonDirector, Bechtel International Center, Stanford University

• Who drives the desire for education abroad op-portunities?

Is it faculty driven, supported by an administrativeoffice, or does an administrative office develop pro-grams in cooperation with interested faculty. If theinstitution has an international mission, or if it talksof being a global or an international university, isthis connected in any direct way to education abroad?What is the oversight, as opposed to the reportinglines, of an education abroad office?

• Are education abroad opportunities part of themission of undergraduate education?

If so, how is this articulated? Is there a clear sensethat the institution has clear objectives for educa-tion abroad? Or is it just another of the many stu-dent related services that institutions now provide,sometimes minimally, and often without much over-all strategy? To influence the future of educationabroad will mean knowing the history of the programor office: when, how and who decided that educa-tion abroad was to be offered at a particular institu-tion is as instructive as knowing the current scenario.

• Who has an interest in the work you do in educa-tion abroad at an institution?

Can you feel confident that you could articulatethe various parts of the institution that have an in-terest? Often it is not just the obvious offices anddepartments that are important. One way to do it isto spend some time, as a staff, detailing all the vari-ous offices and units on your campus that have aninterest in what you do. Which offices seem favor-able and why; which offices seem actively discourag-ing and why? Are there offices that show a form of“benign neglect” but could, with some effort, turn intoyour supporters? A secondary question is: Who, oncampus, should know about your work?

• How are education abroad opportunities relatedto broader institutional philosophies? Examples ofthese would be: the institutional philosophy on ad-missions; and the financial and educational goals ofthe home campus curriculum, including, but not re-lated to, language and area studies requirements.

What can we learn from campus admission stan-dards and from an institution’s financial aid policies

18

that would suggest education abroad is a possible,and popular, choice for students? For example, a veryselective private institution is likely to accept a cer-tain percentage of students who may already havehad some overseas experience which can preparethem for further journeys; institutions whose mis-sion is different may need more incentives to encour-age students to spend time overseas. Likewise, fi-nancial aid can be used as a strong inducement toallow students to broaden their experiences.

Curriculum issues are also integral to whether aninstitution might be laying the groundwork for sup-porting education abroad. For example:

• What are the distribution and graduation require-ments?

• Are there area studies majors?

• Do some majors encourage learning about othercultures and areas of the world through overseasexperience?

• How secure are faculty in recommending educa-tion abroad as a means to meeting home campusrequirements, not in a technical, unit count, butrather in a pedagogical sense.

• Does the institution have intentional barriers toeducation abroad, or are there policies and proce-dures that indirectly affect education abroad?

What are some of these intentional barriers? Itcould be the absence of an office providing eitherprogramming or advising; or the absence of clearlystated faculty commitment to education abroad sug-gesting the home institution offers all a studentneeds academically. It may be that there is a statedpolicy that institutional financial aid cannot be usedto study abroad on programs administered by otherinstitutions. Perhaps the institution allows studentsto study abroad only on a few selected programs.Such intentional barriers are usually reasonably easyto identify because they tend to be transparent - thatis, expressed in writing.

Unintentional barriers are barriers nevertheless;they are difficult to overcome, and often not specifi-cally in place to negatively affect education abroad.These barriers could appear in several ways and in-clude: transfer credit may be possible, but, it is acomplicated process; federal financial aid may bedifficult to use; faculty may be neutral to educationabroad or indifferent; the international office mayhave minimal staffing with few institutional expec-tations to increase the numbers of students study-ing abroad; study abroad may be viewed as a funthing to do and therefore worthy of only minimalsupport and little oversight.

Someone trying to affect change on campus willneed to clearly identify these obstacles and begin toformulate a list of clearly defined objectives and de-velop strong arguments to overcome them. To be aneffective agent of change, one needs a clear under-standing of institutional possibilities: Which ob-stacles have a chance of being removed, and whomight be a partner in removing these obstacles?There may be institutional characteristics, which onthe surface, appear to have little to do with educa-tion abroad, but, which can be used positively to fos-ter change. For example, faculty may be actively in-volved in advising and recommending programs,without such advising being well known or under-stood by the institution; to obtain transfer credit forstudy abroad, the institution may apply the same flex-ible guidelines as to domestic transfer credit; theinstitution may provide four years (or nearly) of hous-ing for its undergraduates—a guarantee that is de-pendent on a certain number of students not beingin residence each quarter or semester.

It is therefore important for education abroad pro-fessionals to know the policies and values of an in-stitution, and understand how they affect develop-ment and implementation of education abroad op-portunities. It is equally important to keep in mindthat institutions of higher education can be bothdynamic and conservative. The problem is often thatthey are conservative when we would wish them tobe dynamic, and dynamic when we wish they wouldbe conservative.

What are some of the institutional characteristicswhich may influence the growth and development ofeducation abroad? The following is a summary of keyissues:

• What is the focus of study abroad and why is itso? Does the institution administer its own programs,does it belong to consortia, does it just advise, andallow, students to go overseas on a wide variety ofprograms. Why is this the approach and who sup-ports it? Or is it more the case that it has alwaysbeen this way?

• Who provides the advising? How involved are fac-ulty or has it been delegated completely to profes-sional staff? Does it matter if this is the case?

• How does the institution define education abroad(if it does)? As a purely academic-classroom activityor involving experiential and service learning? Stu-dents are increasingly adventuresome in more thanjust their destinations; the diversity of their experi-ences overseas is remarkable: mainstream studyabroad programs, internships, volunteer work, ser-

19

vice learning, intensive language programs, indepen-dent research, collaborative research with faculty. Isit possible to paint a full picture of the ways thatstudents at a particular institution pursue their goalsoverseas?

• Is the diversity of the home student populationreflected in education abroad programs? Are olderstudents, disabled students, married students, eth-nic students, lesbian, gay and bisexual students en-couraged to pursue education abroad?

• What types of programs does the institutionsponsor or support? Is there encouragement for aca-demic year programs over quarter or semester pro-grams? Does the institution support the concept ofreciprocal exchange programs? Has there been a dis-cussion as the value of one experience over anotherand if so who is involved in this debate? For manyyears, one debate within education abroad has beenbetween the “island” program versus the “ full im-mersion” program. This is a simplistic way of look-ing at the issue as many programs combine elementsof both. What is the academic reasoning behind aninstitution developing one type of program over an-other?

• How does the institution evaluate and validateits programs? In other words, is there data not juston who goes and where they go, but why they go andwhat was the affect of the overseas sojourn? If suchinformation is gathered, how is it used? If not col-lected and kept, why not? What is the process fordeveloping new programs? Is there a mechanism inplace that allows for a comprehensive survey of fac-ulty and students—and which incorporates theirviews along with the academic goals of the institu-tion—in the development of new education abroadprograms? How flexible is the structure to allow forchange?

Education abroad professionals are genuinelymotivated to encourage more students to spend timeoverseas. To effectively achieve this laudable goalrequires an understanding of one’s institutional cul-ture, and also the skills to effectively work within thisculture to develop and sustain education abroad pro-grams.

20

The first day of class in London three years ago, agroup of students participating in our business—fo-cused study abroad program did not know the an-swer to the British professor’s basic questions aboutthe European Union, the region’s geography or theEuro. Our professor who was observing the class wasappalled. We had conducted a mandatory orienta-tion program in the U.S. prior to departure that ad-dressed general study abroad issues such as health,safety and credit transfer. However, this orientationonly prepared students for the mechanics of study-ing abroad; it did not increase their global aware-ness. We were troubled; if students at one site weren’tfully prepared for life abroad, chances are it was alsoa problem at other sites. So we created a mandatoryone—credit course for all outbound students calledInternational Perspectives.

The overall course objectives were threefold: first,to provide students with general background on in-ternational business and current events; second, toprovide students with knowledge specific to theirhost country; finally, to give students the tools nec-essary to adapt to a culture different from their own.We recently completed the third semester of thecourse and are preparing for the fourth.

International Perspectives includes orientation,peer advising, panels, regional briefings and cultureshock preparation. It meets weekly during the sec-ond half of each semester in two hour blocks. Stu-dents are assessed in the following ways:

• Four weekly reports on news articles about thehost country.

• Four country briefings, which pose questionsabout history and politics; education; daily life andculture; economics, the environment and population.

• A final paper summarizing what was gained fromthe class and detailing what the student will con-tinue to investigate.

Initially, students were less than enthusiastic aboutInternational Perspectives, but in the end, they ap-preciated the course. The final evaluations were filledwith begrudging comments like “I expected this tobe a waste of time, but I have to admit that I learneda lot.”

Hitting the Ground Running: The Impact of APre-Departure Class on Study Abroad Participantsby Andrea Poehling, Assistant Director of International ProgramsUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison School of Business

In general, students considered the independentwork the most beneficial. In addition to learningabout the issue at hand, students acquired habitsand supplemental information they later deemedessential. As a result of the article summaries, stu-dents acquired the habit of reading a newspaper oronline news source daily. While researching the coun-try briefings’ required (and oft-considered boring)questions, students came upon topics they foundmore interesting. One student researched his gene-alogy on his own; another was captivated by the storybehind the Mexican flag.

We adapt the course each semester based on whatwe learn along the way. The quality of the article sum-maries varied tremendously, and reading them in-spired changes to the curriculum. Several studentsexceeded expectations by referencing more than onearticle for a single assignment or by following a singletheme for all four summaries, like one savvy studentwho focused his independent work on London’s clubindustry, as he aspires to a career in entertainment.But not all summaries were top quality. Some stu-dents obviously found an article—often of dubiousrelevance—at the last moment and restated minutedetails simply to meet the one page length require-ment. I struggled to ascertain the relevance ofMadonna’s first internet broadcast concert (from Lon-don) or weekly updates on the surgical separation oftwin babies (in England) to an undergraduate’spreparation for study abroad. Our syllabus now sug-gests that students use assignments either to gain abroad-based understanding of the region or to focuson a particular topic of interest, and it also requiresstudents to discuss the relevance of the topic in ad-dition to summarizing the article.

While many of the students found the country brief-ing assignments tedious, they ultimately realized thatby completing the briefings, they learned basic in-formation about the host country. Working on thebriefings raised practical matters that students hadnot previously considered, including tipping, weatherand public transportation. A wildly popular featureof the class was interviewing students from the hostcountry, a requirement for completing several brief-ings. Students were astounded by what they learned,

21

and many expressed that the impending studyabroad experience felt “real” and concrete for the firsttime. In several cases, the interview spawned newfriendships.

Before International Perspectives, orientation in-cluded only a cursory overview of culture shock. How-ever, the new course’s cultural sensitivity training wasprofoundly influential. Many students assumed theywould easily adapt to the new culture, either becauseof personal attributes or because of their destina-tion. As one student said, “England isn’t that muchdifferent than here.” The presenter’s visual aids, sto-ries of international students in the U.S. and personalexperiences as a British national living abroad gavea realistic and personalized look at culture shock. Thesession struck a chord. One student wrote shortlyafter arriving in Hong Kong, “At first I was basicallyoverwhelmed, but after only a single day I feel like Iam starting to get settled in. The people here areincredibly nice and I’m having a great time already. Ithink that I might be in the ‘honeymoon stage’ ac-cording to our International Perspectives class.”

Although International Perspectives has success-fully prepared our students for the transition to study-ing abroad, some problems with course design re-main. The greatest challenges are keeping the courserelevant to all members of a group whose interestsspan 13 countries on three continents and providingan overview of worldwide current events. We invitedthree guest speakers to each provide a 45 minutesummary of the economic and political events thatshape Asia, Latin America or Western Europe, theregions where we send students. Admittedly, this wasa tall order. The lectures were met with mixed reviews,as some students found the material too basic, whilefor others it was too focused. Far too many studentscomplained about being briefed on a location farfrom where they would study. We struggle with howto instill the worth of learning about issues happen-ing around the world, and not just in the country ofinterest. In the future, we will more carefully explainwhy the lectures are important.

The final paper was a tool for students to reflectupon what they had learned in International Perspec-tives and to provide focus for final preparations. Stu-dents cited the value of specific lectures or assign-ments, often stating that a topic they once consid-ered amorphous had suddenly become very relevant.One Spain-bound student wrote about her increasedunderstanding of the Basque separatist movement,and implications for her life while in Madrid. A stu-dent headed for Singapore not only learned aboutlaws and punishment there, but also the influence

they might have on a society. We may consider col-lecting the final paper after the study abroad pro-gram ends, which will allow students to report bothon the value of the overseas experience and the im-pact of the class.

Our students are not the only ones who have ben-efited from International Perspectives. Our partneruniversities have told us, anecdotally, that they ap-preciate hosting students who are better preparedfor living in the host city and adapting to a new cul-ture, and who also can adjust to different academicexpectations. I also benefited a great deal from In-ternational Perspectives. Given that most studentse-mail me for information rather than stop by my of-fice, it was enlightening to see students on a weeklybasis. I was constantly reminded of the value of in-ternational education and the exciting journey thestudents were embarking upon. I have used the feed-back from our host partners to refine the course andimprove our site-specific handbooks.

International Perspectives has proved to be a valu-able asset to our curriculum. Our overseas partnershost students who have an increased global perspec-tive. My office has improved its services. Outboundstudents now think about the host country monthsin advance of the program and are thus better pre-pared for studying and living abroad. Students viewInternational Perspectives as a bonus: they makepreparations they knew they should be doing, butmight not otherwise have done. And now studentscan speak with confidence about the European Unionon their first day of class in London.

22

In Zimbabwe, I have also become accustomed tobeing motionless. Being motionless usually feelsgood, as when I sat with Amai Kyandere on thekitchen hut floor waiting for the water to boil. Some-times even waiting for a bus that may never comecan feel good. It has to do with acceptance, allowingfor a slower pace and understanding that nothing isreally predictable.

These are the words of an American undergradu-ate, Perrin Elkind, newly returned from study in Af-rica. Her story, Tonderai: Studying Abroad in Zimbabwe(Fort Bragg, CA: Lost Coast Press, 1998), a movingaccount of how study in a very different culture candeepen understanding of the self and the world, is amodel of what can be achieved at the edges, the fron-tiers, of American higher education. It serves as akind of testimony to the flexibility of a system thatcan expand to include life experiences such as thesewithin its capacious formal structures. These struc-tures are challenged daily as more and more studentslike Perrin Elkind set out on journeys through mindand space in search of themselves and the world.

If we are to encourage such journeys, we shouldlook anew at the options for foreign study and at thechanging patterns of study abroad by American stu-dents. More of them are on the move, from a widerrange of institutions (thanks in part to growing flex-ibility on the part of sending institutions and accred-iting agencies), and with a much greater range ofdestinations. They are also going, on average, forshorter periods.

The shift from Europe is significant in percentageterms. The once dominant idea of study abroad as akind of European finishing school has been replaced,at least in part, by a more eclectic pattern with lessemphasis on immersion in traditional western cul-ture and greater emphasis for example on discover-ing the Americas (the most dramatic increase in num-bers relates to Latin America) and on engaging withother, more distant parts of the world (and not justthe Europeanized environment of Australia and NewZealand, but the countries of Africa and of east,southeast and south Asia). Such travel patterns putstrains on the sending mechanisms—offices of studyabroad and engaged faculty members. The need foradvanced preparation is made all the more acute by

Study, Service and the Self-Transformedby Humphrey TonkinPresident Emeritus, University of Hartford

the shortness of the foreign visits themselves: If astudent takes all of his or her time abroad goingthrough the initial stages of adaptation, the time leftbeyond the threshold stage when the full benefits ofthe experience accrue, dwindles to nothing. Add tothis the fact that the cognitive gap between homeand abroad is often large, and it is clear that orienta-tion programs must be planned carefully and reen-try programs developed to receive students back intofamiliar surroundings.

Above all, the programs themselves must be ofhigh quality. Running unusual programs in exotic andinaccessible places requires special skills, a kind thatmay not be available to individual institutions. Suchprograms are best left to the experts. The School forInternational Training (SIT) for example, under whoseauspices Perrin Elkind visited Zimbabwe, includesamong its offerings programs in over 10 African coun-tries (totals for all U.S. students going to Africa areup by a factor of six over the past 15 years), and insuch countries as Thailand, Viet Nam, Nepal, Indo-nesia and most recently, Mongolia. SIT is also aboutto start a program in Cuba. Drawing on its years ofexpertise in foreign study and in work in difficult en-vironments, the School specializes in offering pro-grams in countries and subjects not easily handledby conventional U.S. institutions. Many of these pro-grams involve various forms of hands-on experience,stressing fieldwork, independent study and self-help.

Equally adventurous in its way, though offeringprograms of a different kind, is the International Part-nership for Service Learning (IPSL), which operatessemester long and summer programs in some 10 for-eign countries in Europe, the Americas and Asia.These programs are roughly evenly divided betweenconventional study, generally in a host institutionsuch as the University of Montpellier in France, Ben-Gurion University in Israel and Trinity College in thePhilippines, and community service in literacy pro-grams, grass-roots community organization, legaldefense programs, social work services and a host ofother activities. Classroom work and community ser-vice are linked in a regular seminar under the leader-ship of an experienced mentor who helps studentsprocess their experiences in the field and relate theirclassroom learning to their community work.

23

There is plenty of evidence that prolonged studyabroad, particularly when it involves a degree of im-mersion in a culture very different from one’s own, isa transforming experience for many. Leaders of studyprograms abroad point to the ways in which suchexperiences challenge received assumptions, teachvalues and allow students to look at their home-coun-try lives in a different way. We do not need remind-ing that in the world of tomorrow, with more andmore people occupying tighter and tighter physical,intellectual and emotional space, and with increasedmobility and easier communication leading to moreand more overlap and layering of cultures, youngpeople (and old ones too) need such perspective.The SIT programs are taking students to some of themore remote parts of the world, giving them an op-portunity to observe and participate in environmentsthat are rapidly changing and may never againpresent the kinds of exotic variety that they now dis-play. The programs of the Partnership are approach-ing this process of change in a different way, by giv-ing students an opportunity actually to participatein mitigating some of the effects of the deprivationand dislocation that can be variously described aslongstanding or as products of modernization.

The service learning movement, of which the Part-nership is one of the most interesting manifestations,has grown in strength in recent years, in part in re-sponse to an expanding realization on the part ofeducators that uniting theory and practice benefitsboth sides of the equation: Students learn to derivetheory from practice, and to test theory through prac-tical observation. The net result is that a generationof students less adapted to the traditional ways ofacquiring knowledge through passive absorptionlearns in a new way, and perhaps in the process ad-vances its own moral development and the ethic ofservice to fellow human beings. Service learning hasits roots in part in such organizations as CampusCompact whose initial aim was to persuade morestudents at conventional liberal arts colleges anduniversities to get involved in volunteer work in thecommunities around their institutions. But, while itbuilds on the ethic of community service, its goalsare at once deeper and more ambitious: It seeks tomake community service not an adjunct but an inte-gral part of formal study. Many of the member insti-tutions of Campus Compact now have their servicelearning programs, in which they encourage facultymembers to develop teaching programs linked to thecommunity and assist them in making the connec-tions.

Community service, too, can be a transforming

experience. Many students, growing up in middle-class homes in suburban neighborhoods, have hadlittle to do with the world revealed to them whenthey embark on programs taking them into social-service organizations, hospitals and inner-cityschools, and they can derive deep satisfaction fromcombining their own studies with the well-being oftheir communities. They can also learn new ways oflooking at the world, and through the formal learn-ing process, share their experiences with others. Fur-thermore, while so much of classroom learning isbased on competition, community service revolvesaround cooperation: Such service puts students insituations in which they maximize their productivityby working effectively with others.

It is perhaps worth emphasizing that the idea be-hind service-learning, of linking the classroom withthe larger world, theory with practice, is an idea ofworldwide potency. While we can find some of itsroots in the long-established American belief in vol-unteer service, an idea fostered and promoted byenlightened liberal arts institutions over many years—or in the conjunction of education and practicethat lies behind the land-grant colleges of the 19thcentury—it has many genealogies in many traditionsacross the world. In 1998, a group of educators andrepresentatives of non-governmental organizationsfrom the United States and 15 countries around theworld met at the Wingspread Conference Center inRacine, Wisconsin, to review the progress of servicelearning initiatives in the United States and abroad.A report published by the IPSL the following year(Howard A. Berry and Linda A. Chisholm, Service Learn-ing in Higher Education Around the World, New York: IPSL,1999) described service learning programs in thesecountries and 15 others—programs linked withteaching (in Indonesia, Israel, Ecuador, the CzechRepublic, for example), health care (in Japan, Jamaica,Liberia, France…), community development (thePhilippines, Mexico, Kyrgyzstan, Korea…) and so on.These programs include those of individual profes-sors or institutions and also nationwide and region-wide efforts. Service learning, in short, has becomean important element in the higher education sys-tems of many countries, and in the academic pro-grams of numerous individual institutions. “I wouldlike not only to study at my desk, but also to go tothe place, to touch and feel,” writes Miyuki Araki inthe IPSL report (p. 22). “Service learning gives mefirst-hand experience of team work and brings me incontact with people, especially children,” adds IfeomaNnaji of Nigeria; “I consider this vital because I wantto be a doctor.”

24

One reason for convening the Wingspread confer-ence was to explore international cooperation in ser-vice learning. When service learning and study abroadare brought together, they form a powerful combina-tion. Students find themselves studying in settingsvery different from those of their home country, whichcall forth all the adaptation skills that we associatewith study abroad: Learning a new culture while at-tending to the ordinary needs of daily living, partici-pating in a dialogue with those around them in adifferent idiom or a different language. But this chal-lenge to their sense of self is not simply a journey ofself-discovery, not simply an adaptation that, onceembarked upon, benefits them and them alone: It isa means to an end. Students in service-learning pro-grams adapt to their surroundings not simply to ad-vance their own agenda but to enter into a partner-ship, a compact, with a community needing theirservices. So there is a collectively recognizable goaland purpose to their adaptation, and the effort thatthey expend on it has its rewards not only for thembut also for the people they serve. The willingness toserve and the desire to do it well are powerful moti-vators, hastening an adaptation that once a thresh-old has been crossed, allows students to benefit mostfully from the cultural experience. One reason (or soI believe, without benefit of research) why interna-tional service learning is so effective is the fact thatstudents are put in positions in which they have toadapt fast, and in which strong supportive mecha-nisms are in place to hasten the adaptation.

A few years ago, asked to speak to an audience ofspecialists in international service learning about myown sense of why such learning works, I enumerateda series of points that perhaps bear repeating. Ab-stract learning, I declared (and as I have suggestedabove), is easier when it is rooted in practical expe-rience, and the experience itself is enriched when itis linked directly with learning. There are those whoargue that we sacrifice objectivity when we allow thepractical or the here-and-now to intrude into theclassroom, but the objectivity that we allegedly sac-rifice may be the objectivity of the status quo, theideology of the powerful. A classroom in which real-life experiences are analyzed, and in which guidanceis provided for dealing with such real-life experiences,may be a messier place than the antiseptic environ-ment of clinical objectivity, and it may wreak havocwith test-taking and unambiguous competition forgrades—but, as my very examples imply, educationis never value-free. I might add that it doesn’t alwayswork, and a system that encourages tempered self-worth may be a better teaching environment thanone that simply sorts, rewards and punishes. Teach-

ers working in a service-learning environment maybecome better teachers of students (as opposed tomachines for the unerring separation of sheep fromgoats) and better observers of societies and cultures.

Far from value-free, education is in fact a journeywith maps and compasses: Namely the values of theteacher, and the collective and individual values ofthe students themselves. The best way to learn thevalues of sharing and service is by deriving them fromconcrete, unambiguous situations where the humanneed to cooperate is made incontrovertibly clear.Perhaps I should add my belief that the right way tolearn self-worth is by observing one’s ability to bet-ter the self-worth of others.

But, of course, there is more to international servicelearning than this, since participants find themselvesliving in another country, in a minority. The very ren-dering of service raises a host of complex issues,beginning with a sense on the part of students thatthey are simply doing what Americans so often do—trying to make other people more like themselves,and exercising their sense of generosity by bestow-ing it on those they regard as less fortunate. But suchdelusions of social beneficence are rapidly counteredby the discovery of value systems that reshuffle thepriorities or build other assumptions into family andcommunity. With good guidance, particularly fromin-country specialists, students learn to serve onother terms than their own, and it is this perhapsmore than anything else, that they take with themwhen they leave. Living in another culture and criti-cally absorbing its values may be the best way to pre-pare young people for the multicultural and global-ized world of today and tomorrow—a world in which,despite the rather frequent assertions of our lead-ers, we cannot expect to live by one standard andhave others live by another.

There is a further value to be associated with in-ternational service learning: When the students leavetheir hosts to return home, they leave somethingbehind. The International Partnership, for example,is not simply engaged in providing students with acollection of opportunities: It is also embarked onhelping a range of institutions work better and de-liver better services—an orphanage in Kingston, Ja-maica, a kindergarten in Guadalajara, a literacy pro-gram in Quito and so on. One measure of thePartnership’s success is the success of the agenciesit serves, and so it takes these connections very seri-ously. It is significant that many of the students whopass through its programs develop lasting friend-ships with those they serve and with their fellow-workers. Many return to their host countries at a later

25

date. Some go into the master’s program in Interna-tional Service run jointly by the Partnership and uni-versities in Britain, Jamaica and Mexico. As for theirhosts, they perhaps develop a new awareness of whatit means to be an American, and some of our bettervalues perhaps rub off on them.

Recently, Linda Chisholm, of the Partnership, pre-pared a manual, Charting A Hero’s Journey (New York:IPSL, 1999), designed through a series of readingsand exercises, to assist students in keeping journalsand in reflecting on their experience abroad or incommunity service, or in the combination of the twothat is the Partnership’s particular mission. This won-derfully practical and intelligent volume containsexcerpts from published journals spanning 200 years—journals which tell us both that the anxieties oftravel and of service have always been with us, andthat others went before us, into an often far moremysterious world. James Boswell and Dr. Johnson ledthe way, trudging through the Highlands, but JaneAddams, Mary Kingsley, Octavio Paz and others toldtheir stories too, and do so again in Linda Chisholm’sbook. Of all the excerpts, I think I like the ones byLangston Hughes, who at one point observes,acerbically, “ Six months anywhere is enough to be-gin to complicate life. By that time, if you stay in oneplace, you are bound to know people too well forthings to be any longer simple.”

That is what Perrin Elkind discovered. And she re-turned transformed.

26

Introduction

These are days of rapid transition in the wide worldof study abroad and international exchange pro-grams. We are involved with a proliferation of newprograms as “global education” becomes a moremainstream term in higher education.

This rapid expansion of programs has an unusualcharacteristic to it, at least at most institutions. Thatcharacteristic is the negative correlation betweenincreasing programs and increasing budgets. It seemsthat the more interest there is in study abroad pro-grams, the wider the gap grows between the numberof programs offered and the resources committed tocoordinating them. This gap reflects the broader is-sues of public support for higher education combinedwith the problem of translating institutional rheto-ric in support of international education into an in-creased funding priority on the campus.

The new realities

As we deal with more programs and a stagnantbudget, we need to recognize some new realities. Thedays of expanding programs from a campus base arecoming to a close. Universities cannot afford to du-plicate programs around the world. That is not cost-effective now and it will become less so as we try torespond to the increasingly diverse nature of studentinterests. A 21st century university needs to haveinternational program opportunities in all majorparts of the world. This requires an infrastructure be-yond the capabilities of a single institution. The nameof the game from now on is Partner or Perish.

We can see the shape of the future already. Thetrend is to pool resources across universities to ac-complish common goals for study abroad and ex-changes. Oregon might serve as an example in thisregard. We have every type of program model, from ashort-term program in a particular academic depart-ment, to a college based program, to a university-wide program, to a system-wide program, to a re-gional consortial program, to a national consortialprogram and finally, to an international consortialprogram. It is only by pooling resources that we canrespond to our students needs and interests. Thereis no way any one university in Oregon could affordto duplicate what is possible through inter-institu-

Partner or Perish—Study Abroad in the 21st Centuryby Jack Van de WaterDean of International Programs, Oregon State University and Assistant Vice Chancellor for International Programs,Oregon University System

tional cooperation. The Oregon example is no longeratypical.

U.S. universities seem particularly poorly placedto be leaders in this Partner or Perish world of thefuture. We relish competition at every level, we cher-ish our institutional independence and will go tosome length to avoid collaboration, even when itmight be of obvious self-interest. Despite these tra-ditions, this is another unusual characteristic of studyabroad in the U.S. We are running ahead of our col-leagues in recognizing the necessity of cooperationand the advantages of pooling resources. This is es-pecially true of state-wide networks. California, NewYork, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Caro-lina and Oregon are in various stages of evolutionbut they all share the same basic goals. We are:

• Becoming more cost-effective through coopera-tion

• Pooling students who share common interests

• Diversifying opportunities through merging orsharing programs

• Sharing administrative costs

• Increasing program quality

• Reducing program proliferation and duplication

• Facilitating cooperation and communication withpartner universities abroad

• Enhancing ability to attract external funding.

A new trend in regard to inter-institutional coop-eration is public-private partnerships. This might becalled another new reality. The pressure on resourcesat the campus level is such that “outsourcing” hasbecome a common term to refer to various types oflinkages with providers of programs and services fromthe private sector to the campus. Here in the North-west, several public universities have contracted foryears with AHA International, a private, not for profitorganization, to provide on site administration, fi-nancial management and logistical support for anetwork of study abroad programs.

Another form of public-private partnership involvesbreaking down the traditional barriers between pri-vate and public universities. These universities sharemost of the same goals and the same challenges re-lated to study abroad and exchanges but they have

27

seldom collaborated. This is changing too as com-mon interests become more evident and public andprivate universities become more alike than differ-ent. In Oregon, the public university system has for-mal agreements with four private colleges to enrollthe private college students in the network of inter-national programs established by the state system.Once the old stereotypes are overcome and personalrelationships developed, it is quite easy to work withneighbors, rather they be public or private.

Cooperation beyond the local campus involveschanging some traditional behavior. It seems strangeto say, but it involves cross-cultural understanding.Our universities are famous for their diversity. Whatworks on one campus is not necessarily going to workfor a partner. Partners need to get to know one an-other so they can understand their cultural differ-ences and adjust to them. Good communication isthe key among partners. There is no substitute forvisiting partners and getting acquainted with the lo-cal culture and colleagues who work within that en-vironment. Cooperation and compromise go togetherin the process of forming good working relationshipsamong diverse partner universities.

Another new reality in the Partner or Perish worldis technology. New technologies have made it pos-sible to think of new ways of cooperating. Traditionalbarriers related to space and distance are disappear-ing. A student can receive information, be advisedand apply online. The combination of applying newtechnologies and working closely through aconsortial framework has many advantages. The per-sonal contact at the key points in the process, suchas interviews and orientation, can be maintainedwhile more bureaucratic matters are handled throughelectronic networks. All kinds of creative ideas fornew program models are emerging as new technolo-gies become more affordable and more sophisti-cated. Technology can create a sense of close col-laboration over long distances in a way that wasnot possible a few years ago. Technology also servesto blur the traditional lines separating public andprivate institutions and, in the process, makes co-operation with off-campus partners of all kinds morerealistic. We should remember, however, that it is notthe solution to all aspects of study abroad and ex-change program coordination, and it will never be asubstitute for actually living and studying within anew cultural environment.

Conclusion

International education professionals often leadthe way in the Partner or Perish world. That seemsappropriate as our careers are chosen because we

value understanding others and adjusting to differ-ent ways of thinking and acting. Those same valuesare what make a good partnership among universi-ties work effectively. If you have not entered the Part-ner or Perish world, you should recognize that it isthe future of study abroad and exchanges and youare well positioned to contribute to it.

28

Overview—Current student destinations

The number of United States undergraduatesstudying abroad for academic credit continues togrow each year by double-digit percentages. The OpenDoors survey of the Institute of International Educa-tion shows an increase in overall numbers from70,727 in 1989-90 to 129,770 in 1998-99. As seen be-low, the past decade has seen a shift in the region ofstudy away from Europe and toward Latin America,Asia, Africa and Oceania.

Distribution of U.S. undergraduates

Region of study 1989-90 1998-99

Europe 76.7% 62.7%

Latin America 9.4% 15.0%

Asia 5.0% 6.0%

Oceania 1.9% 4.9%

Africa 1.3% 2.8%

Middle East 2.7% 2.8%

North America 0.8% 0.1%

The figures in parentheses throughout this articleare the 1998-99 totals of undergraduates studyingabroad for credit as reported by the U.S. institutionssurveyed by IIE for Open Doors 2000.

Europe (81,367) continues to draw the largestmass of U.S. students with 78,018 American under-graduates flocking to Western Europe while only3,349 ventured further east on the continent to study.However, the total Eastern European numbers in-creased from 1993-94 to 1998-99 by 29%. Russia(1,196) remains at the top of the list, but its num-bers have shrunk slightly in the past five years whilethe second-ranking Czech Republic (999) has tripledits numbers in five years. Hungary (448) and Poland(310), the only other Eastern European countries withmore than 100 students, are also growing.

Latin America/Caribbean (19,464) is the secondmost-frequented region for study abroad, and the1998-99 numbers increased impressively in one yearfrom 7% to 15% of the entire U.S. study abroad con-tingent. Total numbers of U.S. students in LatinAmerica have nearly doubled since 1993-94.

In Central America, Mexico (7,363) and Costa Rica(3,499) are the only two Western Hemisphere coun-

New Study Abroad Destinations:Trends and Emerging Opportunitiesby Carl U. ZachrissonInternational Education Consultant

tries in the top 15 study abroad destinations. In thepast five years, Belize (576) has overtaken Guatemala(355) on the Central American list, followed by Hon-duras (287) and Nicaragua (165).

In South America, Ecuador (1,273) remains theleading destination with nearly twice as many stu-dents as five years ago. Second-ranking Chile (966)is followed by Argentina (731) which displaced Bra-zil (594) in third place. Fifth place Peru (310) has seenits numbers grow from 20 in 1993-94 with an impres-sive 64% growth in 1998-99; it is definitely a destina-tion to watch. Venezuela (263) and Bolivia (101) com-plete the South American list of countries with over100 students.

The total Caribbean numbers increased from 1993-94 by an astounding 191%. The Dominican Republic(687) and the Bahamas (499) are likely to be soonovertaken by fast-growing Cuba (499) that saw its1998-99 numbers increase by 172%. Jamaica (377)moved down the list from the first place rank it en-joyed in the early 1990s. Barbados (162) and Trinidad& Tobago (102) were the remaining Caribbean coun-tries with more than 100 U.S. students.

Asia (7,781), the third most important destinationfor U.S. undergraduates, attracted only a slightlylarger percentage of students than a decade earlier.However, the total numbers of U.S. undergraduatesin the region increased by 13.8% over 1997-98 and56% over 1993-94.

East Asia (5,729) contains the only two Asian coun-tries to rank in the top 15 world destinations: #11Japan (2,485) and #12 China (2,278). They both sawmodest growth in 1998-99. The Republic of Korea(479) and Hong Kong (289) grew at more impressivedouble-digit rates, while Taiwan (165) remained level.

The total South/Central Asia numbers (1, 098) in-creased from 1993-94 by 86%. The leading destina-tions were India (707), showing modest growth overthe previous year, and Nepal (296) that grew at 25%in one year. The third ranking country in the sub-re-gion, Sri Lanka (67), grew at 179%.

The total Southeast Asia numbers (954) increasedfrom 1993-94 by 89%. Thailand (374) continued tolead the sub-region both in absolute numbers andwith its 77% growth rate over the previous year. Stu-

29

dent growth led CIEE’s Council Study Center at KhonKaen University to augment its summer and fall se-mesters with a new spring semester, beginning in2002, to focus on Comparative Community Studiesin Globalization. Second place Indonesia (201), wheresome programs have been suspended, is likely to beovertaken by the Philippines (129) and Singapore(124) whose numbers are growing at twice the Indo-nesian rate. Fifth place Vietnam (95) moved slightlydown from its peak numbers, but its numbers havenonetheless doubled from those of five years earlierand are likely to grow substantially in this decade.The growth would be facilitated by the possible es-tablishment of a cooperative Center for SoutheastAsian Studies to enrich and expand the curricularoptions in Vietnam.

Oceania (6,353) has seen its total numbers in-creased from 1993-94 by 143%. English speakingAustralia (5,368) and New Zealand (803) account foralmost all of the increase and have made successfulefforts to attract and serve visiting students.

Africa (3,672) is the fifth most frequented worldregion, having more than doubled its portion of U.S.study abroad students in the past decade. Its num-bers of study abroad students grew by 19.6% overthe previous year, and 149% since 1993-94.

East Africa (1,248) saw only a modest growth of3%, while Kenya (561) saw its 1998-99 numbers di-minish by 7% from the previous year. Zimbabwe (325)and Tanzania (240) continued to show modestgrowth.

West Africa numbers (900) increased 27% in oneyear and are up by 205% since 1993-94. Ghana (627),the sub-regional leader and the second most impor-tant destination on the continent after South Africa,grew at 29% over 1997-98 and more than five foldsince 1993-94. Senegal (154) grew modestly as theonly other West African country with more than 30students.

The total North Africa numbers (402) increasedfrom 19% over 1998-99 and by 83% over 1993-94. Thegrowth was entirely accounted for by Egypt whichgrew by 38% over the previous year while Morocco(126) shrank slightly.

In Central Africa, the only significant destination,Cameroon (57) increased its number of U.S. under-graduates in 1998-99 by 12% over the previous yearand 81% since 1993-94.

The Middle East (3,578) saw the U.S. undergradu-ate population in Israel (3,302) increase by 66% in1998-99 over the previous year, making it the ninthmost frequented country in the world by U.S. under-

graduates. The second ranking Middle East destina-tion, Turkey (126), fell by 17%. Jordan (70), Lebanon(28), Bahrain (12), the Palestinian Authority (10) andthe United Arab Emirates (10) all saw their 1998-99numbers increase. The shifting political situation inthe region produces high volatility in the numbersof students in Israel and other countries in the re-gion such as Lebanon.

Factors influencing new directions

The shifts in numbers noted above are driven byboth student interest and institutional opportunitiesthat are made available to them. The growth of in-terest in studying outside Western Europe has re-flected the increasing diversity of participants instudy abroad. Growing numbers of students inter-ested in exploring their roots may be drawn to do soin Latin America or Africa rather than Western Eu-rope. A second factor affecting the shifts in numbershas been the broadening of the overseas curriculafrom the traditional area studies focus on languageand culture to include offerings in business, naturalsciences and other subjects not formerly offered inthe typical non-European study site. Thirdly, the de-velopment of internships and other program en-hancements has attracted a broader range of under-graduate interests. Fourth, the increasing number ofprograms requiring less than a full academic yearcommitment has broadened the appeal of new ven-ues. Fifth, instruction in English has made broaderrange of sites available, especially in countries whoselanguages are less commonly studied. Sixth, as theawareness of the need for global education has be-come more widespread, overseas experience in de-veloping economies is increasingly perceived as apositive addition to a resume. The brochure for theUniversity of California Education Abroad Programlaunched in the Philippines this year illustrates thesekey points.

The factors affecting the individual countries notedabove as having particularly impressive growth intheir numbers of American undergraduates are thosewith an educational infrastructure which can supportstudy abroad programs. Mexico and South Africa aregood examples. On the other hand, growth in Viet-nam is hampered by an insufficiently developed in-frastructure to support U.S. study abroad programs.The fast-growing countries also have a perceived sat-isfactory level of public order and are not subject tocurrently negative political assessments or actionsby the U.S. government. Unserved North Korea andgrowing Cuba provide an interesting contrast at thistime. The role of perceptions of personal danger can

30

be seen in the volatility of the numbers of studentsgoing to certain countries noted above in the MiddleEast and Africa and elsewhere.

Consortia have played a significant role in the de-velopment of study opportunities in many new ven-ues. IIE’s Academic Year Abroad 2000-2001 lists 50 con-sortia of academic institutions sponsoring studyabroad programs in one or more sites, and the num-ber is much higher if one defines “consortium” toinclude all of the public university systems with jointprograms. The Council on International EducationalExchange (CIEE) has played a pioneer role inconsortial development of Council Study Centers athost institutions in almost all of the countries citedabove with significant numbers and growth. At theother end of the higher education spectrum, the in-creasing participation in study abroad at the com-munity college level has given rise to numerousconsortial efforts in recent years such as the Califor-nia Colleges for International Education (CCIE).

Finally, special funding plays an important role inthe development of non-traditional study sites. Fornearly a decade, the undergraduate scholarships ofthe National Security Education Program (NSEP)have provided essential support for sophomores,juniors and seniors at two year and four year institu-tions to study abroad outside Western Europe. Theinclusion of community college students and theemphasis on less commonly taught languages hashelped broaden the scope of study abroad althoughNSEP scholars tend to reflect the general preferencefor destinations like Russia, Japan or China over theless frequented areas. The NIS Regional LanguagePrograms, administered by the American Council ofTeachers of Russian (ACTR) and the American Coun-cil for Collaboration in Education and LanguageStudy (ACCELS) have also been important in thesupport of study in Eastern Europe, Russia andEurasia. Private sector support from such sources asthe Ford Foundation, the Freeman Foundation andmany others has also played a leading role in devel-oping institutional capacity and providing funds toenable educational exchange.

The increase in the portion of study abroad stu-dents going to non-Western European destinationshas shifted significantly in the past decade, but allindications are that the trend will intensify in thedecade ahead as student perceptions and institu-tional leadership support the development of qual-ity programs in less-frequented locales. The richnessof the curricular and co-curricular offerings will con-tinue to be dependent on the human and financialresources that can be organized to provide effectivesupport for the venture.

31

Special thanks to Marty Tillman for pulling togetherthis important AIFS Foundation publication.

Marty has a special knack of enlisting the best andbrightest in the study abroad field and allowing themto write about what they know best. The result is acollection of articles which contribute to our under-standing of the changing landscape of study abroad.

With few exceptions, “the more things change, themore they remain the same.” A recent e-mail flurryof SECUSSA-L on program “quality” was reminiscentof old style, late night SECUSSA reception discus-sions of the late 1970’s and early 1980’s.

This is not necessarily a bad thing. Burning issuesthose days included diversity, program quality, fac-ulty involvement and pre-departure knowledge to

Afterwardby Bill GertzExecutive Vice President, American Institute For Foreign StudyStamford, CT

name a few. Amazingly, these are still in the fore-front of the 21st century vision. Only technology isreally “new,” and as Clay Hubbs points out “we havea long way to go to marshal the power of technologyto enhance the academic and intercultural compo-nents of study abroad.” In other words, technologyis changing the way information is delivered but doesnot affect core challenges faced by students, facultyand advisors involved in study abroad.

It was a pleasure reading these essays from studyabroad folks who have been at it a long time. I knowMarty from his Lisle days, Gail from IIE, John fromUniversity of Tennessee and Clay from my CIEE daysin the late 1970’s. They have their collective fingerson the pulse, and it is great to have their wisdom allin one place.

32

33

American Institute For Foreign Study FoundationFounded in 1967 with the assistance of the late

Senator Robert F. Kennedy, the American InstituteFor Foreign Study Foundation is an independent, not-for-profit 501(c)(3) public charity. The Foundationraises funds for scholarships for U.S. studentswishing to study abroad. It cosponsors a specialscholarship program for students from the state ofGeorgia with the Coca-Cola Foundation, usingmatching funds from the Georgia HOPE scholarshipprogram. The Foundation is designated by the UnitedStates State Department as the J-visa sponsor for theprogram below.

Academic Year in AmericaMore than 1,000 high school students from around

the world are placed with host families throughoutthe U.S. The students attend American high schoolsfor five or 10 months and share their language, cultureand customs with their host families and new friends.A recent cooperative agreement with the state of

American Institute For Foreign Study Foundation

Georgia facilitates this exchange, supported by theCoca-Cola Foundation.

Host families and schools earn scholarshipstoward a variety of AIFS programs, includingAmerican Youth Abroad.

American Institute For Foreign StudyThe American Institute For Foreign Study, Inc.

(AIFS) and its family of companies organizes culturalexchange programs throughout the world for morethan 50,000 students each year. Since its founding in1964, more than one million students and teachershave participated in AIFS programs worldwide.

College DivisionIn affiliation with 18 international universities, AIFS

annually organizes study abroad programs for morethan 5,000 American students during the academicyear and summer. For details call (800) 727-2437 orvisit the web site www.aifsabroad.com.

34

35

36

AMERICAN INSTITUTEFOR FOREIGN STUDY

FOUNDATION

®

River Plaza • 9 West Broad Street • Stamford, CT 06902-3788 • (203) 399-5000