Upload
duongkien
View
224
Download
4
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
242
International Internships for American Undergraduates: Assessment and Accreditation Challenges
Ruth M. Ediger, Seattle Pacific University, United States Kathleen Braden, Seattle Pacific University, United States
Abstract: The increasing numbers of students from United States higher education institutions
who choose to study abroad (262,416 in the 2007-08 academic year according to the Institute for
International Education of Students sponsored by U.S. Department of State) raise questions of
assessment of learning objectives and accreditation of programs. The popularity of internships
as part of the study abroad experience raises even further complications on oversight and
assessment. Two educators with experience in academic assessment, professional accreditation,
evaluation of exchange programs, and supervision of co-curricular educational programs discuss
challenges for international internships at the undergraduate level. A case study is briefly
presented on the development, approval process, and assessment of the new Guatemala Term
study and internship abroad program at Seattle Pacific University.
Keywords: Undergraduate, international, internship, assessment
Introduction A “perfect storm” of both opportunities and challenges appears to be approaching for American
undergraduates who want to experience internships in an international setting. Study abroad is an
increasingly popular option for students and the Institute for International Education in their
2009 “Open Doors” report notes that there was an 8.5% increase of U.S. students participating in
the 2007-08 academic year over the previous period (Institute for international Education, 2009).
Even students with fewer resources are able to take advantage of short-term programs, which
now take up 56.3% of study abroad trips (defined as eight weeks or less). Europe remains the
most popular object-destination, but China and India are showing fast-growing popularity.
Meanwhile, the inclusion of academic internships as part of undergraduate education is also
showing an upsurge. In 2008, the National Association of Colleges and Employers reported that
50% of graduating students had experienced internships, whereas the number was 35% in 1992
(Greenhouse, 2010).
Finally, a culture of combining travel with work experiences, often at the unpaid, volunteer
level, seems emergent among college-age students, many of whom have experienced “service
learning” trips in high school or associated with church activities. The term Voluntourism is
becoming prominent as an increasingly popular form of travel. The desire that travelers may
contribute to local economies and well-being by visiting a region indicates that a portion of the
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
243
public is not only interested in traveling internationally, but doing so in a socially-responsible
manner.
The convergence of these trends indicates that more students are interested in combining
traditional study abroad with an internship and many schools are offering internship credits as
part of international education (see Verweijen, 2001). The benefits for students’ education may
be significant, but we are interested in examining challenges to international internships, both in
terms of ensuring academic objectives are met (assessment) and accountability for programs
(accreditation).
Two recent events suggest that a cautious examination of these challenges is warranted. First, in
2007, the University of Washington was put in the press spotlight when a study abroad program
in Ghana raised questions about short-term, faculty-led trips that might be insufficiently
supervised by administrators who know the field of international education. The five-week
program in Northern Ghana was cut short and students evacuated when there were serious
complaints about lack of preparation and poor quality academic components. The University of
Washington has since adopted stricter guidelines (see Fischer, 2007). The second event was a
decision by the United States Department of Labor in 2010 to increase enforcement against
unpaid internships that violate minimum wage laws. The fear is that, especially in the recession
climate, unpaid student interns will displace paid employees and be engaged in work that is not
essential to their education or have an academic component (Greenhouse, 2010). This new
scrutiny creates issues within the United States due to national laws, but also raises questions
about internships in foreign settings for U.S. students.
Defining Concepts For purposes of this paper, we are limiting our discussion to internships for undergraduates and
focusing on those related to arts and sciences disciplines, as opposed to professional or technical
internships. But how do we define an internship, particularly versus service learning or
practicum?
At Seattle Pacific University, the Center for Career and Calling defines internship as a work
experience that integrates practical experience in the workplace with reflection, research, and
other academic work. It is a planned, structured, and supervised experience that enables students
to gain career related work experience before graduating. But we authors have adopted here a
modified version of the definition used by Ohio State University: An internship is an opportunity
to integrate career related experience into an undergraduate education by participating in work
that is complementary to the classroom and that is supervised both by an on-site mentor and an
academic instructor.
We differentiate internships from service learning in that the internships involve “a form of
experiential education in which students engage in activities that address human and community
needs together with structured opportunities intentionally designed to promote student learning
and development” (Sternberger, et al, 2005, p. 77, quoting Barbara Jacoby). Likewise, we do not
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
244
include in our internship definition a practicum, which is experiential education activities related
to a specific course and often related to professional training.
We argue here that what makes the internship experience special is its marriage of academic,
direct educational pursuit with work experience. Thus, internships have an evaluative function
with respect to learning outcomes, similar to a class.1 A recent article in the newspaper USA
Today indicated that international internships are becoming increasingly in demand by college
students.” Over the past three years, colleges have on average seen a 6% increase in the number
of students doing international internships, according to a 39-college survey in March by the
National Society for Experiential Education, an association of campus internship coordinators.
And the Institute for the International Education of Students says 25% of its 5,000 annual study-
abroad participants now do an internship component, up from 17% in the 1980s and 21% in the
1990s” (MacDonald, 2007).
Internships done as part of a study abroad program bring strong benefits to students, according to
Ruth Verweijen in a 2001 study on American students in Austria for the School of International
Training. She notes that students who engage in internships must go outside the “American
ghetto” of students studying abroad and truly into the host country community. Greater demands,
and therefore learning opportunities, are made on students in terms of language acquisition and
cross-cultural competencies.
But Verweijen (2001) also notes that greater complexities and stresses are evident and
worthwhile international internships put a stronger demand on program managers than a
classroom based study abroad program would do. She notes: “All the tasks involved, from
establishing contacts and administering the application process to conducting regular meetings
and evaluating individual assignments as well as the entire internship, are time-intensive” (p. 44).
We suggest in Table 1 a summary of both the benefits and challenges of arranging internships
abroad for American undergraduates.
Table 1: Benefits and Challenges of International Internships for U.S. Undergraduates Dimension of Experience Benefit Challenge
multicultural education Increased exposure to host culture need to properly prepare and orient
students
multicultural education increased exposure to various socioeconomic
groups in host country
students may not be prepared for
difficult material circumstances
personal skills increased opportunity for student to become
independent and more resourceful
demands emotional maturity in part of
students beyond more controlled
classroom setting;
liability and risk factors need
assessment-host country may have
different legal and cultural norms
personal skills acquisition of new skill set on the job communication on expectations with
host country employer
language acquisition potential increase of use of host country
language
students may be under-prepared on
language
1 A useful source for comparing various student experiences, such as internships, co-ops, practicum, and externships
may be found at the National Association of Colleges and Employers website: http://www.naceweb.org/.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
245
post experience debriefing help students process learning from internship may be disequilibrium upon return if
insufficient debriefng
length of internship high quality even short-term internship
experiences may provide long-lasting
educational benefits
short-term study abroad internships may
be surface-level “volunteer” experiences
only; or need to work with host country
employer on semester-long internship
preparation
global interdependence improved student exposure to global issues;
impact on student attitudes (less insular) carried
over to U.S. workplace
need to help students process increased
social competency on global
interdependence upon return
Furthermore, international internships may be subject to the same dichotomies as internships at
the domestic level: how much of the experience is academic and therefore requiring close
supervision by a faculty member and how much is apprenticeship, with the learning taking place
through on-the-job activities? In the case of American students overseas, Vereijen’s (2001)
study of internships in Austria suggested that the following components are necessary to make
the internship successful:
• Timing and proper placement
• Continuity of partnerships
• Realistic student expectations
• Communication with internship partners
• Established evaluation procedures
Because the last point is especially pertinent to our paper, we now turn to the subject of assessing
international internships.
Assessment of International Internships for American
Students Similar to traditional academic programs, it can be said that assessing international internship
programs has two levels of assessment. The most basic level involves assessing the students; are
the students meeting the learning objectives of the program? For this “a well-constructed
assessment program should make clear to students what they can expect and what we can expect
from them” (Gillespie, 2002). The next level is assessment of the program itself. For this the
Council for Higher Education Accreditation (Council for Higher Education Accreditation, 2001)
highlights the challenges of working internationally when they emphasize in their Principles for
United States Accreditors Working Internationally: Accreditation of Non-United States
Institutions and Programs that communication of quality expectations be clear, thorough, and
culturally sensitive and involve all parties, US institutions, accrediting bodies, non-US
institutions and foreign programs. Is the international internship program meeting the academic
standards of the university where the student is attending?
Currently much of the data pertaining to international programs focuses either on study abroad
programs or on international service learning opportunities (the vast majority of these are
medical or educational). In this discussion the key questions then become “How might
assessment of international internships compare with the assessment of more traditional study
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
246
abroad programs?” and “How might assessment of international internships compare with
international service learning assessment?” In other words, in what ways can assessing
international internships simply follow the best practices laid down in the aforementioned areas
and where might international internship assessment need to break new ground? In Table 2 we
summarize the similarities and differences that study abroad programs and service learning have
with international internships at both the level of student assessment and the level of program
assessment.
Table 2: Comparing International Internship Assessment with the Assessment of Traditional
Study Abroad and International Service Learning
“How might assessment of
international internships compare with
the assessment of more traditional
study abroad programs?”
“How might assessment of
international internships compare with
international service learning
assessment?”
Are the students
meeting the learning
objectives of the
program?
Similarities: Many instruments and
techniques transferable
Differences: Internships involve more
than foreign culture encounter; also
need to assess learning resulting from
“on the job” training
Similarities: Where there are outside
disciplinary standards, internships can
compare with service learning
Differences: Standards vary wildly if
they exist at all for internships.
Is the international
internship program
meeting the academic
standards of the
university where the
student is attending?
Similarities: Challenges regarding
different foreign academic standards
Differences: In addition to potentially
different academic standards the
culture of the internship site
workplace may also be significantly
different beyond cultural differences.
Similarities: Service learning can
meet larger community needs.
Differences: Internships are designed
to be more focused on student job
experience rather than community
development.
There are numerous studies that show how one can successfully measure whether students are
meeting the learning objectives of the study abroad program. For example, Lewis and
Niesenbaum (2005) used an online survey of past participants in order to determine if the
learning objectives were being met while Poole and Davis (2006) employed the concept mapping
technique because it allowed for the use of qualitative and quantitative research designs
simultaneously. In contrast McLeod and Wainwright (2009) utilized social learning theory in
order to focus on psychological constructs instead of the traditional study-abroad related
outcomes. It is also not uncommon for researchers to use several instruments to tease out
multiple outcomes. For example, Rexeisen and Al-Khatib (2009) use three different instruments
to measure the impact of their study abroad program on the students’ ethical reasoning,
intercultural development, and environmental attitudes.
Of course if one is focusing on the “foreign culture encounter” aspect of the international
internship then the methods listed above can aid in assessing the student’s learning outcomes.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
247
But they fall short when the researcher wants to determine if the “on the job training” learning
objectives are being met. This part of assessing student learning can be found in the research on
assessing service learning.
In their essay Sternberger, et al. (2005) highlight several model approaches for service learning
and found that inevitably best practices included one key assumption and two essential
components: reciprocity and reflection. First they suggest that a successful international service
learning program first begins by determining to meet the needs of the community as defined by
the community. Reciprocity then entails both students and community members acting
simultaneously as teachers and learners. This fosters mutual respect and everyone gets the
opportunity to change in the process. Finally, the second component, student reflection, was
deemed essential to connect the practical aspects of the service-learning with the student’s
academic experience. Often this involved the student keeping a journal or field notes. Sometimes
these were shared among the group during the experience and sometimes the student might be
asked to participate in an on-campus public presentation after the experience was over.2
Where the assessment of international internships can differ significantly is in the level of
academic rigor demanded by faculty of the student intern. Even on our own campus of Seattle
Pacific University the assessment of students on domestic internships differs across schools,
from department to department, and even among faculty in the same department. This
inconsistency only increases with the international internships that our students pursue. Of
course, some of this difference is to be expected when considering schools and departments that
have outside accrediting bodies such as nursing. Understandably it is in the disciplines where
there are no specific external internship standards that there is the most variation.
“To go into a workplace with limited language ability, and when you really don’t understand the
culture all that much, is pretty risky relative to taking an internship in the U.S.” according to
Mary Dwyer, of the Institute for the International Education of Students (as quoted in
MacDonald, 2007). Not only is the situation risky it compounds the difficulty of meaningful
assessment of student performance on the internship site. Add to that uneven academic demands
by faculty and you have one of the more significant challenges for assessing student learning
outcomes on international internships.
Gillespie (2002) hit upon a significant challenge to offering study abroad through foreign
institutions, specifically; do we accept the credits and grades from the foreign institution as the
equivalent of credits and grades as given by the home institution? This challenge can be
amplified for the international internship program in countries where students may have limited
language skills, the foreign organizations may not have meaningful work for the students, the
culture is not familiar with the idea of gaining work experience through part-time or short-term
internships, and the work environment on the foreign internship site may be influenced by a local
2 The idea of having students keep some form of journal of their experience and do a presentation of their experience
once back on campus was widespread throughout the literature both for study abroad and service learning programs.
See, for example, Sternberger, et al, (2005).
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
248
culture that allows for workplace behaviors (such as what in the US we might call sexual
harassment) that would be unacceptable on a job site in the US (MacDonald, 2007).
International service learning tends to have a couple of key advantages over international
internships in that service learning programs can offer some type of service needed by a
community, such as health services, teaching English, etc. and service learning often involves a
group experience (Sternberger, et al, 2005). Although the internship might be with an
organization focused on community development, the ultimate goal of the internship is to give
the student “on the job” training in a work environment and the student is often working “alone”
in the workplace apart from others in the group. Of course this “solitary” experience can also be
advantageous for learning but assessment can be more difficult.
Internship programs whether foreign or domestic struggle with questions such as who will
evaluate the student on the internship site and how? How is international internship supervision
different from domestic supervision? What is the faculty or university role in assessing the
workplace site? In a move to try and answer some of these questions we now turn to the process
of accreditation.
Accountability for Quality: the Process of Accrediting International Internships In 2006, then Secretary of the Department of Education for the United States federal
government, Margaret Spellings, held an Accreditation Forum in Washington D.C. after a
national commission on higher education had raised issues about the value of peer-to-peer
accreditation oversight for the country’s colleges and universities. 3 The apparent drift of
Secretary Spellings toward a more centralized accountability system and the goal of more
uniform learning outcomes and performance measures created a pushback from accrediting
bodies in the United States and put a new spotlight on the role of such oversight in higher
education.
External review of higher education institutions in the U.S. is not a government function, but is
done by non-profit, decentralized bodies, although some national accreditation standards have
been developed for professional and technical training programs. There are eighty accrediting
organizations in the U.S., most operating at the regional level and most dependent on peer-to-
peer evaluation done by volunteer labor. Both internships and study abroad programs are subject
to such review and accountability, but what special issues are raised by international internships?
How are quality and achievement of learning outcomes measured?
The focus here is defined as internships that deal less with technical training, such as dental-
medical or business fields, and more with traditional liberal arts courses in humanities, arts,
social sciences, and natural sciences. One of the authors is familiar with the Northwest
Commission on Colleges and Universities, having been trained as an accreditor for three
3 the report entitled “A Test of Leadership” is available at
http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/pre-pub-report.pdf.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
249
standards under the guidelines and served on several site-visit teams. The NWCCU may be
typical of a U.S. regional accrediting organization and deals with Study Abroad programs under
a policy (2.4- see Appendix A) but this policy does not differentiate any special guidelines for
internships abroad; at best, guideline “L” states that institutions should have “clearly defined
criteria and policies for judging performance and assigning credit in accordance with standards
and practices of the home institution.” Commercially-sponsored study-travel programs are asked
to be thoroughly investigated by the home institution before credit is granted through this
mechanism. This caution may be noteworthy in cases where separate, commercial vendors are
providing the internship experience for students as part of a study abroad program otherwise
sponsored and directed by the U.S. based institution.
Currently, CHEA, or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, that works with the
various regional and specialty accrediting bodies, has issued a set of principles for accreditation
of non-U.S. institutions and programs (see Appendix B). In 1972, the Federation of Regional
Accrediting Commissions of Higher Education, a forerunner of CHEA, examined study abroad
programs and noted some of the issues involved in the evaluation process. For example, there
might be an inherent contradiction in the accreditation of overseas educational programs for
American students because by their very nature, such programs are designed to give the students
a very different experience than they would have received from the home institution. At the
same time, certain standards have to be kept and students could not be disadvantaged in progress
toward degrees (see Pfnister, 1972).
A further issue is the fact that many accrediting bodies do not have the resources to review
sufficiently well study abroad programs when they conduct evaluation of institutions. One 2004
survey suggested that eighty percent of accrediting bodies do not formally review study abroad
as part of regular accreditation oversight (Levanthall, 2005, p. 19).
In looking at the soundness of international internships, accreditors may be faced with issues as
follows:
Whose standards are met? The home institution? The host country’s standards? The
workplace internship site’s?
What is the process for ensuring compliance with academic objectives and evaluation?
How does the assessment loop get closed by the home institution? What is evidence of
modification of international internship after feedback is obtained?
How are logistical and safety issues to be assessed?
What are legal and regulatory dimensions and who has liability for serious problems or
risks associated with internships?
What is the responsibility for oversight of vendors in the accreditation process?
Finally, the issue of whether there should be universal, international accreditation standards and
bodies may also bear on the quality assurance for internships abroad.
Particularly since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, the potential hazards of
traveling abroad have been underscored for Americans, but at the same time, there is increased
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
250
demand for international education. Leaving the comparative safety of the “American ghettos”
of some study abroad programs to venture out into an internship in the host country provides
many benefits for a student’s education, as noted above, but it also raises a new set of safety,
liability, and training concerns.
Because of incidents occurring with American students abroad, often resulting in families
bringing liability cases before universities, the question of legal responsibility has been raised
more acutely (see, for example, Marklein, 2009 and Fischer, 2007). Martin Schultz (1992), in a
1992 article, examined the issues of liability associated with sociology internships for
universities. He points out the complexity of liability laws, which may vary state-to-state within
the U.S. on such diverse questions as transportation safety to and from internship sites and
insurance policies. He warns faculty against establishing a service learning program on his or her
own initiative due to potential personal liability. Placement of students in health care facilities,
criminal justice work sites, and medical facilities may require proper training and warning to
students of potential risks and safety factors.
In turn, the question is raised about assuming liability for students’ actions if they are improperly
or insufficiently screened. Some of this liability may be mitigated by contracts in which the
students assume risk, but this may not be sufficient. Also, questions have occurred about the
liability of the actual internship site.
All these legal complexities may be exacerbated by moving the internship to an international
setting and accrediting processes need to be aware of such issues, far beyond typical safety and
risk questions inherent in any study abroad program. A case in the 1990s brought to a head the
question of whether student signatures on waiver of liability were enough to protect the interests
of the home institution.4 Applying complex and unclear standards to internships involving third
party vendors may raise the stakes even further. The organization, International Internships, for
example, notes on its web page: “International Internships will help to source a suitable
internship site and will do its best to support you during your time there. However, the actual
working agreement is between you and your internship site and International Internships does
not take responsibility for anything that happens while you are at your internship site.” 5
In some cases, institutions require students to purchase separate liability insurance or have
limited liability insurance for internship work within the United States, but this does not
necessarily carry over to study abroad. In fact, in some cases, such as sports medicine
internships, American professional liability insurance may not be recognized.
All this suggests that internships as part of a study abroad program carry a separate and more
complex set of oversight issues than mere course-based study abroad and accrediting bodies need
4 Cathy Owens Swift and Russell Kent (1999) note the case of an American student studying in Japan who filed a
suit against Earlham College after she was sexually harassed and raped. The case, which was settled in 1998, raised
questions about whether U.S. colleges and universities have to apply sexual harassment programs and standards
globally (Guernsey, 1997). 5 See http://www.internationalinternships.com.au/conditions, accessed 6
th of May, 2010.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
251
to ask questions of home institutions to ascertain whether they have considered all these factors.
In its release in 2008 of principles for internships, the Council for the Advancement of Standards
in Higher Education noted:
“With the proliferation of internships at the local, state/provincial, national and international
levels, administrators and faculty have a special obligation not only to ensure the high quality of
the learning environment for their students, but also to assess the risk management and safety of
students in these settings. Both faculty and staff need to be sufficiently trained to appropriately
oversee an internship, to recognize the warning signs, and to take appropriate action.
Increasingly, institutions work with third party organizations to place, supervise, and evaluate
students because these organizations have dedicated personnel who are expert in these areas.
Yet, similar diligence must be paid to the evaluation of their performance as well (Council for
the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education, 2008, p. 2).”
The guidelines point out that internship sites need to be aware of national laws on the privacy of
student records and also deal with any constraints of human subject review provisions. In
addition, “IP staff members must disclose to appropriate authorities information judged to be of
an emergency nature, especially when the safety of the individual or others is involved, or when
otherwise required by institutional policy or relevant law” (Council for the Advancement of
Standards in Higher Education, 2008, p. 10). Fulfilling such requirements may be problematic
when the internship is conducted overseas under a different regime of laws.
Various organizations are now examining the possibility of international standards for study
abroad. For example, the Forum on Education Abroad (a large consortium of academic and
organizational partnerships dealing with study abroad) has released a report subsequent to action
by the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission in 2005 to encourage development
of standards. Pilot projects were initiated in 2006. The standards are not meant to create a
universal; “one-size-fits-all” model, but do address both in and out-of-classroom activities.
Among the standards are provisions to ensure proper resourcing of study abroad and attention to
health, safety, and security. 6 Standard 3c is of particular interest for the topic of this paper since
it deals with internships and field research. Table 2 shows the Forum’s standards.
Other organizations that have a role in suggesting accreditation and evaluation standards include
the National Committee for International Trade in Education and the Center for Quality
Assurance in International Education. The U.S. Department of Commerce sponsored a May,
2002 forum on the topic, with various agencies and organizations represented, including the
World Bank.
6 See The Forum on Education Abroad, Standards of Good Practice for Education Abroad, 2008,
http://www.forumea.org/standards-standards.cfm particularly p. 10 on internships.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
252
Table 3: Standards for internships and field research outlined by the Forum on Education Abroad
(2008, 3.c p. 10)
Internships and Field Research: When offered for credit, internships and field
opportunities have appropriate academic and field supervision.
i. Are internships or field research opportunities closely related to one or more other courses in the
program or to the program’s location, language, or theme(s)?
ii. Are any preparatory or parallel courses (e.g. field research methods or contextual studies in relevant
disciplines) required and/or provided in order to facilitate academic credit for an internship or a field
research project?
iii. Do qualified academics or other professionals regularly monitor internships or field research
components, and regularly evaluate and grade student performance in them?
iv. Is a research paper or other substantial final assignment required in order for students to synthesize
learning in internships or field research projects so that they may obtain academic credit?
v. Is the award of credit for internships or field research projects consistent with home institution?
Standards for awarding such credit?
vi. Does the organization adhere to appropriate ethics in its research and in its guidelines for student
research projects, particularly involving human subjects?
A special word should be given about the question of quality assurance when third-party vendors
or for-profit organizations are providing the internship placement and oversight. Sometimes, a
student may find such a company by a web search and then request academic credit from a home
institution in the U.S. (such as Internship.com., Next Step Connections, or InternDirect). While
many programs are legitimate, well-planned, and link to colleges and universities as partners,
others may be dubious. Online informal reviews sometimes warn of so-called unpaid internship
abroad programs that left students without the experience they contracted for.7 Appendix C
shows a sample country-listing of volunteer and internship abroad reviews from the website
“Abroad Reviews.com” and illustrates the plethora of organizations now engaged in this activity.
Finally, large international multi-state organizations such as UNESCO (United Nations
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) and OECD (Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development) have also issued quality guidelines for “cross-border” education.
Their report addresses the uneven nature of quality assurance standards:
“While in some countries the national frameworks for quality assurance, accreditation and the
recognition of qualifications take into account cross-border higher education, in many countries
they are still not geared to addressing the challenges of cross-border provision. Furthermore, the
lack of comprehensive frameworks for coordinating various initiatives at the international level,
together with the diversity and unevenness of the quality assurance and accreditation systems at
the national level, create gaps in the quality assurance of cross-border higher education, leaving
some cross-border higher education provision outside any framework of quality assurance and
accreditation. This makes students and other stakeholders more vulnerable to low-quality
7 For example, Abroad Reviews.com (http://abroadreviews.com/index.php) or Rate Your Study Abroad
(http://rateyourstudyabroad.com/)
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
253
provision and disreputable providers of cross-border higher education (United Nations, 2005, p.
8).”
The UNESCO report continues to argue that the challenge is to ensure the benefits that derive
from international education while cooperating on monitoring of quality, particularly in terms of
government oversight role. The Council of Europe’s criteria adopted in 2001 for assessment of
foreign qualifications is suggested as a good model.
Proposing Study Abroad with Internship Component: A Brief Case Study
A proposal put forth in 2009-2010 at Seattle Pacific University (SPU) to begin a study abroad in
Guatemala for undergraduate students is illustrative of challenges faced for assessment and
accreditation. At the time of this writing, the program still awaits final university approval with
a hoped-for start fall quarter, 2011.
Students International (SI), a faith-based organization headquartered in Visalia, California, has
done community development work and supervision of service-learning projects in Guatemala
since 1995. To supplement a spring term program with Bethel University in Minnesota, SI
approached the administration and faculty in Arts and Sciences at Seattle Pacific University
about initiating a fall term program that would involve coursework, Spanish language training,
and placement of student interns at various sites under SI staff supervision. Four faculty from
liberal arts and business disciplines traveled to Guatemala July of 2009 to meet with the SI
people and view all the internship sites.
The program proposal submitted was a test case for the university’s newly constituted study
away committee. Four learning objectives were specified, including the plan to have students
acquire applied skills through the internship locations in the city of Antigua and the villages of
Magdalena and El Gorrión, a refugee resettlement site. Internship experiences proposed included
work in microfinance, schools, health and mental health clinics, water projects, a children’s art
school, web design, a hospital, and various community development sites. Resumes for Students
International staff who would be supervising students at the work sites were submitted with the
proposal. Faculty envisioned offering several courses in Guatemala intensively over a month in
September while students also took Spanish language training at the Centro Linguístico Maya
school in Antigua. Faculty would then return to begin fall quarter teaching in Seattle while
students remained to do internships until early December, living in pairs with local Guatemalan
families.
A challenge for assessment was envisioned to be oversight of internships from the Seattle end.
The proposal called for students to have a faculty supervisor at the university who would keep in
touch electronically, review student work, and coordinate with the Students International site
supervisor. A philosophical difference on this aspect of the proposal became evident as the
faculty and dean from the School of Business and Economics envisioned the internship
experience in Guatemala to be akin to a work apprenticeship, requiring minimal faculty oversight
at SPU, while the Arts and Sciences faculty envisioned an ongoing academic component
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
254
(journals, readings, and papers). This variation in approach has yet to be worked out
successfully by the university and illustrates a challenge in conducting internships abroad amid a
general lack of consensus about the exact definition of internship.
Another challenge of oversight- staff to deal with logistics coordination with SI, student safety,
and student adherence to university behavioral norms- was solved by factoring into the proposed
budget a part-time on-site coordinator who would be hired by the university. Finally, the cross-
cultural aspect of the program called for enhancement by a pre-trip preparatory process and a de-
briefing after the experience.
Seattle Pacific University’s challenges in making this program happen in a way conducive to
student learning and satisfying of university requirements and budget considerations illustrates
some of the issues with foreign internships discussed in this paper. At the same time, great
enthusiasm on the part of university students, faculty, and Students International staff for the
value of this program should ensure its final approval and launch.
Conclusions Evidence has been presented in this paper that study abroad and international internships are a
growing phenomenon as American undergraduates seek to extend their education to foreign
platforms. But the authors have also suggested complexities in both assessment of student
learning and issues with accreditation standards and educational philosophy. At the same time,
the advent of the internet as a source of informal reviews and the plethora of commercial vendors
offering international internships have meant that university personnel will probably be under
increasing pressure by students to count non-sanctioned programs as part of their credit work.
We conclude that the very value of internships in a foreign setting is also what makes them more
complicated to evaluate. By their nature, international internships place students in a cross-
cultural context, but university faculty and officials also are nudged beyond their comfort zone
and forced to regard norms as flexible. Academic institutions may see an increasing call for
international standards on accreditation of study abroad and internships, but we have qualms
about whether this solution can be effective. The whole point of experiential education in a
foreign setting implies that the richness of cultural diversity may be diminished by any attempt to
impose a “one-size fits all” criterion for measuring success. While some international standards
of educational attainment and workplace safety are to be expected, the authors hope that the
challenges we suggest in this paper do not result in a sanitized and diluted study abroad
experience for our students.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
255
References Cited in Paper Abroadreviews.com. (2010) Retrieved 5
th of May, 2010 from http://www.abroadreviews.com.
Anderson, P.H., Leigh, L., Rexeisen, R. J., and Hubbard, A.C. (2006). Short-term study abroad
and intercultural sensitivity: A Pilot study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol.
30, 457-469.
Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education. (2008). Role of Internship
Programs. In partnership with National Society for Experiential Education. Retrieved 29th of April, 2010 from http://www.cas.edu/getpdf.cfm?PDF=E86CFB4D-0B9E-4853-
6D82720BE0779895.
Council for Higher Education Accreditation. (2001). Principles For United States Accreditors
Working Internationally: Accreditation Of Non-United States Institutions And Programs,
September, 2001.
Fischer, K. (2007). Ghana Fiasco Shows Risk of Faculty-Led Study Trips. Chronicle of Higher
Education, vol. 54, A1, A26.
the Forum on Education Abroad. (2008). Standards of Good Practice for Education Abroad.
Retrieved 6th
of May, 2010 from http://www.forumea.org/standards-standards.cfm.
Gillespie, J. (2002). Colleges Need Better Ways to Assess Study-Abroad Programs. Chronicle of
Higher Education, vol. 48, issue 43.
Greenhouse, S. (2010). Growth of Unpaid Internships May Be Illegal, Officials Say. Posted
April 2, 2010 on New York Times website www.nytimes.com. Retrieved 6th
of April, 2010 from
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/03/business/03intern.html.
Guernsey. L. (1997). A Lawsuit Raises Difficult Questions About Liability in Study-Abroad
Programs. The Chronicle of Higher Education, April 11, 1997, p. A37-38.
Institute for International Education. (2009). Open Doors 2009: Report on International
Educational Exchange. IEE Network. Retrieved 2nd
of May, 2010 from
http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=150651.
Levanthall, M. (2005). Strategies and the Center for Quality Assurance in International
Education, Education Abroad Standards of US Accrediting Agencies: A Survey. The Forum on
Education Abroad, February, 2005.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
256
Lewis, T.L. & Niesenbaum, R.A. (2005). Extending the Stay: Using Community-Based Research
and Service Learning to Enhance Short-Term Study Abroad. Journal of Studies in International
Education, vol. 9, 251-264.
MacDonald, G.J. (2007). International Internships Propel Students Up Career Ladder. USA
Today, April 24, 9D.
Marklein, M.B. (2009). Students Studying Abroad Face Dangers with Little Oversight. USA
Today, 5/28/2009.
McLeod, M. & Wainwright, P. (2009). Researching the Study Abroad Experience. Journal of
Studies in International Education, vol. 13, 66-71.
Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities. (2002) Policy 2.4 on Study Abroad.
NWCCU Accreditation Standards. Retrieved 4th
of May, 2010 from
http://www.nwccu.org/index.htm
Pfnister, A.O. (1972). The Evaluation of Study Abroad Programs Under the Auspices of
American Colleges and Universities: U.S. Regional Accrediting Agencies Look at Study Abroad.
Occasional Papers in Higher Education, Number 2, December, University of Denver.
Poole, D.L. & Davis, T.S. (2006). Concept Mapping to Measure Outcomes in Study Abroad
Programs. Social Work Education, vol. 25, 61-77.
Rexeisen, R.J. & Al-Khatib, J. (2009). Assurance of Learning and Study Abroad: A Case Study.
Journal of Teaching in International Business, vol. 20, 192-207.
Salisbury, M.H., Umbach, P.D., Paulsen, M.B., and Pascarella, E.T. (2009). Going Global:
Understanding the Choice Process of the Intent to Study Abroad. Research in Higher Education,
vol. 50, 119-143.
Schultz, M. (1992). Internships in Sociology: Liability Issues and Risk Management Measures.
Teaching Sociology, vol. 20, 183-191.
Sternberger, L.G., Ford, K.A., and Hale, D.C. (2005). International Service-Learning: Integrating
Academics and Active Learning in the World. The Journal of Public Affairs, vol. 8, 75-96.
Swift, C.O. & Kent, R. (1999). Business School Internships: Legal Concerns. Journal of
Education for Business, vol. 75, 23-26.
United Nations. (2005). United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization,
Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education. Paris, France.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
257
Verweijen, R. (2001). Internships Abroad As Parts of Study Abroad Programs: Potentials and
Pitfalls, Brattleboro, Vermont: School of International Training.
Other Helpful References
Alsup, R., & Egginton, E. (2001). Major Obstacles and best Practices in International
Educational Exchanges, National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges,
Washington D.C., November, 2001.
Blumenstyk, G., & McMurtie, B. (2000). Educators Lament a Corporate Takeover of
International Accreditor, Chronicle of Higher Education, vol. 47, p. A55-7
Council for Higher Education Accreditation. (2002). International Quality Review and
Accreditation: The Role of U.S. Recognized Accrediting Organizations, August, 2002.
Donnelly-Smith, L. (2009). Global Learning Through Short-Term Study Abroad, AAC&U Peer
Review, Fall, 2009, pp. 12-15.
Eaton, J. (2009). Council for Higher Education Accreditation, An Overview of U.S.
Accreditation, May, 2009.
Hadis, B.F. (2005). Gauging the impact of study abroad: how to overcome the limitations of a
single-cell design, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 30, No. 1, February
2005, pp. 3-19.
Long, S.O., Akande, Y.S., Purdy, R.W., and Nakano, K. (2010). Deepening Learning and
Inspiring Rigor: Bridging Academic and Experiential Learning Using a Host Country Approach
to a Study Tour, Journal of Studies in International Education, Vol. 14, No. 1, February, 2010,
pp. 89-111.
Moore, J.C. (2009). Colleges Want Students to Go Abroad. Tribune Business News, Washington
D.C., November 29, 2009.
Norris, E.M., & Gillespie, J. (2009). How Study Abroad Shapes Global Careers: Evidence From
the United States. Journal of Studies in International Education, vol. 13, 382-397.
Pfnister, A.O. (1972a). The Evaluation of Overseas Study Programs: Two Case Studies (Central
America and Spain). Occasional Papers in Higher Education, Number 1, 1972, University of
Denver.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
258
Rubin, K. (2009). Globalizing General Education. International Educator, Sep/Oct, 2009,p. 20-
29.
Stubbs, N. Safety and security issues and their impact on the study abroad field, AIFS
Foundation Study Abroad: A 21st Century Perspective – Volume 1,
http://www.aifsfoundation.org/stubbs.asp.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
259
Appendix A: Policy 2.4 on Study Abroad of Northwest
Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU)
Policy 2.4 Study Abroad Programs
Study abroad can be an important phase of undergraduate and graduate programs in American
colleges and universities. Carefully planned and administered, foreign study may add significant
dimensions to a student’s educational experience. As guidelines for institutions which conduct
programs of foreign study or whose students participate in such programs, the Northwest
Commission on Colleges and Universities urges that a study abroad program should:
a. be clearly related to the mission and goals of the sponsoring or participating institution;
b. have a well-defined rationale stating the specific nature and purposes of the program,
and be accurately represented in the institution’s catalog and all promotional literature;
c. provide educational experiences related to the institution’s curriculum;
d. be available to students carefully selected according to ability and interest;
e. have a carefully articulated policy regarding the availability of financial assistance
to students for programs required by the institution;
f. have clearly specified language proficiency requirements when appropriate to the
program and place of study, and clearly defined methods of testing proficiency prior to
acceptance into the program;
g. provide extensive information to intended participants, honestly and specifically
describing the program’s opportunities and limitations, indicating how and where
instruction will be given and the relationship to the foreign institution, describing
grading practices, identifying especially significant differences between a home
campus experience and what can be expected abroad, including information about
local living conditions and the extent of responsibility assumed by the program for
housing participants;
h. provide extensive orientation for participants prior to departure for, and on arrival in,
the foreign country with respect to the matters in item g above, augmented with more
detailed information and instruction related to the specific program;
i. have a resident director carefully selected on the basis of professional competence
and interest, appointed for a minimum of two years with provision for overlapping
replacement appointments to allow for transition, and assured of the same professional
rights, privileges, and consideration as colleagues on the home campus, with due
respect for the responsibilities of the overseas assignment;
j. provide counseling and supervisory services at the foreign center, with special
attention to problems peculiar to the location and nature of the program;
k. guarantee adequate basic reference materials to offset any limitations of local libraries
or inaccessibility to them;
l. include clearly defined criteria and policies for judging performance and assigning
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
260
credit in accordance with prevailing standards and practices at the home institution;
where several institutions are involved with a single overseas institution or in a
consortium, a common basis or determining grade equivalents is essential;
m. stipulate that students will ordinarily not receive credit for foreign study undertaken
without prior planning or approval on the students’ home campuses;
n. include provisions for regular follow-up studies on the individual and institutional
benefits derived from such programs; and
o. ensure fair reimbursement to participants if the program is not delivered as promised
for reasons within the sponsor’s control.
Cooperative arrangements are urged among American institutions seeking to provide foreign
study opportunities for their students. In many cases, resident directors, faculty, and facilities
could be shared, resulting in significant improvement in the efficiency and economy of the
operation. One basic reference collection, for example, supported and used by students from
several programs is likely to be more satisfactory than several separate ones.
Travel programs per sé or commercially sponsored “study-travel programs” should be
thoroughly investigated by an institution before granting degree credit for these activities. The
regional accrediting commissions do not evaluate these activities as foreign study programs of
member institutions, nor will they evaluate independent foreign study programs which are not
related to the curricula of specific colleges or universities in the United States.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
261
Appendix B: Principles for Accreditation of non-U.S.
Institutions and Programs under CHEA Guidelines (CHEA, 2001)
Purpose
These principles are to advise Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) accrediting
organizations and to provide a framework for U.S. accreditors undertaking reviews of non-
United States (U.S.) institutions and programs operating in countries outside the U.S. They are
intended to strengthen the working relationship among U.S. accreditors and international quality
assurance agencies and encourage and enhance ongoing cooperation and communication.
Principle 1. Considerations and Actions for U.S. Accreditors When Determining to Undertake
Accreditation of Non-U.S. Institutions and Programs in Another Country
U.S. accreditors will:
• Assure that they have the organizational capacity to undertake an international review (e.g.,
language, trained staff and evaluators, budget, experience, basic information about the
country);
• Promulgate a clear statement of the scope of the accreditation and the use of U.S. accredited
status by an institution or program in another country, especially with regard to transfer of
credit and degree and qualifications equivalency;
• Assure clear understanding of the relationship of the U.S. review to any international
agreements that address accreditation and quality assurance;
• Clarify the relationship of international review activity to the priorities of the accrediting
organization;
• Communicate with other U.S. accreditors about international review activity.
Principle 2. Expectations for Conduct of U.S. Accreditation Reviews of Non-U.S. Institutions
and Programs in Another Country
U.S. accreditors will:
• Inform, consult and cooperate with national quality assurance agencies in countries where
reviews are undertaken and seek information and guidance from these agencies;
• Communicate with chancellors, presidents and rectors and other college and university
officials at institutions where reviews are undertaken;
• Assure that U.S. staff and evaluators are adequately informed about higher education and
quality assurance in the countries in which they are conducting reviews to preclude the
appearance of cultural insensitivity;
• Communicate fully and clearly about costs and currencies associated with a review.
Principle 3. Accreditor Expectations of Providers of U.S. Online and Web-based Instruction
and Programs Exporting to Another Country
U.S. accreditors will:
• Work closely with U.S. institutional and programmatic exporters of online and Web-based
education to assure quality as offerings are made available in a variety of countries,
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
262
especially when Web-based and online offerings involve instructional strategies that are
unfamiliar to the host country;
• Work with U.S. exporters to inform potential students of the language expectations and
requirements associated with online and Web-based courses, programs and degrees;
• Work with U.S. exporters to review language, literacy and study skill levels of the target
audience for online and Web-based offerings, preparing separate or supplemental material to
meet special needs if appropriate.
Principle 4. Responsibilities of U.S. Accreditors Working with Non-U.S. Institutions and
Programs to Students and Colleagues in Another Country
U.S. accreditors will:
• Work with other countries to provide the most comprehensive and accurate information
available about U.S. exports to avoid “accreditation mills” and “diploma mills”;
• Develop, working with international colleagues, an information protocol that can be used to
assist countries in reviewing imports from the U.S.
(Approved by CHEA Board of Directors September 25, 2001)
International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
263
Appendix C: Informal reviews list for International Internship organizations in Guatemala from abroadreviews.com (2010) Guatemala Volunteer, Internship and Study Abroad Program Reviews:
Name Internship Volunteer Study Abroad Overall Rating # of Reviews
AmeriSpan Yes Yes Yes NA 0
Boston University International Programs Yes
NA 0
Bridge Abroad
Yes NA 0
Cactus Volunteers Abroad
Yes
1 1
Cross-Cultural Solutions
Yes
8.7 17
Cultural Embrace Yes Yes
0 1
Don Quijote
Yes 9.4 5
ELIabroad Experiential Learning
International
Yes Yes Yes 7.5 21
Eurolingua Institute
Yes NA 0
GCN - Global Citizens Network
Yes
NA 0
Global Crossroad Yes Yes
6.8 52
Global Vision International (GVI)
Yes
8.7 31
Habitat for Humanity
Yes
9.1 9
Institute for Field Research Expeditions Yes Yes
7.2 5
Madventurer
Yes
6.9 7
Original Volunteers
Yes
8 1
Real Gap Yes Yes Yes 2.3 3
Rustic Volunteer and Travel
Yes
9.5 2
Spanish Abroad
Yes NA 0
Travellers Worldwide
Yes
7.3 4
United Planet
Yes
NA 0
Volunteer Adventures
Yes
8 1
Volunteers for International Partnership
Yes
NA 0
Volunteers for Peace
Yes
NA 0
Walking Tree Travel
Yes
NA 0
Worldwide Helpers
Yes
NA 0
Youth Challenge International
Yes
NA 0