TOWARD A RESEARCH AGENDA FOR U.S. EDUCATION ABROAD
Anthony C. Ogden, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Elizabeth Brewer, Ph.D., Beloit College
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy and Tony
Session Overview
Welcome & Introductions
A Research Agenda for the Internationalization of Higher Education in the United States (1996)
Toward a Research Agenda for U.S. Education Abroad (2015)
Notable Gaps and Needed Research
Your Input: Key Research Questions
Q&A & Discussion
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy
Association of International Education Administrators (AIEA)
Established in 1982, for campus leaders who
facilitate internationalization − Bring attention to significant issues in int’l education − Improve int’l education at colleges and universities − Support a professional network of int’l education
leaders (SIOs) − Cooperate with national and int’l groups with similar
interests.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy
Association of International Education Administrators (AIEA)
AIEA Editorial Committee
− The SAGE Handbook of International Higher Education
− Occasional Papers − Issue Briefs − Perspectives from Presidents and Provosts − Journal of Studies in International Education − Research Agenda for the
Internationalization of Higher Education
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy
A Research Agenda for the Internationalization of Higher Education in the United States (1996)
Focus on internationalization in the next decade
− Types of research needed (databases, survey, impact studies, longitudinal social science)
− Future private and public sector needs − Status of internationalization − Impact of current strategies, and new approaches
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy AIEA established a National Agenda Task Force of 6 individuals - chaired by Barbara Burn (UMass) and Ralph Smuckler (Michigan State). Focus exclusively on the U.S. Concerns of post-war era: Fears that with the cold war over, government and foundation would no longer see a need to fund internationalization Concerns: inadequate data on the internationalization that was taking place Lack of hard evidence that the funding that had been made available was having impact, August 10-11, 1995, AIEA and the U.S. Department of Education convened a working group of 37 to discuss educational officials from the U.S. government, educational associations, and universities to identify questions Discussion reflected the times –considerable concern about the future of area studies and language offerings –.
A Research Agenda for the Internationalization of Higher Education in the United States (1996)
Faculty and specialist development University management and funding Undergraduate programs Outreach and extension
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy Task Force identified the purpose of internationalization “to produce graduates who are well suited to the blend of international cooperation and competition” Asked what kind of resources and education would be needed in the next decade Section on undergraduate education focused on foreign students, study abroad and exchanges, faculty roles faculty and specialist development ; What kinds of faculty and specialists are needed? university management and funding ; how are international programs funded and managed? undergraduate programs: What programs and experiences have the most impact on undergraduate attitudes and perceptions about cultural, economic, and political forces in the world? Which are most effective in helping them understand their role as well as the role of the U.S.? – Three categories of inquiry: foreign students, study abroad & exchanges, faculty roles outreach and extension: What does internationalization matter to local communities and states? (outreach a requirement for Title VI area studies funding)
Impetus for a New Look at International Higher Education Research
What have we learned over the last two decades? How has internationalization changed since 1996? How have universities changed in response to the
internationalization agenda? What old questions still need attention? What new questions need to be asked?
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy Environment for internationalization has changed Delivery of internationalization has changed Much more research has taken place, and there are more outlets for the research Platforms for disseminating research and scholarship have evolved
Research Agenda for the Internationalization of Higher Education (2015)
Education Abroad
(Outbound mobility) International Student &
Scholars (Inbound mobility)
Campus & Curriculum Internationalization
• Methodological and design challenges
• Theoretical models • Instrumentation • Notable gaps in the
existing literature • Future directions • Publication venues
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy Suggestion for developing a new agenda came from members of AIEA’s editorial committee Three members stepped up to produce a new agenda: Tony Ogden, Robin Sakamoto, Kevin Kinser Roundtable held at 2013 AIEA conference to solicit input for the development of the publication Initial focus: U.S. E-publications Blog permitting comment The first three topics are the initial ones – we hope to see contributions to the series that are relevant to internationalization outside the U.S.
Research in International Education
Distinct Research Approaches
Comparative and International Education
Internationalization of Higher Education
U.S. Education Abroad
International Schools
International Research on Teaching and Teacher Education
Internationalization of K-12 Education
Globalization of Education
Dolby, 2008
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Tony Introduce Dolby’s (2008) six distinct research approaches in international education to emphasize that we are focusing on one sub-category related to the internationalization of higher education. The six approaches are comparative and international education, internationalization of higher education, international schools, international research on teaching and teach education, internationalization of K-12 education, and globalization of education.
Research on the Internationalization of Higher Education
U.S. Education
Abroad
Internationalization (Ex., J. Knight)
Comprehensive Internationalization
(Ex., J. Hudzik)
International Student Mobility
(Ex., H. De Wit)
International Higher Education
(Ex., P. Altbach)
Comparative Higher Education
(Ex., B. Streitwieser)
Disciplinary Internationalization
(Ex., K. Cushner)
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Tony Another way of looking at this…. U.S. Education Abroad Research influences and is influenced by distinct research threads in a number of related areas. Jane Knight – Definition of internationalization… John Hudzik – Has written a number of NAFSA publications on the topic. New book: Comprehensive Internationalization: Institutional Pathways to Success (Routledge, 2015) Hans De Wit – A number of books on global student flows, with particular emphasis on push and pull factors. In September, will become the new director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College. Phil Altbach – Founder of CIHE and author of numerous books and articles on international higher education. Research area really expands all aspects of international education. Bernhard Streitwieser. We don’t hear a lot about the folks doing comparative higher education, but perhaps we should. Their work on understanding educational policy and systems greatly influences our work. Dr. Streitwieser just published a new book in this area by Oxford Studies in Comparative Education, Internationalization of Higher Education and Global Mobility. Ken Cushner – Global Teacher Education. Although we work closely with our academic disciplines, we seldom publish in discipline specific journals or access them in our research. There is an obvious gap here.
Historical Overview of U.S. Education Abroad Research
1950s, Research began to emerge
1970s, About
189 research studies
1990s, 675
research studies
1990s, Frontiers
& JSIE launched
2001, Forum on Education
Abroad founded
2007, Forum
Guide to Outcomes
Assessment published
2015, Numerous
Publications on EA
Research
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Tony This slide shows a simple illustration of the historical time line of research in education abroad. Deardorff, D. K., de Wit, H., Heyl, J. & Adams, T. (2012). The Sage handbook of international higher education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Deardorff, D.K. (2015). Demystifying Outcomes Assessment in Education Abroad Programs. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. Lewin, R. (Ed.) (2009). The handbook of practice and research in study abroad: Higher education and the quest for global citizenship. New York: Routledge. Twombly, S., Salisbury, M, Tumanut, S., Klute, P. (2012). Study abroad in a new global century: Renewing the promise, refining the purpose. ASHE Higher Education Report: Vol. 38, No. 4., Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Wiedenhoeft, M., Hernandez, M., & Wick, D. (Eds.) NAFSA’s Guide to education abroad for advisers and administrators, 4th edition. Washington, DC: NAFSA: Association of International Educators.
Categorization of Trends in U.S. Education Abroad Research
Single Domain (second language acquisition, ICC, etc.)
Since the 1990s, education abroad research has grown increasingly complex and diverse. Early research sought to demonstrate the acquisition of knowledge or skills while abroad, with most focusing on skills associated with a single learning domain. In particular, many of these earlier studies focused on second-language acquisition. Subsequent research began to look at student learning in education abroad on multiple domains such as intercultural sensitivity, global awareness, identity development, attitude and behavioral change, open mindedness, intellectual development, and disciplinary learning. A number of important longitudinal studies have also emerged in recent years. Perhaps one of the most cited studies examining student learning outcomes was conducted by IES, which surveyed 17,000 alumni of its programs during the previous 50 years. Beyond Immediate Impact: Study Abroad for Global Engagement (SAGE) sought to examine the long-term personal, professional, and social capital outcomes associated with undergraduate education abroad. The authors surveyed and/or interviewed over 6,000 alumni who studied abroad from as far back as 50 years ago. Some attention has been given to analyzing how internal variables to students potentially moderate learning outcomes. The question of gender has been important. Limited research has shown that female and male students experience studying abroad differently. Students’ proficiency in languages is considered an important characteristic because of the challenges associated with studying in a country whose dominant language is not one’s own. Previous international travel experience has also been an important variable. An increasing number of studies are focusing on the extent to which program-specific variables can mediate student learning, such as the language of instruction or the context of the academic program, how home institutional grading policies influence academic motivation, the relationship between student housing and language learning, and how the amount of contact with host country nationals leads to intercultural learning. The most notable study in this regard is perhaps The Georgetown University Consortium Project which sought to examine relationships between student learning and specific program features such as program type, duration, housing type, and student characteristics such as gender and prior education abroad experience. Predictor Variables: Does EA lead to greater retention rates? alumni development? Student employability? Institutions are direct more attention to documenting practices that maximize student success, and have begun to independently conduct large-scale self-assessment studies of student learning outcomes, such as the University System of Georgia (GLOSSARI). Utilizing NSSE data has also become a useful way for institutions to demonstrate how those who participate in education abroad are not only more academically and socially engaged overall, but may also be more likely to remain loyal to the home institution and become actively engaged alumni.
Assessment of Research Limitations in U.S. Education Abroad Research
Self-Selection Sample Size Experimental Design
Generalizability Data Accessibility Terminology
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Much of the existing research has been undermined by common and often serious methodological and conceptual shortcomings. Criticisms have also been made that the existing research has been largely unsophisticated, lacks international comparative research, and that there has been a major disconnect between the prioritization of scholars and the applicable needs of practitioners. Self-Selection Because education abroad is an elective activity for which students themselves select to participate, it is reasonable to anticipate that these students have an intrinsic interest in learning about other cultures, studying languages, or may already have a higher degree of global citizenship in comparison to their peers who do not study abroad. In other words, students already internationally-oriented may be more likely to study abroad. In fact, previous research suggests this is indeed frequently the case. Few studies have been able to account for self-selection through the use of control groups or statistical measures that control for difference between samples. Experimental Design Although the volume of research that utilizes pre- and post-test design methodologies and other experimental research methodologies appears to be increasing, there are few studies that have been able to use control groups effectively as it is usually not possible to randomly assign students within education abroad contexts. Thus, it has been difficult for researchers to infer definitively that any measurable changes over time were due to or caused by the intervening or mediating variables. Testing occurs whenever two or more administrations occur over a period of time that uses the same or a similar instrument. Because of this, change may actually be brought about by reactions to the process of measurement. In other words, it is possible the first administration affects the choices made on the second administration, especially when there is little time between administrations. For example, the students may recall the questions and answer without carefully reconsidering their responses. In addition, the questions on the first administration may encourage respondents to reflect on the content and subsequently engage in different behaviors. In this case, however, the questionnaire itself may be instrumental to encourage students to move toward the measured outcome or to pursue new approaches that enhance their development. As research on short-term programs using pre- and post-test measures increases, this threat to internal validity will become even more important to note. Fortunately, a number of innovative research designs are being utilized in experimental research. For example, Salisbury, Paulsen & Pascarella (2008) have pursued an innovative line of research that looks at statistical likelihood of participating in education abroad. Generalizability Although there are notable exceptions, existing research in education abroad has predominately been institution-specific and small scale in the sense that the research has had small sample sizes or is qualitative by design. Thus, much of the research is not widely generalizable to U.S. undergraduate education abroad, though there is arguably a case for theoretical generalizability. Data Accessibility As the internationalization of higher education continues around the world, more nations are collecting, organizing and making large datasets publicly available. However, there are many challenges that complicate the utilization of these datasets as there is little consensus on how to define and count mobile students. Since 1949, the Institute for International Education (IIE) has conducted the annual statistical survey of the international student and scholar flows to and from the United States, now commonly known as Open Doors. While the annual Open Doors report arguably provides the most widely known and reliable dataset on U.S. education abroad enrollment, the report collects only basic enrollment data and provides little to no interpretation of the data beyond enrollment trends and student demographics, nor does the report position the data within the broader U.S. higher education landscape. The data are also not linked to other databases for more complex statistical analyses or computations. Terminology Existing research on education abroad all too often suffers from conceptual limitations with regard to operational terminology. In both the professional practice of education abroad and the field of education abroad research, the lack of standardized terminology often leads to confusion and the inability to relate across institutions. In 2008, the Forum issued the first edition of the Education Abroad Glossary with the goal that this Glossary be used as a conventional practice in both the profession and research.
Major Theoretical Models & Conceptual Frameworks
STUDENT LEARNING Experiential Learning Theory Kolb, 1984 Multiple Intelligence Theory Gardner, 1985 Transformative Learning Theory Mezirow, 1991, 1996, 2000
INTERCULTURAL LEARNING Development Model of Intercultural Sensitivity Bennett, 1993 Intergroup Contact Theory Allport, 1998; Pettigrew, 1968, 1998
STUDENT DEVELOPMENT Theory of Self Authorship Baxter Magolda, 1992 Zone of Proximal Development Vygotsky, 1978 Theory of Identity Development Chikering & Reisser, 1993 Reflective Judgment Model King & Kitchener, 1994 Women’s Development Theory Love & Guthrie, 1999 Scheme of Intellectual and Ethical Development Perry, 1970 Theory of Moral Development Gilligan, 1982
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT High Impact Educational Practices Kuh, 2008 Model of Student Retention Tinto, 1987 Input-Environment-Output Astin, 1993 Situate Learning Theory Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Lave & Wenger 1991
COMMUNICATION Social Exchange Theory Thibault & Kelley, 1952 Social Learning Theory Bandura, 1986 Symbolic Interactionism Theory Blumer, 1969 Theory of Reasoned Action Fishbein & Ajzen, 1977
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Tony Due to the interdisciplinary and multi-dimensional nature of education abroad, it is not surprising that the extent to which the theoretical models and conceptual frameworks that have underpinned education abroad research have greatly varied. The existing research has generally utilized an array of theoretical models that can loosely be grouped along five broad lines of research: student learning, intercultural learning, student development, student engagement and communication. Student learning theories have generally been used in education abroad research to describe how information is absorbed, processed, and retained. Kolb’s experiential learning theory (1984) is arguably the most-often cited learning theory in education abroad research. Kolb's Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) is frequently used by practitioners in on-going orientation programming. Mezirow’s Transformative Learning Theory has increasingly been utilized to explain changes in students’ preconceptions and world views. Intercultural learning has been the focus of considerable interest in education abroad research, particularly in the assessment of student learning outcomes. Culture shock, curves of adjustment, transition shock and related cultural adaptation theories have long been pervasive and powerful concepts in the existing research. Much of the research has been informed by Bennett’s (1993) heavily-cited, Development Model of Intercultural Sensitivity, which describes the different ways in which people can react to cultural differences. The use of student development theories, whether cognitive, psychosocial, identity or otherwise, in education abroad research has been less explored. The extent to which development theories have been discussed has usually focused on programming innovations that potentially propel student movement through stages in their development (Savicki, 2008, 2013). Understanding and creating conditions that foster student engagement is increasingly important. In recent years, international educators are increasingly pointing to Kuh’s (2008) theoretical model on student engagement and Tinto’s longstanding model of student retention (1987). Tinto provides a student retention model that hinges on students’ academic and social integration. Kuh points specifically to global learning as a high-impact educational experience that increases rates of student retention and student engagement. There has been no shortage of communication theories utilized in education abroad research to define how information is conveyed and received between two parties in intercultural contexts. Social Exchange Theory, Social Learning Theory, Symbolic Interactionism Theory, and Theory of Reasoned Action are just a few theoretical models that have been used to understand verbal and non-verbal communication in education abroad settings.
Assessment & Instrumentation in U.S. Education Abroad Research
LANGUAGE LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT Language Strategies Survey Cohen & Chi, 2001 Oral Proficiency Interview ACTFL, 1999 Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview ACTfL, 1999 Speech Act Measure Cohen & Shively, 2003
DISCIPLINARY LEARNING Disciplinary Learning Interview Protocol Hammer, Malone, & Paige (in press) Academic Development Scale Ogden, 2010
GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE & AWARENESS Global Perspectives Inventory Braskamp, Braskamp, and Merrill, 2009 Global Awareness Profile Corbitt, 1998 Global Citizenship Scale Morais & Ogden, 2011; Ogden, 2010 Global Competencies Inventory The Kozai Group, Inc. Global Competence Aptitude Assessment Hunter, White, & Godbey, 2006
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Tony The increasing interest in understanding and documenting outcomes associated with education abroad has intensified the need to identify accessible and affordable instruments that are valid and reliable. This slides list some of the most commonly used instruments that have appeared in education abroad research. Beyond instruments, education abroad research has seen over the years the utilization of a wide array of other assessment measures, including traditional forms such as student surveys, direct evidence of student learning through critical reflection papers, and observation of students’ interactions. More recent studies have included assessment approaches that have used rubrics, such as the Association of American Colleges and Universities’ intercultural knowledge value rubrics, and the use of e-portfolios, such as the approach endorsed by the American Council on Education (ACE, 2010). NAFSA’s Assessment and Evaluation for International Educators provides an overview and comprehensive resource guide for international educators participating in assessment and evaluation (Braskamp et al, 2009). Similarly, Deardorff’s Demystifying Outcomes Assessment for International Educators is an excellent new resource (Deardorff, 2015).
Things to keep in mind…
Be cautious when using self-reporting instruments.
Correlation doesn’t mean causation.
Avoid using the scale of most convenience.
There is no one size fits all study.
Differentiate evidence and anecdote.
Avoid comparing institutional EA data with national datasets.
Control accordingly and be mindful of confounding variables.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Tony Education abroad research has often relied on student self-reports, or rather solicited statements of the impact the experience abroad experiences have had with regard to explicit and pre-determined outcome variables. This approach potentially exposes data to bias since participants may feel pressured to report socially desirable gains from their experiences abroad. “Students who study abroad are more likely to graduate and graduate on time than students who don’t study abroad.” IDI. When conducting research, it is critical to select the appropriate measure and not be swayed by what is most convenient or affordable. Researchers should spend sufficient time to understand exactly what is to be measured and only then determine the appropriate assessment methods or instruments to be used. Otherwise, the data collected could be invalid regardless of how valid and reliable the assessment measure may be. As research objectives become more complex and multi-dimensional, one measure alone may be insufficient. Homestays are the best! African-Americans are underrepresented. LGBT are underrepresented. Graduation rates….students have to be retained into the second year. Students who are retained into their second year are more likely to graduate than those that don’t.
Notable Gaps and Needed Research in U.S. Education Abroad
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Tony Break out discussions/ or large room call and response (w/flip chart)
Notable Gaps and Needed Research in U.S. Education Abroad
Programming Program Mobility Modes
Experience Types
Curriculum & Career
Integration
Technology Host
Community Impact
Institutional Impact
Financial Issues
Participation Global Citizenship
Push & Pull Factors
Institution Type
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Programming: The existing research on the traditional programmatic components of education abroad programming, namely student accommodation, academic programming, experiential learning, and student services does not fully support the many long-held assumptions of the value of education abroad programming. Program Mobility Modes: A variety of modes of student mobility have emerged. The most commonly utilized modes include bilateral and multilateral student exchanges, faculty-directed programs, consortia programming, and provider organizations. Experience Types: The term “education abroad” is now preferred as a broader category consisting of at least five distinct experience types of outbound study: study abroad, research abroad, intern abroad, teach abroad and service-learning abroad. Curriculum Integration: Curriculum integration at its most basic level involves granting credit for education abroad toward the home campus degree. However, it can also involve changes to teaching and learning on campus to prepare students for education abroad and help them build on it post-education abroad. While abroad, some students also benefit from advising and instruction facilitated from the home campus. Career Integration: Career integration efforts focus on integrating educational experiences abroad into student career and life planning. Education abroad participation is often claimed to help students become more employable after graduation. Technology: The arrival of new technologies is directly impacting the nature of international student mobility and points to the need for new research on communication and intercultural engagement. Host Community Impact: The extent to which host communities are impacted by the presence of visitors has long been the focus of both anthropologists and tourism scholars, but this question has only recently been asked in relation to education abroad programming. Institutional Impact: As institutions direct more attention to documenting practices that effectively maximize student success, international educators are increasingly being asked to provide evidence of the extent to which internationalization efforts potentially enhance and extend institutional missions, values, and priorities. Financial Issues: International educators are often reminded that studying abroad is expensive and that either students or institutions cannot afford it. There is very little generalizable data available which show the degree to which student financial need actually impacts participation and program choice. Participation: It is important that education abroad professionals not only understand national enrollment trends in education abroad and higher education, but also the enrollment trends within their own education abroad sample relative to the home campus population (and that of comparable institutions). Global Citizenship: The concept of global citizenship has prominently emerged in much of the language that is being used to prioritize the internationalization of higher education and the undergraduate experience. It remains a highly contested concept. Push & Pull Factors: Although there has been considerable research on understanding the many push and pull factors associated with educational mobility, particularly on international students coming to the US, there is scant research on the push/pull factors associated with U.S. outbound mobility. Institution Type: Much of the existing research has been based in the context of four-year universities and colleges. Although there has been some research focused on education abroad programming at the community college level, more work needs to be done in this area.
Notable Gaps and Needed Research in U.S. Education Abroad
Programming Program Mobility Modes
Experience Types
Curriculum & Career
Integration
Technology Host
Community Impact
Institutional Impact
Financial Issues
Participation Global Citizenship
Push & Pull Factors
Institution Type
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy
Notable Gaps and Needed Research in U.S. Education Abroad
Programming
− How do student learning outcomes differ based on housing type (e.g., homestay, apartment, dormitory, etc)?
− How do student learning outcomes differ based on the mode of instruction (e.g., faculty-directed, direct enrollment, island programming, etc)?
− How does experiential learning programming enhance student learning (e.g., internship, service-learning, field placement, etc.)?
− How do student services enhance student learning outcomes (e.g., field trips and excursions, language exchanges, on-going orientation programming, co-curricular and extra-curricular activities, etc.)?
− How are language proficiency gains influenced by the manipulation of programmatic components?
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Betsy Example: Programming Followed by table breakout discussions
What does the future hold for U.S. Education Abroad Professionals?
Will education abroad professionals be seen as logistics experts (aka, a
student travel agency) that handles risk management,
health and safety, compliance, inbound/ outbound travel, etc?
Will education abroad professionals be seen as educators with expertise
on program design, student learning pedagogy,
outcomes assessment, collaborating with faculty,
curriculum integration, etc?
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Tony – Concluding Slide
TOWARD ESTABLISHING A RESEARCH AGENDA FOR U.S. EDUCATION ABROAD
