U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Passes the Simon Study Abroad Foundation Act

The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee passed the Simon Study Abroad Foundation Act (H.R. 1469) today, Wednesday, February 13, 2008. The bill will now go on to the full Senate for vote. The bill has strong, bipartisan leadership from Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Senator Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) who introduced the Senate version of the bill. The bill was introduced in the House by Representatives Tom Lantos (D–Calif.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R–Fla.) last year. On Monday, February 11, 2008 Representative Lantos passed away at 80 years of age.

NAFSA Task Force on Institutional Management of Study Abroad

On January 16, 2008 NAFSA released the Report of NAFSA’s Task Force on Institutional Management of Study Abroad. The report, Strengthening Study Abroad: Recommendations for Effective Institutional Management, is intended to prompt discussion and reflection at the highest levels on university and college campuses about how each institution can effectively integrate, sustain, and strengthen study abroad.

This report is endorsed by six Higher Education Associations:
· American Association of Community Colleges (AACC)
· American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU)
· American Council on Education (ACE)
· Association of American Universities (AAU)
· National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU)
· National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC)

Task Force Members:
· John K. Hudzik (Chair), Vice President, Global Engagement and Strategic ProjectsMichigan State University

· Karen Hunter Anderson, Vice President for Adult Education and Institutional Support Illinois Community College Board

· Joseph Brockington, Associate Provost for International Programs Kalamazoo College

· Robert A. Corrigan, President San Francisco State University

· Everett Egginton, Dean, International Border Programs and NAFSA President-elect New Mexico State University

· Pamela Brooks Gann, President Claremont McKenna College

· Marlene M. Johnson, Executive Director and CEO NAFSA: Association of International Educators

· Pamela Jolicoeur, President Concordia College (Moorhead, MN)

· Kavita Pandit, Senior Vice Provost, Academic Affairs The State University of New York

· Kathleen Sideli, Associate Vice President for Overseas Study Indiana University

· Thelma B. Thompson, President University of Maryland-Eastern Shore

· Humphrey R. Tonkin, President Emeritus University of Hartford

The full report is available on the NAFSA website at: http://www.nafsa.org/knowledge_community_network.sec/international_education_4/chief_international_education/practice_resources_14/internationalizing_the/imsa_epub

Center for Strategic and International Studies' (CSIS) series on Smart Power

Continuing on the topic of Soft/Smart Power that has been an on going
discussion theme on the NAFSA Teaching, Learning & Scholarship Research/Scholarship network (www.nafsa.org/RSnetwork) I am posting a link to a video from a December 3, 2007 panel discussion which is part of the Center for Strategic and International Studies' (CSIS) series on Smart Power. This panel consisting of World Learning President and CEO, Carol Bellamy, H. Patrick Swygert, President of Howard University, and Stephen Joel Trachtenberg, President Emeritus of George Washington University discussed the role of international education and the influence it can have on restoring the United States' standing in the world. You can link to the panel discussion here:
http://media.csis.org/csistv/?071203_smartpower.

Related to this issues is the new poll: Americans Concerned About Long-Term Impact of Damaged US Reputation Abroad from the January 28, 2008 PRNewswire-USNewswire:
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-28-2008/0004744241&EDATE=

A Theory on Students Compatibility with a Host Family While Studying Abroad

Propositions of the Theory

1. The greater one’s proficiency in a foreign language (same as host family), the greater one’s compatibility with a host family. This foreign language proficiency will facilitate easier communication between the student and the host family, which in turn will increase compatibility. This is a positive, linear relationship.

2. The greater the number of prior international/intercultural travel experiences one has experienced, the greater one’s compatibility with a host family. Increased number of international/intercultural travel experiences a student has experienced will increase the compatibility with a host family because they enjoy such experiences. This is a positive, linear relationship.

3. The greater one’s age, the greater one’s level of maturity. The older a student is the more mature behaviors they will display in the host family living environment. This is a positive, linear relationship.

3. The greater one’s age, the greater their ability to adapt to an intercultural experience. Students will be able to adapt much easier to an intercultural experience the older they are. This is a positive, linear relationship.

4. The greater one’s maturity level, the greater one’s compatibility with a host family. Students who display mature behaviors will be much more compatible with a host family than students who demonstrate immature behaviors. This is a positive linear relationship.

5. The greater one’s ability to adapt to an intercultural experience, the greater one’s compatibility with a host family. The ability to adapt to an intercultural experience will have a direct impact on a student’s compatibility with the host family. This is a positive, linear relationship.

Contingency factor for proposition 5
5a. The higher one’s interest in an intercultural experience, the stronger the relationship between adaptability and compatibility.

6. The more one experiences home sickness, the less one’s compatibility with a host family. As students become more homesick they will not be as compatible with their host family because they want to be back home and not on their study abroad experience. This is a negative, linear relationship.

Contingency factor for proposition 6
6a. As the amount of contact from friends and family back home decreases, the stronger the relationship between homesickness and compatibility.

7. The length of stay of a study abroad experience is related to one’s compatibility with a host family. From a short length of stay to a moderate length of stay the relationship is positive. However, from a moderate length of stay to an extended length of stay there is no relationship. This is a curvilinear relationship.

To view a diagram of this theory follow this link: http://international.ed.consulting.googlepages.com/StudyAbroadCompatibilityTheory.doc

Research on International Education as a Vehicle of U.S. Soft Power, 1945-2000

Recently, I finished some research on international education as a vehicle of soft power in the United States. The first aim of my research was to determine the intended outcome of the international education legislation and funding in the United States between 1945 and 2000.

Throughout the United States’ history of international education legislation and funding it is clear that soft power is an underlying objective of the federal government. The term “cultural exchange” is used frequently throughout the related literature and legislative language. Often times the term “cultural exchange” is used interchangeably with the term “international educational exchanges.” The interchangeability of these two terms, however, was more prevalent in the literature and legislation of the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s. These two terms were used more separately in the 1970’s through the year 2000.

Another finding is, that for the most part, the language used during the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s focused more on “mutual understanding between cultures” while the language used during the 1990’s and into 2000 had a much stronger tone and emphasized the benefit to the “national security” of the United States. An exception to this is the National Defense Education Act of 1958 which encouraged and supported international education exchanges but the focus was more on U.S. national security and competition with the Soviet Union during this challenging period of the Cold War.

Interestingly, the language used in The International Academic Opportunity Act not only focused on the benefit that these study abroad scholarships would give to the United States in terms of soft power and national security but it also focused on the personal benefits that scholarship recipients gain and that the purpose of the Benjamin A. Gilman International Scholarship was to better prepare students to assume significant roles in an increasingly global economy. It took until the year 2000 for the federal government to fully understand the economic benefits of international education exchanges and that the economic dimension is just as important to the United States as soft power and national security objectives.

I was also interested in investigating the importance that the international education legislation and literature place on the inflow of international students and scholars into the United States and on the outflow of American students and scholars who are studying and/or conducting research abroad? It’s not surprising that in the years immediately following World War II and into the 1960’s the federal government and the greater higher education community placed significant importance on the inflow of international students and scholars into the United States. Certainly, the federal government saw value in funding and supporting U.S. students and scholars going abroad for academic purposes but their main focus was on the academic inflow into the United States. While support for international education exchanges increased through the last half of the twentieth century, the international education legislative focus of the 1990’s and into 2000 tended to favor the outflow of U.S. students and scholars than on the inflow of academics from abroad. What changed, however, was that major federal legislation focusing on international students and scholars in the United States was found more in the immigration arena.

Study Abroad Resources for Serving Students with Disabilities

I just returned from the CIEE conference in Toronto and several people in attendance had questions and were looking for resources to better serve students with disabilities. This summer I compiled a brief list of resources available on the web so I thought I'd share. The resource list follows:

Mobility International USA (MIUSA)
Excellent Site with Many Resources for Administrators and Students
http://miusa.org/publications

University of Minnesota Learning Abroad Center ~ Access Abroad
Excellent Site with Many Resources for Administrators and Students
http://www.umabroad.umn.edu/access/index.html

Mental Health and Crisis Management: Assisting University of Notre Dame Study Abroad Students (2002)
http://www.nd.edu/~ucc/International_Eds_Hdbk_I.html

Study and Work Abroad for People with Disabilities
http://www.independentliving.org/studyworkabroad/
A website which lists the programs available in a multitude of countries worldwide including information about local conditions as well as the organizations which are looking for new contacts.

Higher Education Accessibility Guide
http://www.european-agency.org/heag/
This website is a guide to the accessibility services which are available in Higher Education Institutions across Europe. The information includes contact information to a large number of European institutes and programs which specialize in providing resources for those with disabilities who would like to travel abroad.

Student Disability Travel Resources for Europe
http://www.transitionsabroad.com/publications/magazine/0103/students_with_disabilities_in_europe.shtml A resourceful website with contact information for various institutions and programs specializing in those with disabilities.

No Barriers to Study (NBTS)
http://www3.vjc.edu/nobarrierstostudy/index.html The NBTS is a consortium of college and university professionals from the areas of disability services, international programs, study abroad, diversity and other interested groups. The NBTS group meets twice a year to discuss issues and concerns regarding students with disabilities studying abroad.

A Brief Summary of China’s Astounding Economic Growth

In 1950, China’s foreign trade was a meager $1.14 billion. (Chang 1995, 956). According to Cable and Ferdinand (1994) “the most tangible economic manifestation of China’s ‘open door’ policy is its trade performance. Its trade turnover grew from $15 billion in 1977 to $165 billion in 1992.” (245) Avery Goldstein (1997-1998) provides additional data which shows a more complete picture of China’s trade volume when combined with the data from Cable and Ferdinand (1994). Goldstein states that “over the same time period [the 1980’s to the mid-1990’s], China’s trade volume ballooned from $38.2 billion to more than $250 billion.” (41). During the first ten months of 2006, according to the Chinese Government (2006), China’s foreign trade volume increased 24.1 percent “year-on-year” and reached $1.425 trillion. The increase in China’s trade volume from $15 billion dollars in 1977 to $1.425 trillion during the first ten months of 2006 equates to an astounding 9,400% total increase in a little less thirty years.

The present and projected growth of China’s economic growth continues to be on the rise. Prior to the February 27, 2007 drop in the Chinese market, the Shanghai Index had gained 12% year-to-date and, if it continues at this pace, China will see its fifth straight year of double-digit growth. In 2006, the Chinese economy grew 10.7% and projected growth for 2007 is at 10.8% according to Goldman Sachs (Cheok, 2007). Further, the 2008 Olympics in Beijing are bound to bring in substantial revenues from tourist and media dollars related to the event which will likely continue the double-digit growth for a sixth year.

China’s middle class continues to rise and current estimates place the number of Chinese middle-class citizens at 400 million and it is this population within China that will provide a domestic market for goods that would normally be sold to other countries. Also, according to Vogel (2004), in addition to China’s rising middle-class she has roughly 150 underemployed rural laborers which provides a “virtually unlimited supply of future workers, low wages can continue for a long time to come. Wages can therefore remain low and China can continue to compete in labor-intensive production.” (46)

References

Cable, Vincent., and Ferdinand, Peter. 1994. “China as an Economic Giant: Threat or
Opportunity?” International Affairs 70: 243-261.

Chang, Maria Hsia. 1995. “Greater China and the Chinese ‘Global Tribe.’” Asian
Survey 35: 955-967.

Cheok, Dora. 2007. “A China Affair” CNBC.com,
http://www.cnbc.com/id/17806732/for/cnbc (March 30, 2007).

Chinese Government. (2006). “China’s Foreign Trade Volume Hits New High.”
http://english.gov.cn/2006-11/13/content_441227.htm (November 13, 2006).

Goldstein, Avery. 1997-1998. “Great Expectations: Interpreting China’s Arrival.” International Security 22: 36-73.

Vogel, Ezra F. 2004. The Rise of China and the Changing Face of East Asia.” Asia
Pacific Review 11: 46-57.