INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION TASK FORCE

May 2011

Dr. David L. White, Chair Dr. Jason A. Bronner Ms. Trachanda Brown Ms. Rosana L. Campbell Dr. Tracey A,. Cummings Dr. Lawrence Farley Dr. Richard Goulet Dr. Steven P. Guthrie Dr. Philip Huber Dr. Annik R. Kerszberg Mr. Rick Lilla

Dr. Joseph McGinn Dr.Todd Nesbitt Mr. Angleo Dominic Pisano Dr. Priya M. Poehner Dr. Kathy Richards Ms. Robin Rockey Ms. Patricia Rudy Dr. Robert Sandow Dr. Dan Shaw Ms. Anne-Marie Turnage

Introduction

Lock Haven University’s historic focus on international education has distinguished LHU from the other PASSHE institutions for decades and offers the many domestic students who come here from relatively homogeneous communities the opportunity to experience a wider world. Student exchanges have been the heart of our international programs and preserving them is critical. Study abroad is both an academic experience and a vehicle for personal growth. Sending Lock Haven students to other countries and welcoming students from those countries to our campus enriches the educational environment at the university for both the individual students and those with whom they interact. When our domestic students graduate and enter the workforce, they have a perspective that goes beyond the borders of the commonwealth and nation. Moving forward, our core concern is to expand the role of international experiences in the academic life of LHU students.

In this era of globalization, cultural literacy and the ability to work across borders are essential for both individuals and political entities. When visiting students return to their home campuses, LHU’s exchange partners, they bring with them an understanding not only of American academics, but an appreciation of the diversity of the United States gained both in the classroom and through travel opportunities, often facilitated by the university. At least as important, they have experienced the friendship extended by LHU students, faculty, and staff, who assist them throughout the year. Furthermore, international exchange enriches the academic environment across the university for students who interact with international visitors and Study Abroad participants. With this in mind, LHU must continue to have in place an infrastructure of supporting curriculum, engaged faculty, and an inspiring campus environment to encourage our students to find their place in our globalized world.

At the center of the infrastructure for supporting global education is the Institute for International Studies (IIS). For decades, the IIS has been a jewel in Lock Haven’s crown. It has facilitated life-changing experiences for our students, hosted internationally-renowned scholars, and served as a gathering place for community members interested in international issues. Continuing to build the international infrastructure on campus will require recommitted leadership working to continually expand the ranks of administration, faculty, staff, and students who have ownership of the international mission of the university. Committed leadership will carry this mission through challenging fiscal times by making creative and effective use of those resources that are available.

Charge

The International Education Task Force was created on October 4, 2010 by order of the Provost and VP of Academic Affairs, Dr. Deborah Erickson. The creation of the Task Force, however,

came after a significant spike of concern by faculty and staff alike over a perceived lack of commitment to the aforementioned "special mission" of Lock Haven University by LHU administrators. These concerns were borne out by the distribution of a cost model report prepared by the office of the Vice President of Finance and Technology and cited by the Provost in May and June of 2010 as a justification for a sharp reduction in the emphasis on international education in the University’s mission and planning. The model was made available, at the faculty union’s request, on July 21, 2010. The announcement of the departure of the Dean of International Education, Dr. Jennifer Creamer, with no plans for the position’s replacement, added to the concern of those who value the traditional high importance international education has had at LHU. Due to this heightened and expressed concern, the Task Force was convened and charged.

The charge of the Task Force states that "since the mid-1970s, Lock Haven University has been a special mission campus in the PASSHE system for international education and all that that means: study abroad, welcoming international students and faculty to campus, exchange of Lock Haven faculty with international partners, and emphasis on global issues on campus." The charge continues: "due to financial constraints, the resources which may have been available in the past will probably not be available to support international activities at the same level. Consequently, we must consider how the university can continue to maintain this international focus with reduced resources." Due to this perceived reduction in resources, the Task Force was given the following five specific charges:

1. Look at the cost model and budget of the International Institute to determine areas for possible efficiencies.

2. Examine international student recruiting strategies with the objective of recruiting international students at lowest cost.

3. Examine how to continue to emphasize student study abroad at lowest possible cost to the university.

4. Examine how to encourage faculty exchanges with foreign institutions at lowest possible cost to the university.

5. Examine how to provide opportunities for students and faculty to engage with international issues at lowest possible cost to the university.

The International Education Task Force met regularly throughout the fall and spring semesters of the 2010/2011 academic year, with the stated purpose of analyzing the impact and importance of international education at LHU. The Task Force, chaired by Dean David White, consisted of faculty and staff from a variety of disciplines, plus a student member. After initial discussions, in order to consider the five charges, six different working groups were formed to study the various aspects of international education served by the Institute for International Studies. The groups were to address finances, alternative funding sources, internationalization of the curriculum, study abroad, faculty exchange, and international student recruitment, all with an eye towards deficit-neutral or income-generating programming. Each of these areas was assigned to a subcommittee consisting of volunteers with corresponding interests, experience, and areas of expertise.

Subcommittee Report Summaries

The Finance Working Group (FWG) report deals with the first charge in particular, but due to its findings, speaks to the very purpose and reason the Task Force was created: the perception that the IIS was revenue negative, or a drain on the University’s financial resources. The FWG investigations challenge the cost model analysis presented by the Provost and the VP of Finance and Technology in the summer of 2010, concluding that the IIS is revenue positive. Through a detailed analysis, the FWG argues that the cost analysis model put forward by the administration was "flawed in several ways." The FWG concludes that the IIS should be considered, for cost analysis purposes, analogous to other non-academic units on campus, such as the Library, Career Services, or the Office of Admissions, since the IIS does not teach any classes. This would eliminate the faculty salaries charged against the IIS by the administration’s model. With this change in assumption of the model and explanation of other ways to view direct and indirect expenses, the FWG concludes that the IIS is a profit-making unit of the university and not a net drain on university resources. With the change of assumptions the FWG makes, the administration’s latest cost analysis (02/2011) would indicate a revenue-generating result for the IIS as indicated in the FWG final report and accompanying spreadsheets.

Despite the important conclusions of the FWG indicating the IIS should be seen as a revenue generating unit for LHU, the other working groups or subcommittees pursued their charges to try to find additional revenue-producing or cost-saving measures for the IIS. The Alternative Revenue subcommittee (ARS) identified several avenues of possible revenue generation. One possible source, which is in the process of being developed, is to make direct online contributions, through the LHU Foundation website, both possible and easy. At present there is no easy way to directly donate to the IIS and the many programs it administers. Dr. Rick Goulet has been coordinating a project, as part of his Alternative Workload Leave (AWL) appointment with the IIS, with Dr. Marlene Jensen of the Business Administration, Computer Science and Information Technology (BACSIT) department and some of her students, to create and install an online contribution webpage that will allow donors to support the IIS directly. The hope is that with new visibility on the Foundation’s donation page and easy links from the IIS website, a new revenue stream will be possible.

Other ideas from the FWG for alternative revenue include developing a closer working relationship with Mr. Keith Barrows, Executive Director of the LHU Foundation. Mr. Barrows feels there are donors who would be interested in donating substantial amounts ($10,000+) in support of the IIS, but that these donors need to be cultivated. The lack of a clear commitment to or vision for the IIS by the administration during this time of presidential transition and financial crisis is holding back the cultivation of these potential large donors.

Potential alternative revenue might also be generated by outreach to community organizations and businesses. Contact with various community and regional groups has begun with the hope that a fall semester reception highlighting the work of the IIS and identifying mutual interests with different groups will lead to additional support for the work of the IIS. For example, Allison Grubb of First Quality International has shown some interest in developing a working relationship with the IIS. The support services of SEDA-COG will also be utilized to pursue other ways of creating revenue, such as the recruitment of fee-paying international students through PA trade representatives, at little or no cost to LHU.

The remaining alternative revenue possibilities include the grants available from a variety of government and academic agencies and organizations. The ARS identified many grants that might be suitable for LHU and/or its professors to pursue in support of international education. The list of grant possibilities can be found in the alternative revenue report below.

The Internationalization subcommittee emphasized the PASSHE charge to LHU to be a system leader in study abroad programs and the more than thirty-five years of executing that charge. While student exchanges are at the core of LHU’s internationalization mission, there is more to internationalization than student exchanges. Internationalization should be a focus throughout the curriculum. The subcommittee suggested reviving the International Lecture Series with low-cost exchanges of scholars from within the PASSHE system, embassy personnel within driving distance of campus, and Fulbright scholars who are funded to give lectures. Initiating a brown bag luncheon program on a regular basis, in which interested participants would meet to discuss books, articles, and themes on a subject related to global studies or the lecture series theme for the year, is a no-cost option. Creating a newsletter or blog to showcase international activities and programs at the university would likewise cost nothing. Increasing opportunities for interaction between international students and Pennsylvania students could improve recruitment efforts in both directions with little or no additional funding required. The International Education Committee is considering a year-long celebration of International Studies at Lock Haven University, a series of activities that will attempt to put into action the suggestions noted above. The subcommittee supports the renewal of travel grants for faculty who want to teach or do research, as the only recommendation requiring funding.

The International Student Recruitment subcommittee’s primary recommendation was to significantly increase the number of international students studying at LHU, recognizing that recruitment expenditures will be easily compensated and surpassed by the revenue that four-year fee-paying international students will make for the university. The committee made additional recommendations in the following areas: recruiting activities, student life, and curriculum. Recruiting activities can be done both on site and from a distance and will involve promotion of the university not only overseas, but in domestic international high schools and in community colleges and high schools with large ESL programs; placement of advertisements with key agencies and publications; and the possible reinstatement of at least partial tuition waivers for specific international students. To improve international student life, the subcommittee

suggested making provision for prayer space and religious dietary restrictions; continuing to house international students with domestic students while increasing opportunities for meaningful interaction; exploring the possibility of accepting all payments via VISA in addition to present systems; and making housing more flexible to accommodate early arrivals, late departures, and lodging during breaks. Curricular recommendations include reviewing current offerings to determine appeal to international students; reinstating the economics major, a much-desired program by international students; obtaining program accreditations whenever such are possible; designating a faculty member to advise international students; exploring dual degree options with international partners; and modifying current policies to ensure timely processing of international transcripts.

The Faculty Exchange subcommittee pointed out that faculty exchanges with partner institutions are cost-effective ways to improve international programming for students. The group suggested no-cost options for fostering such exchanges, the most central of which is an updated page on the IIS website to explain the opportunities, provide contact information for interested faculty on both sides of potential exchanges, and list house swap opportunities for various durations of exchange. It also recommended that the IIS conduct frequent, regular surveys of interest in exchanges at LHU and partner institutions and work towards mutually agreeable matches years in advance. As a side-note, the committee suggested that the IIS remind faculty to speak to their students about the possibility of study abroad. In terms of allocation of travel funds, the committee strongly recommends seeking outside funding; but when funding is provided for international travel by the university, to link it to international recruiting activities by the traveling faculty member. Using the internet to make possible joint courses with international partners is another extremely cost-effective way to allow both faculty and students to participate in a globalized curriculum; faculty could team-teach certain courses with international partners. The subcommittee recommends an immediate meeting with the university administration to discuss specific plans to replace housing for visiting international scholars that was lost with the destruction of the International House. The subcommittee stresses IIS responsibility for working with partner institutions to recruit their students as a means of keeping the exchange balance.

The Study Abroad subcommittee provides an overview of the value and need for international study by LHU students. The group points out that the current bed-for-bed exchange model, coupled with continued recruitment of tuition-paying international students, can maintain a positive revenue stream, but more important, is the most affordable model for LHU students, most of whom come from middle and low-income families and live in culturally homogeneous communities not far from the university. It recommends a full-time director for the IIS in order to achieve the university’s internationalization and positive revenue stream goals. The value of international education to the students who study abroad and to LHU upon their return as well as the diversity of contributions provided by students from other countries, is stressed throughout the report.

Conclusion

The university’s three-year Strategic Plan requires each student to engage in real-world learning experiences, such as internships, study abroad, or service learning, and/or scholarship (presentation of research) exhibition or public performance. Only by maintaining active engagement with international partners, continuing the globalization of the curriculum and extra-curricular activities, and increasing faculty and student involvement across borders can the university continue to provide international opportunities in support of that goal. LHU’s long tradition of uniqueness in the PASSHE system as the rural institution with an international emphasis may be the key to its ability to compete for students in hard economic times.

The Task Force subcommittees consistently found ways that a well-managed program can be revenue neutral or positive without requiring substantial investment. Innovative use of assets already available could make this quiet contributor to the university’s mission, budget, and quality of education one of its most outstanding programs. To that end, it is recommended that the Task Force meet once a semester to monitor the progress and implementation of the recommendations in this report