Report and recommendations of the task force on global education 22 may 2013 table of contents introductory Observations pp. 3-5 Student Programs Abroad

In the past, many of our programs and partners have developed in a reactive way, and with little strategic direction. Quite often, for example, we have signed partnership agreements with institutions that have selected and approached Baylor University, but seldom have we surveyed the landscape, selected partners that would meet our students’ needs and other strategic objectives, and approached the institutions with our own proposals. In the future, our programs and international relationships should be selected and proposed in a more deliberative and pro-active way to pursue our strategic objectives.

• 
  What is the potential for building a deep, mutually beneficial, and sustainable set of relationships between Baylor University and this institution? Does it promise to provide opportunities for many of our students, faculty, and other stakeholders, or for only a few?
  
• 
  Do we have existing relationships with similar institutions in the same country? Does this one bring something fundamentally new to the table? If this relationship is established, should others be discontinued?
  
• 
  Does this program or institution allow us to meet the needs of underserved academic disciplines, to meet the potential demand for increased instruction in specific foreign languages, or to afford language instruction in a language not offered at Baylor?
  
• 
  In addition to its traditional academic value, does this program or institution provide opportunities for our students to engage in practical experience (internships, service learning, discipline-specific missions, etc), that may contribute to their lives and careers?
  
• 
  What are the prospects for utilization of telepresence, videoconferencing, and other advanced communication and instructional technologies in our interactions with this institution?
  
• 
  If this program or institution is located in a country that carries a relatively high level of risk in the areas of health, safety, or security, are the potential benefits of the program commensurate with the risks?
  

One of the major objectives of our overseas programs is the improvement of foreign-language skills of our students, faculty, and staff, so the impact of each program on language instruction should be an important consideration in their evaluation. As the following table will indicate, Spanish accounts for about half of our foreign-language. This would suggests that we should place a high priority on the identification and development of institutions in Latin America and Spain that hold promise for deep strategic relationships. Strategic relationships in Latin America (and Canada) are particularly promising, because they provide opportunities for use of telepresence, videoconferencing, and other instructional technologies within a closer set of time zones.

Our subcommittee held a series of discussion sessions attended by fourteen leaders of academic study-abroad programs and five directors of mission teams and discipline-specific mission programs. These were lively, candid, and informative discussions and we have also received written comments from some directors who were not able to attend (in addition to the members of our subcommittee, some of whom are also program directors). Our discussions touched on a wide range of issues, some of which have already been noted above, but they were particularly helpful in identifying policies, procedures, and practices that are impeding the work of our program directors. Without any claim to completeness, some of their concerns, requests, and suggestions are provided here as matter for consideration by the new Vice Provost for Global Education.

• 
  Some faculty members feel that staff in CIE and other administrative offices are more focused on enforcement of rules than on the support that is needed to aid compliance. They understand that many (not all) of these rules and requirements are necessary, but they need more help and service to support their compliance.
  
• 
  Some directors who coordinate relations with foreign universities report that their biggest problem has been slow consideration and processing of revised agreements in the Office of General Counsel.
  
• 
  For exchange and affiliate programs, staff should provide support on grade approvals and conversions, but faculty directors must provide final approvals.
  
• 
  Also for exchange and affiliate relationships, the Registrar’s office should explore the possibility of creating a new flexible course in each department (or those that wish to participate) that could be used for international courses that have no close equivalent at Baylor.  Ideally, the transcript entry for each instance of this course would include the actual title of the course at the foreign university, and it would accurately reflect the level and credit hours of the course.  A system of this kind is used at Arizona State University.
  
  

• 
  BearsAbroad is our online system for program information, application, and recordkeeping. We need to have a system like this one to improve the efficiency of our operations and to maintain a full database of program information. However, compliance with the demands of this system has been a major cause of difficulty for our program directors.
  

• 
  Provide data entry support for faculty/staff who do not use the system frequently enough to get acquainted with it.
  
• 
  For faculty/staff who are comfortable with BearsAbroad, expand their administrative permissions. Currently, for example, program directors cannot upload their own forms on the system.
  
• 
  Simplify and streamline (reduce required clicks and ambiguous labels) the user interface for faculty/staff members who do use it often
  
• 
  Expand the public space in the BearsAbroad (space that does not require login) to provide program information on the web.
  

• 
  The directors of some programs reported that their compensation is far lower than that of other faculty members teaching in their programs since compensation is tied to the enrollment of individual faculty rather than enrollment in the program as a whole. They are also concerned that it will be difficult to transfer their programs to new directors who also are confronted with higher requirements for scholarship.
  
• 
  Allow full pay to lower-income faculty with fewer than 10 students if program easily covers costs.
  
• 
  Adjust the many spending restrictions that complicate the budget process and program administration. Remove, for example, the limitation on purchase of drinks and “snacks” that are sometimes needed when program participants have long and busy days, sometimes in significant heat.
  
• 
  Make initial Goodrich awards for summer programs before Christmas, making it possible for students to discuss the programs in a more informed way with relatives during the holidays. Also clarify if graduate students are eligible to compete for Goodrich scholarships, and if so what percentage of Goodrich funding is allocated for graduate students.
  
• 
  Tie the indirect cost charge to the current university discount rate, but otherwise allow directors to use both tuition and program fee monies as necessary without restriction.
  

• 
  Program directors need more help to create printed and web material for their programs.
  
• 
  Consider promoting programs between acts at SING, in a special tent during Parents’ Weekend, and in more Baylor publications (Lariat, Baylor Magazine, etc).
  

• 
  Digital course equivalency forms (use on-campus system)
  
• 
  Digital legal/health release forms
  
• 
  Create expedited process for re-approval of programs that have been approved previously.
  

• 
  Consider allowing non-students to participate in the programs
  
  • 
    Help smaller programs to succeed financially.
    
  • 
    In some cases, adults on the program may reduce the need for a back-up program director.
    
• 
  Reconsider the current cell phone policy. Consider exceptions for short trips when the group stays together and for areas where cell phone service is unreliable. Negotiate a high-volume arrangement with a service provider, making it easier for directors to comply with the requirement.
  

To determine whether our global student programs are meeting their stated objectives and to support their continuing improvement, we need to establish a more comprehensive system for program evaluation and assessment with several components. Many instruments, such as the Intercultural Effectiveness Scale (IES), LLC, IDI, Global Competencies Inventory (GCI), the Global Perspective Inventory (GPI), Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI), and LENS already exist. Baylor needs to choose one or more of these instruments and then use the data gathered for continuous improvement of student development of cultural competencies. At the macro level, assessment will include measures of performance for our overall program:

• 
  Participation rates in academic study abroad, international internships, discipline-specific missions, and other programs of education and service.
  
• 
  A deeper analysis of our programs in different schools/colleges and disciplines, the durations of our programs, and their geographic distribution.
  
• 
  A thorough assessment of financial impacts of programs and how University investments align with strategic areas of focus.
  
• 
  The overall impact of our programs on language acquisition, international student recruitment, and other measures of international interaction and cultural competencies.
  

For individual programs and courses, we should consider the extension of our new online system of course evaluation. With proper modification, the online system should make it possible for Baylor students to evaluate all of the international courses that are reflected on their Baylor transcripts, including those taken at exchange and affiliate universities. Also, in addition to the questions that are included on the standard online course-evaluation instrument, additional questions could be added to assess the effectiveness of the international experience. These could include many of the same questions that have been included in occasional surveys of international programs, conducted by IRT. For example:

• 
  Has this program contributed to your understanding of the culture of the country where you are studying/working?
  
• 
  Has this program contributed to your fluency in another language?
  
• 
  Do you feel that this program has contributed to your confidence and maturity?
  
• 
  Would you recommend this program to others?
  

In addition to the formal systems of surveys, questionnaires, and other record-keeping, we also need to provide more opportunities (or requirements) for our returning students to share their experiences with other Baylor students and faculty. This will serve a double purpose. For the returning student, it provides an opportunity to process the information that has been accumulated during time abroad, and to establish relationships with other students and faculty who have interests in their experience. For other members of the Baylor community, it provides an untapped source of up-to-date information on conditions, attitudes, and opportunities in other countries.

The B.B.A. in International Business has two required courses (INB 3305 and 3332) and also requires three additional INB courses, completion of a foreign language through the fourth semester, and a second major in another field of business. Study abroad is strongly recommended, but not required. This degree program is housed within the School of Business and is flourishing. Continued support for this program is recommended.

The Department of Modern Foreign Languages (MFL) offers both majors and minors in Arabic and Middle East Studies, French, German, Spanish, and Russian. Minors in Chinese, Italian, and Japanese are also offered. These degree programs appear to be effectively preparing Baylor students for engaging in a multi-lingual society. Continued support for these majors and minors is recommended. The department of Modern Foreign Languages recently established a new major in Arabic and Middle East Studies.

The MFL Department also offers a minor in World Affairs. This 18-hour minor includes 6 required credit hours of foreign language. Other course requirements and options are provided by a variety of disciplines that address global concerns related to, for example, culture/anthropology, political science, sociology, geography, and religion. This minor appears to be a valuable complement to several globally-focused majors on campus as well as the Global Community Living-Learning Center.

Prior to 2011, five Area Studies programs were housed within the Baylor Center for International Education: African Studies, Asian Studies, Latin American Studies, Middle East Studies, and Slavic and East European Studies. Directors for these programs were faculty members in the Department of Modern Foreign Languages, History, or Honors College/Baylor Interdisciplinary Core. In each program, course requirements included offerings from a variety of academic disciplines, (e.g., language, anthropology, history, political science). Travel to the designated global area was recommended but not required in most programs.

Some challenges related to student enrollment and academic oversight led to extensive discussion about the future of the Area Studies programs. The African Studies program was closed in 2011in consequence of faculty turnover leading to inconsistent course offerings. The remaining four Area Studies programs were temporarily moved from the Center for International Education to the Department of Modern Foreign Languages to facilitate continued academic oversight and student advising. Division directors in MFL currently serve as advisors in those programs. A more centralized location within the Baylor structure is needed for these programs to foster cross-disciplinary partnerships, enhance campus-wide visibility, and expand program purposes beyond that of an academic degree.