Moving beyond ‘wishing and hoping’: internationalisation and student experiences of inclusion and engagement

Abstract

There is clear evidence from a number of studies conducted over the last decade that the student experience of internationalisation in universities around the world can be both positive and negative. In this paper we explore these polarised views of internationalisation as they are recorded in the literature. We argue there is evidence of too much emphasis on 'wishing and hoping' that benefits will flow from cultural diversity on campus and not enough emphasis on strategic and informed intervention to improve inclusion and engagement. We start by exploring what happens when students are forced into cross-cultural encounters without additional actions and interventions and go on to discuss what we can learn from examples of successful inclusion and engagement in multi-cultural classrooms. We suggest that there are at least three things we should focus on in order to enhance students' engagement with cultural diversity and ensure that real benefits for student learning result from culturally diverse campuses and classrooms. These are alignment of the formal and informal curriculum, a focus on task design and management and new approaches to professional development of academic staff. The need for reflective practice, which includes ongoing and focussed evaluation of the effectiveness of interventions, is also highlighted.

The gains and pains of mixed national group work at university

“…In the literature, findings are frequently presented in terms of home and international student perceptions (e.g. Ang 1998/2012;Sweeney, Weaven and Herington 2008;Turner 2009;Jones 2010;Leask and Carroll 2011), and so we start by taking this approach. As can be seen from Table 4, neither of the student groups regarded working in groups with people from other countries as challenging.…”

“…So we further divided students into smaller sub-groups to help counteract the widespread bi-polar distinction between home and international students (e.g. Ang 1998/2012;Sweeney, Weaven and Herington 2008;Turner 2009;Jones 2010;Leask and Carroll 2011). We decided to use the EEA as an entity, rather than the more political unit of the European Union, since it did not seem to make sense to exclude countries like Switzerland and Norway.…”

“…De Vita 2007;Montgomery 2009;Leask and Carroll 2011). In this paper we explore the issues through a large-scale study.…”

A Tool for Educating Global Health Practitioners: the Curriculum Design Compass

“…This does not happen by accident and there is a …need for taking deliberate and strategic action to assist all students, domestic and international, to move outside of their cultural comfort zone. (Leask & Carroll, 2011) Locating student work in an international scenario can be an opportune way to address this issue. For example, Jha et al (2015) have provided a set of scenarios for discussion with medical students about medical professionalism in different cultural contexts while Parisi et This quadrant is very much about practicing what we preach and includes encouraging and supporting interaction between students from diverse backgrounds (Arkoudis et al, 2010), providing a culturally safe classroom environment, and inclusive curriculum design.…”

The ‘Business Case’ for Internationalisation

“…(Leask & Carroll 2011: 657) This final section of the paper, then, takes them at their word and proposes a range of possible ways of establishing an internationalisation ethos in higher education. Leask and Carroll (2011) describe the effective use of a mentorship programme in Australia, where pairs of experienced student 'mentors' are matched up with groups of new international student 'mentees'. These groups are organized so as to include diversity in cultural membership, and to include both domestic and international students.…”