The purpose of this study was to investigate the strategies used at two higher education institutions to engage faculty in the operationalization of internationalization plans. The problem of practice explored by this study was that despite the rhetoric in higher education for internationalization, significant barriers exist in developing faculty engagement in internationalization. The problem of research addressed by this study was that although the literature indicated that (a) written internationalization plans, (b) campus-wide internationalization committees, and (c) faculty engagement are critical to an institution's comprehensive internationalization, the literature to date did not include a study of the strategies used to develop widespread faculty engagement in operationalizing internationalization plans.
This qualitative case study employed expert-driven, maximum variation, and criterion-based sampling to select two Association of International Education Administrator member institutions that had internationalization committees and plans. The institutions selected were Duke University and the University of Richmond. Data were collected by interviews, focus groups, and documentation and analyzed through within-case and cross-case examinations.
The findings indicate that Duke and Richmond strategically engaged faculty in internationalization through the integration of five key components—intentionality, investments, infrastructure, institutional networks, and individual support. These five components were combined by the researcher into a new model for understanding the operationalization of internationalization plans: "The Five I's of Faculty Engagement in Internationalization." In essence, Duke and Richmond intentionally articulated their internationalization goals, made long term investments to provide resources for faculty engagement, developed infrastructure to create foundational programmatic support, developed institutional networks to enable faculty to gain awareness of international opportunities, and provided support for individual faculty to connect institutional goals for internationalization with their personal scholarly agendas.
The findings also indicate that Duke and Richmond used three types of strategies—teaching, research, and service—in three different locations—on campus, regionally, and abroad—to develop widespread faculty involvement in international activities. These types and locations of strategies were combined by the researcher into a new typology: "The Typology of Strategies for Faculty Engagement in Internationalization." Collectively, this typology and model present new ways of conceiving of the operationalization of internationalization plans.
|Advisor:||McDade, Sharon A.|
|Commitee:||Olson, Christa L., Williams, James H.|
|School:||The George Washington University|
|School Location:||United States -- District of Columbia|
|Source:||DAI-A 68/11, Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||School administration, Higher education|
|Keywords:||Case study, Faculty, Faculty engagement, Higher education, Internationalization, Strategic planning, University|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be