Abstract
This paper portrays the findings of a joint mixed-method exploratory Survey (JIPS) carried out among 85 European Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in 18 countries. Its aims are to identify common problematic issues in European internationalization Higher Education strategic designs and practices, through exploring the perceptions of international administrative and academic actors. The study reveals a contradiction between internationalization as an institutional vowed priority and what HEIs do in the practice. Three main weaknesses are detected: lack of planning, scarce internal quality review practices, and deficient bi-directional internal communication and participation of staff in decision-making processes.
Highlights
The overall objective of this study is to identify common problematic issues and lines of concern through the perceptions and points of view of two sets of staff linked to the internationalization processes in European universities: Academic International Coordinators (AICs), and International Administrative Staff (IAS)
The 73% of the sample affirmed that internationalization was explicitly mentioned in the Institution’s Vision and Mission Statement; 54.1% said that internationalization strategy was included in institutional yearly plans and programs; 67.6% admitted that internationalization strategies were collected in dossiers and reports, but only accessible to experts and for internal use
European Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) appear to be decidedly energetic in adopting internationalization initiatives, amongst which students’ mobility is still- as in the 80s and 90s- the main instrument, complemented by Internationalization of the Curriculum (IoC) through tuition in foreign languages as a dominant trend at the local level
Summary
The role and character of internationalization in the context of Higher Education has significantly evolved in the last 30 years. Internationalization is imperative for universities if they want to comply with current standards of academic quality and maintain institutional status in the global educational arena C. Engel & Siczek, 2018; Seeber, Cattaneo, Huisman, & Paleari, 2016).This drift towards strategic internationalization has been intense in Europe, stimulated by strong top-down European Union (EU) initiatives such as Erasmus, the Bologna process, or the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) (Curaj, Matei, Pricopie, Salmi, & Scott, 2015; Zmas, 2015). Recent research shows a positive correlation between progress in internationalization and systematic strategic planning, whereas those institutions that have not established a targeted plan for internationalization are perceived as lagging behind (Leonard Engel, Sandström, van der Aa, & Glass, 2015; Sandström & Hudson, 2019)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
