The internationalisation process within Australian universities over the last decade has been accompanied by a range of organisational structures which have resulted from the strategic approaches followed by each institution. The Stocktake (Chapter 3) shows that virtually all universities (37 of 38 respondents) include a policy of internationalisation in their Mission Statement, and that this is reflected in their Strategic Plans and other planning documents. More than half the universities (22 of 38) have country specific business plans, and most (25 of 37) have an explicit commitment to quality assurance or international bench marking for their internationalisation activities.
Policy development in internationalisation is facilitated when the university's structure includes an internationalisation committee or its equivalent and when the reporting structure involves the senior executive management. The survey showed that most universities (34 of 38 respondents) have an active senior level committee on internationalisation, generally (18 of 33) chaired by a Deputy Vice-Chancellor or Pro Vice-Chancellor, with several (6 of 33) chaired by the Vice-Chancellor. Most universities (27 of 35 respondents) have in place a strategy for communication of policy and information about international activities to administrators and academics.
All universities have established centrally an international office, in accordance with the requirement of the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee (AVCC) Code of Ethical Practice, to provide an appropriate infrastructure for all the appropriate services necessary for overseas students. The roles, responsibilities and reporting lines for the international offices vary greatly across the country. Some offices are responsible for pre-university programs (ELICOS, foundation and bridging courses), some manage international projects, and some operate all student exchanges. Most have full responsibility for student recruitment. The structure and function of international offices are still matters of active debate and reviews of the administrative and policy issues are current in many universities.
Prior to the introduction of the full-fee policy for overseas students in 1985, the Australian higher education institutions had no organisational structures to deal specifically with international issues or with overseas students. The latter were generally treated in the same way as were domestic students, academically, administratively, and in counselling. The special needs of overseas students were met either by their sponsors (such as the predecessors of AusAID) or by voluntary groups on and off campus.
Organisational responses to the needs imposed by the advent of fee paying overseas students varied from institution to institution and followed several different patterns:
The Case Studies for the Project looked at two organisational structures for internationalisation, one established centrally and the other with some of the functions including offshore activities, located in the academic divisions (Chapter 4). This analysis, together with the Stocktake (Chapter 3) illustrates that the situation is in a stage of dynamic evolution, with most universities still in the process of reorganising or refining their organisational structures for internationalisation. While it is clear that the detail of a university's organisational structure will reflect the individual needs, environment and culture of the institution, some general principles emerge which have general applicability.
Staff/student ratios of effective full time staff numbers in international offices to equivalent full time international student enrolments provide a useful guide. Of 36 universities, about half have 60 to 90 students per staff member, eight have less than 60, the remainder are in the range of 100 to 200. There is no clear pattern which relates the size, location or percentage of international students of the university to the ratio of students to staff.
The commitment of senior executive management to internationalisation has the potential to set priorities throughout the university. The Case Studies at Monash University and University of Wollongong illustrate the effect of strong leadership from the Vice-Chancellor for the development of a culture of internationalisation.
A tangible and visible expression of the university's commitment to internationalisation is the appointment of a senior academic leader at the Pro-Vice-Chancellor or Deputy Vice-Chancellor level with designated responsibility for international matters. Typically, responsibility is for policy development and priority setting for all international activities, including research collaboration, institutional links and exchanges, curriculum development, student recruitment, offshore activities and international projects. Responsibilities often also include external relations and sometimes research.
The general acceptance of a Pro-Vice-Chancellor (International) would create the potential for formation of a national grouping, modelled on the case of Pro-Vice-Chancellors (Research) which has formal standing in the AVCC committee structure, enabling coordination of international activities between universities.
International Office
The structure of International Offices varies, but the following functions are usually managed, coordinated by, or closely integrated with the International Office.
A high level international policy committee generally involves a horizontal slice across the university's traditionally vertical organisation structure at a level senior enough to commit the academic and administrative resources of the university. Such a committee has a primary function to give effect to the internationalisation strategies enunciated in the university's strategic plan, to ensure that initiatives developed within the university are consistent with overall academic policy and to articulate and disseminate internationalisation policy and strategies across the university.
The financial basis for the operation of international offices is clearly established, with all universities providing core funding for their international office from fee income. Most universities (35 responses) have procedures in place for allocation of international student fee income. Again, most universities (26 of 37) have procedures or costing models in place to determine the cost of an international student place.
Again as suggested in the Conceptual Framework for Internationalisation (Chapter 2), there are at least some organisation and program strategies for internationalisation where good practice involves the existence of a central institutional base in the university, complementing the faculties. Such strategies are particularly important in the integration and coordination of international activities, including international student support services, and in the provision of advice in the formulation of internationalisation policy. They might also include oversight of international technical assistance and training projects, student exchange agreements and academic links.
Faculty based academic initiatives underpin the successful internationalisation of the university in all areas of activity, including collaborative research, exchanges, off-shore programs, curriculum development and international student recruitment. Regular contact with overseas academic colleagues facilitates the development of new initiatives in internationalisation. Financial policies which provide appropriate incentives at the faculty and department level, and recognition of experience of international activities in promotion contexts, are key factors in maintaining commitment and initiative.
The quality of support for international students is enhanced considerably by the formal appointment of academic advisers at the faculty level who have comprehensive knowledge of course requirements across the faculty, and authority to make decisions in relation to a student's enrolment. Similarly, the success of exchanges as an internationalisation strategy is dependent on students maintaining academic progress while they are studying abroad, and this process is facilitated by systematic definition and approval of academic credit transfer.
Five universities surveyed reported that they had formal staff incentives arrangements in place. In the past, involvement in international projects often worked against career progress, because it was perceived to reduce the individual's capacity for research publications. Promotion criteria are now more broadly based in most universities, and international work is seen as a plus rather than an impediment.
In the initial stages of the rapid expansion of international student recruitment, faculties and departments benefited from generous distribution of the fee income; expenditure was discretionary, enabling them to employ staff, purchase equipment and attend conferences. This incentive is being reduced as more universities move to mainstreaming international student fee income along with fees from other sources (especially full fee graduate courses for Australian students) as part of the overall budgeting process.
Staff in international offices are seeking the increased availability of professional development programs, an issue which also includes the availability of cross-cultural training for both academic and general staff.
Based on the principles outlined above, a model for an organisational structure to support internationalisation in a university might include: