This Chapter raises issues from the study in three areas:
This is the first study of its kind. While several papers have documented the scope of internationalisation, and other studies have looked at aspects of international programs, this is the first comprehensive study and analysis of internationalisation strategies in Australia's universities. As a result, there are few existing benchmarks, and little baseline data, apart from international student numbers and reports of surveys by the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee (AVCC) on links and twinning programs.
The study is limited to Australia's universities, and pays no attention to internationalisation in other sectors such as higher education outside universities, vocational education and training, schools and Australia's thriving ELICOS (English language intensive course for overseas students) sector.
The study does not evaluate internationalisation of Australia's university system. There is no systematic analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the system, nor opportunities for and threats to the system. The terms of reference did not seek such an evaluation. In any case, internationalisation is now part of the Australian university system, and any reversion to isolationism or nationalism is not an option for the system.
The Case Studies looked at good practice, and information invariably was obtained from people who are stakeholders. Consequently, the study highlights many of the best things about internationalisation of the Australian university system. Comment from universities was sought, however, in the Stocktake and Case Studies about weaknesses and lessons learnt.
The Case Studies sought to look at costs and benefits of internationalisation strategies. While each case study description in Chapter 5 concludes with a description of benefits, there is little information available on costs of strategies. Nevertheless, in responses to the Stocktake, 26 of 37 universities reported having in place procedures or costing models to determine the costs of international student places.
The Project Team attempted to seek the views of international students on strategies for internationalisation of Australian universities at the Annual Conference in Brisbane in July 1996 of the National Liaison Committee for International Students in Australia. While members of the Project Team attended the conference and contributed to the proceedings, the conference program prevented any formal sampling of student opinion. This clearly is a limitation, particularly in respect of the international student program, internationalisation of teaching and international student and community support services.
The Australian Government announced changes to higher education policy on 9 August 1996, and adjusted Australia's international education policy on 20 August 1996. This report describes these policy changes, but the changes are too recent to allow any account of their implementation or analysis of effects.
Finally, the study, completed in the second half of 1996, uses 1995 data for the most part including the Stocktake.
There may be opportunities in future for further studies which overcome some of the methodological limitations of this study and which address other related issues:
Three issues are worthy of consideration for specific studies arising from this report:
Australia has a high quality university system. After three rounds of Quality Reviews in 1993, 1994 and 1995 by the CQAHE, university administrators and academics immediately look to inject quality assurance programs into any new initiatives.
Australia's international education has moved from education aid to education trade to the mature phase of internationalisation. The earlier commercial, export orientation of international student programs is now balanced by internationalisation of teaching, internationalisation in research and the provision of international student and community support services.
In this mature phase, universities cooperate extensively, in consortia and in other forums. Universities perceiving weaknesses in their own practices seek out good practice in other universities for implementation. This continuous process improvement enhances the quality of practices in internationalisation programs in all Australian universities. Weaknesses become relative, in the sense that a university which is not up with best practice in a specific program strategy is seen as having a relative weakness.
As a result of continuous process improvement, there is considerable systemic strength in the internationalisation of Australia's universities.
This is not to say that the system is perfect.
The Stocktake found that 26 of 37 universities (covering 72% of international students) have procedures or costing models in place to determine the cost of an international student place. A further 11 universities (covering 28% of international students) reported that they do not have these in place and, presumably, do not know their cost of an international student place.
Similarly, while 29 of 38 universities (covering 86% of international students) have cross-cultural training programs in place for staff, nine reported that they do not have these programs. Further, of 35 respondents, 60% do not have strategies in place to maximise the participation of staff in these programs.
Again from the stocktake, while 38 universities reported an aggregate 1,256 student exchange agreements with overseas universities, 33 universities reported only 1,307 outgoing international exchange students in 1995.
Problems occur. From time to time:
What is impressive about Australia's internationalised university system is the speed with which universities rectify problems, bringing safety nets to bear to minimise any disadvantage to individual students, to institutions or to Australia's international reputation.
From the Stocktake findings in Chapter 3:
For this study, Australia's 38 universities were asked to comment on lessons learnt in the process of internationalisation. Responses included: