∙1∙

Focus June 2015 | Volume 1 | Issue 2

FORUM The

∙2∙

Building U.S. Education Abroad Capacity Based on Standards of Good Practice

I am frequently asked how The Forum views national efforts to increase educa-tion abroad participation, so I thought

that I would address this topic in this edition of The Forum Focus. The short answer is that The Forum supports these efforts with this important qualification: expansion should be based on the Standards of Good Practice and focus on quality as much as it does on the number of students who participate in educa-tion abroad.

It is an important time for the education abroad field. There are unprecedented efforts in the U.S. to increase the number of students

who participate in education abroad. Government-led efforts such as the 100,000 Strong initiatives and IIE’s Generation Study Abroad, have dra-matically increased the level of attention focused on expanding education abroad participation. It is critical that these efforts address how the expansion of education abroad op-portunities can be achieved while maintaining high quality programs and student learning. If the field does not address quality at a time of expanding participation, it runs the risk of doing more harm than good; we must do everything that we can to strive for quality in every aspect of education abroad.

Brian Whalen, President & CEO, The Forum on Education Abroad

President’s Corner

“...Expansion should be

based on the Standards

of Good Practice and

focus on quality as much

as it does on the number

of students who

participate in education

abroad.”

∙3∙

The expansion of education abroad can only be successful if it is done by designing and developing high quality opportunities for students. Increasing education abroad capacity and participation will only be as suc-cessful as the quality of the programs themselves. To sustain the expan-sion of education abroad, efforts to in-crease capacity must also address on-going quality assurance, improvement and accountability.

This goal can be met by educating and training the key drivers of educa-tion abroad at colleges, universities and international education organizations: senior administrators, faculty, and edu-cation abroad administrators. These groups each play distinct and important roles in expanding education abroad, yet often do not have the same un-derstanding about how to do so. For example, university presidents, prov-osts and deans may commit publicly to expanding the numbers of stu-dents their institution sends abroad without understanding fully what spe-cific resources and staffing are required to do so. Faculty may have a keen understanding about how to design an education abroad course, but unaware of the best practices to ensure stu-dent health and safety abroad. And education abroad adminis-trators may have a thorough knowledge of the administra-tive aspects of managing edu-cation abroad, but unsure how to expand participation by be-coming advocates for and en-gaged in the work of curriculum development and change.

There is a dual need, then: 1) to provide a common foundational knowledge to all who work to develop and sustain quality education

“To sustain the expansion of

education abroad, efforts to

increase capacity must also

address ongoing quality

assurance, improvement and

accountability.”

∙4∙

abroad; 2) to provide information and training specific to the distinct re-sponsibilities of multiple internal constituencies. The goal of this approach is to facilitate across partners a common understanding of the Standards that form the basis for high quality education abroad experiences while at the same time addressing how senior administrators, faculty and education abroad administrators can play active and mutually supporting roles to ex-pand education abroad at their institutions and organizations. The outcome of this approach will be the effective expansion of education abroad capac-ity and participation.

The task of expanding the number of U.S. education abroad students may at first seem daunting. How can we create so many new opportuni-ties for students? The goal seems more attainable, however, when we acknowledge the capacity that already exists. A survey that The Forum

conducted last year revealed that there is capacity to accommodate upwards of 100,000 students on existing education abroad programming opportunities.

But how do we realize the potential of this existing resource? By building re-lationships based on shared mission and goals, trust, adherence to the Standards, and a focus on quality. These relation-ships should come in many forms in or-der to increase student access. They should offer opportunities to accommo-date the wide variety of student inter-ests, qualifications and curricular re-

quirements. Collaborations are therefore likely to come in many forms: stu-dent exchanges, program provider and institutional partnerships, consortia, faculty-led programs, directed research and more. Much of the work to expand education abroad will involve establishing and sustaining new institutional and organizational collaborations, a type of matchmaking based both on a common view of student learning goals and a commitment to quality. The Forum’s mission is to provide the resources,

training and programs necessary to meet this challenge.

“Much of the work to

expand education abroad

will involve establishing and

sustaining new institutional

and organizational

collaborations, a type of

matchmaking based both on

a common view of student

learning goals and a

commitment to quality.”

∙5∙

O ver the past year, The Forum’s Standards Committee undertook the task of producing a fifth edition of the Standards of Good Practice for Education Abroad. It was a vast effort, as we wanted

the new edition to reflect the breadth and diversity of the field at large, but at the same time be boiled down into a much more concise and accessible text. We also wanted the process to be collegial and collaborative, with multiple rounds of outreach through formal and informal networks, and with drafts submitted to Forum members and the public for multiple rounds of review and comment.

This process not only yielded an excellent document, but also, we hope, will result in the Standards being owned by everyone with an inter-est in the field of education abroad. The new edition has been generally well-received, to be sure. But beyond our hopes for its warm reception, its broad dissemination, and its use in informing and enhancing our education abroad activities, what authority do the Standards really have? Funny that as chair of the Standards Committee throughout the production and publi-cation of the new Standards, I would only pose this question after their completion. But if, as Lacan suggests, meaning is only ever constituted ret-roactively, perhaps authority can be, too.

As we all know, The Forum is a designated Standards Development Organization (SDO), with the U.S. Department of Justice’s recognition and backing to develop standards of good practice for the field of education abroad. And it has done so thoughtfully and conscientiously for the past 10+ years, navigating a rapidly growing and evolving field, seeking to bring together a wide diversity of program models and missions around a com-mon set of values, and trying to articulate a set of standards that can serve both as baseline and inspiration.

Indeed, much of The Forum’s identity has been caught up in negotiat-ing the complexities of this task. Should it require a Standards review and accreditation of prospective members? Exclude those institutions and or-ganizations that fall short? Penalize transgressions? What teeth should it,

Andrea Custodi, Director of Academic Affairs & Strategic Initiatives, CET Academic Programs

The Authority of The Standards

∙6∙

could it, put into its Standards to give them weight, to shore up their au-thority, to show any and all who may be watching that we as a self-governing field mean business (and therefore should not be regulated from without)?

The answer here is a subtle one, and much de-pends on what is meant by authority. In today’s legalistic mindset, authority has come to mean wielding power to separate the good from the bad, the right from the wrong, and in higher educa-tion, ‘accredited’ from ‘unaccredited.’ The Forum, while having policies and processes such as QUIP that judge quality accord-ing to the Standards, constructs the authority of the Standards differently.

No real brandishing of sticks or threats of exile. No barriers to entry. Though formal Board-level mechanisms do exist for the most egregious of cases, The Forum has chosen a path of inclusivity, and voluntary adherence to and support of its Standards. Members are asked to state this, to commit to this principle, but undergo no formal mechanisms of review or certifica-tion as a prerequisite of membership.

One could venture, however, that more subtle yet pervasive mecha-nisms of authority are nonetheless at work. I am thinking of the ‘panopticon’ of Foucault (if I may be pardoned for bringing in another French philosopher): the all-seeing, omnipresent theoretical judge and jury, before which the Standards would doubtless be called were something to go tragically wrong. The Standards hold authority because our actions would inevitably be measured against them in a court of law, as they also would be measured against the actions of our peers. That is something, yes. But it’s not the whole story. It’s not why we have come together as a field to de-velop and debate and ultimately uphold these Standards.

From what, then, do the Standards derive their authority? As I have pondered this question, and with thanks to my colleague and current chair

∙7∙

of the Standards Committee Mark Lenhart for helping me to articulate this, I have come to sense that the authority of the Standards turns on the hinge between inside and out, and for those of us on the inside, it ulti-mately lies in the process of critical engagement. Let me explain.

For practitioners in the field, most of our time is spent focused on our education abroad activities. We use the Standards to help establish our baseline, and to drive us towards excellence. But for The Forum as an or-ganization, and for many within the field who must also promote and in some cases justify education abroad to decision makers outside of it, the authority of the Standards derives from its status as a document collabora-tively produced and supported by the field at large. It provides a compre-hensive picture of all that is involved in the work of education abroad, of the care and intentionality that goes into so many dimensions of our pro-gramming and activities. From both its official, U.S. government-backed weight as well as from the breadth of the membership that stands behind The Forum, the authority of the Standards makes them one of our most

effective tools for advocacy and education beyond the field of ed-ucation abroad. That’s the outside bit.

On the inside… I’ve hinted above at how I use the Stand-ards, as I think do most of our colleagues in the field. The Stand-ards serve as a baseline that can at the same time be aspirational: there is a both a minimum and a scope for excellence; they hold us accountable but allow room for diversity and innovation. Where I

think the authority of the Standards comes into play for us, practitioners who work each day with the principles and questions that frame them, is precisely their dialogic nature, and the call to critical engagement that their structure and content fosters.

“For practitioners in the

field, most of our time

is spent focused on our

education abroad

activities. We use the

Standards to help

establish our baseline,

and to drive us towards

excellence.”

∙8∙

The Standards are written as an invitation to critically assess our edu-cation abroad activities, to interrogate our programs and organizations. Not only are the Queries an essential part of the Standards that give it an ex-plicitly dialogic nature, but the Statements, too, invite reflection rather than simplistic top-heavy, one-size-fits-all implementation. The Standards were written by practitioners in the field who are well aware of the complexities of what we do, and the difficulties of being too detailed or prescriptive. However, at the same time, we are committed to the idea that there are certain things that all organizations must do well, and carefully, and thoughtfully if we are to operate within the field.

Ostensibly simple yes/no ques-tions may require significant unpacking to get to the answer. Words and phrases within the Statements are in many cases intentionally multi-layered, multivalent. The reader, the thinker, the practitioner must consider what that word or phrase means for her area of activity, her particular organization or program. Meanings can be interpreted and applied according to context and goal, but behind even such seemingly amorphous constructs as ‘appropriate’ stands the knowledge that, given context, we would all be able to judge whether it were, in fact, so.

So, I would venture to assert, the power (and, if I may, the beauty) of the Standards as they are written is precisely in this interplay between in-side and out—what they mean for us in the field and how they can repre-sent us beyond it; how they call for critical engagement and reflective dia-logue; and how they have the latitude to be interpreted and applied based upon the unique context of each program or activity, but at the same time communicate that, if used as a framework for judgment, it will be clear when they have not (or have) been met.

They don’t browbeat, they engage. But they do so in a way that leaves no doubt as to their authority.

“The Standards serve as a

baseline that can at the

same time be aspirational:

there is a both a minimum

and a scope for excellence;

they hold us accountable

but allow room for diversity

and innovation.”

∙9∙

Kelly McLaughlin, Assistant Dean of Assessment & Deputy Director of the Center for International and Professional Experience, Yale University

FROM the Forum Council Chair

A ll of us who work in education abroad are systems people, whether we know it or not: For this grand enterprise to succeed, we must have understanding of the institutional, organizational, societal,

and governmental forces that exert themselves on our work and on our students. This is no easy task, especially as new systems constantly arise and old systems morph.

The founding members of The Forum clearly saw this puzzle and, knowing these complexities would only grow, worked to put all the pieces together for the entire field of education abroad professionals moving for-ward.

Such macro-level impact represents just part of the story. Through The Forum thousands of us come together in expertly-run conferences and other meetings each year, and we have at our fingertips standards for our field, advocacy for our work, frameworks for assessing our students’ devel-opment, data about our profession, mod-els for shaping the curricula that lend structure to our students' learning, and much more. The Forum operates, that is, at the highest systems level and at the level of our daily work.

Drill down further, and that story is even more impressive: Many of The Fo-rum’s resources have been developed for and by Forum members themselves. What makes The Forum a powerful force in education abroad is that its member-ship takes such an active role in ensuring The Forum’s work is relevant, accessible, and constantly-evolving to meet the needs of the field.

Members of The Forum’s Standards Committee, for example, just completed the 5th edition of the Standards of Good Practice for Education

“What makes The Forum a

powerful force in education

abroad is that its

membership takes such an

active role in ensuring The

Forum’s work is relevant,

accessible, and constantly-

evolving to meet the needs

of the field.”

∙10∙

Abroad. The Standards, which represent The Forum’s foundational work in establishing good practice for the field, are now far easier to utilize, partic-ularly in their new on-line format that features streamlined introductions and expandable queries. Be sure to bookmark this outstanding resource at www.forumea.org/resources/standards-of-good-practice!

To give another example, members of the Outcomes Assessment and Research Committee recently launched a toolbox on the The Forum’s web-site that features assessment case studies, texts, tools, terms, bibliography, and other resources to help any Forum member take his or her assessment efforts to the next level. As with the Standards, the contents of the toolbox are constantly evolving in response to membership need and best practices in the area of assessment. Be sure to bookmark this page, too, at www.forumea.org/resources/member-resources/outcomes-toolbox.

These examples underscore how Forum committee members are, as a service to the field and with constant support from Forum staff, constantly delivering meaningful resources to the rest of the Forum membership. All Forum members can certainly play a vital role in this way.

As such, I encourage all colleagues at Forum member institutions to continue engaging directly in the work that makes The Forum such an ef-fective ally for us and for our students: Get or stay involved in workshops, conferences, Institutes, Fireside Dialogues, webinars, Certification, the Quality Improvement Program, committees, working groups, and training to become a Forum Trained Facilitator. All of these opportunities, which un-derscore the incredible array of opportunities to impact The Forum’s future,

are explained on-line at www.forumea.org/get-involved.

Finally, Thank You. By reading this and future editions of The Forum Fo-cus, you are taking an active part in the spirit of collegiality and collaboration that is the hallmark of the organization. We look forward to hearing from –and working with!- you in the months and years to come.

“I encourage all colleagues

at Forum member

institutions to continue

engaging directly in the

work that makes The Forum

such an effective ally for us

and for our students.”

∙11∙

Opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of The Forum on Education Abroad.

The Forum encourages responses to the perspectives in this issue. Reflections, topic suggestions and other correspondence are welcomed, and all contributions will be considered for future publication.

Please send correspondence to: info@forumea.org

∙12∙

© The Forum on Education Abroad Dickinson College

P.O. Box 1773 Carlisle, PA 17013

info@forumea.org +1 717 245-1031