Meeting Notes
April 25, 2001
Big Ten Athletic Conference Headquarters
9:30 -3:00
Attending:
John Hudzik, Michigan State University
Rashid Khalidi, University of Chicago
Stephanie Latkovski, University of Chicago
Jerry Ladman, Ohio State University
Gene Allen, University of Minnesota
Beverly Lindsay, Penn State University
Devora Grynspan, Northwestern University
Michael Kennedy, University of Michigan
Allan Lerner, University of Illinois at Chicago
Steve Hoch, University of Iowa
Barbara Allen, CIC
Guests:
Kathleen Fairfax, Purdue University (Chair of the CIC Study Abroad
Directors)
Rob Quinn, University of Chicago, Director, Scholars at Risk Network
Unable to Attend:
Michael Stohl, Purdue University
Earl Kellogg, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
David Trubek, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Patrick O'Meara, Indiana University
Scholars at Risk Network:
Rob Quinn reported on the Scholars at Risk Network, indicating
that five of the CIC member universities have already agreed to
support a scholar. Chicago would like to expand the network to
include services for students, as well. The network facilitates
solutions and will work with the host university to develop the
best possible arrangement for the scholar and for the university.
During the follow-on discussion, it was observed that the scholars
are at risk for a long term, but the university is a host for
a short term - this is a challenge for the scholar and for the
university. Rob Quinn will encourage Geof Stone to share a brief
update and report with the CIC Provosts at their June 19 meeting,
as well.
Report on Policy/Legislative Issues
John Hudzik reported that there is an effort between the six "presidential
organizations" in DC to bring attention and focus to a number
of issues:
· CIPRIS
· Health and safety of study abroad participants
· Higher education to be included as a service in GAT (?)
· "Rebuilding and dismantling" federal agencies
- INS, USAID, and Education
· Whether or not to move forward the Clinton executive
order on international education
Dr. Hudzik also shared the text of a proposed resolution coming
out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
In a general discussion about NSEP, concern was expressed about
the growing link between "international" activities
and national security. We may not be able to wrest what is meant
by national security from the current administration - but we
should absolutely make an effort. It is important that our scholars
and students not be perceived as operatives of the federal government.
But, it was also observed that NSEP has two programs - student
fellowships and institutional, and the requirements have changed
on NSEP. And, the universities are in no position to tell a student
that they may or may not work for (e.g.) the CIA. If renewed,
the opportunity is before us to open discussion on these issues
that continue to cause vexation.
MUCIA
The MUCIA office will move to MSU, with a focus on development
activities and distance education initiatives that are related
to development activities.
Discussion and Planning for Provosts' Top Priorities for Collaboration
Kathleen Fairfax, Chair of the CIC Study Abroad Directors reported
on the outcomes of the recent study abroad directors' meeting.
Kathleen distributed the notes from the Study Abroad Directors'
meeting (appended to these notes) and the group then engaged in
a lively and free-flowing discussion of the issues. Including:
· Our goal should be producing high quality, cost-effective
programs for our students.
· Could do better cooperating in the area of brokering
agreements with strong international organizations - becoming
in some ways an "accreditation" body for "good"
partners.
· Need some understanding of the current barriers, what
must happen in order for this to work.
· One of the challenges is the fact that we have so many
different models and we have very different problems and challenges.
If we want to start back home, the presidents and provosts need
to understand that there must be significant changes in the ways
the study abroad offices are managed.
· There is an emphasis on providing options for enhancing
programs, not on a monolithic CIC approach to providing programs.
· Gene Allen encouraged a discussion of the kind of goals
we should identify and articulate. Dr. Allen also observed that
the CIC universities are not their highest priority partners for
delivering programs, and they do not wish to be restricted to
partnerships with only CIC universities.
· As we look at expanding opportunities, we should also
look at the relationship between institutions and exchange programs,
for example. We should not restrict ourselves to only looking
at undergraduate programs. Could the CIC universities launch some
new exchange programs? If the provosts are serious about adopting
models, this could help increase the numbers. A mini-ISEP program,
if you will. And, we all have problems in managing exchange programs,
but another opportunity is in understanding the economics of university
exchange programs and in identifying models for enhancing exchange
programs. Perhaps instead of enrollment, they might involve internships
for the students.
· A significant leadership role for this group could be
a scholarly assessment of the benefits of study abroad, the best
models for delivering high-quality programs.
· Some best practice sharing in terms of:
· Financial models for study abroad
· Insurance issues
· Impact assessment models
· Liability, safety, emergency procedures, waivers
Under item 5, we should look at issues related to safety and other
items such as liability, emergency procedures, and waiver forms.
For the five areas, give also some examples of opportunities
and
Less Commonly Taught Languages
We should identify the state of collaboration across the CIC right
now (Title VI, CIC FLEP) in the report to the provosts.
Steve Hoch reported that he is working with an ad hoc group to
identify an experiment with at least MSU and Iowa, in the area
of second year intensive Portuguese. There has been much discussion
in the past to deliver LCTLs through distance education, but no
substantive experiment has been tried and evaluated. This will
move forward with foreign language faculty, LAS Deans, and SIOs.
Are there other ways of advancing a CIC LCTL "agenda"?
Are there several potential models for delivering LCTLs? Are we
doing the best we can do to address needs for language acquisition?
Business and government, for example, criticize the "purist"
language approach on some of our campuses.
The experiment should address language acquisition issues, and
issues associated with insuring opportunities to study certain,
critically important languages. Are we looking at languages where
we have active area studies programs? This is attractive for Title
VI programs.
This will be reported as an experiment within a larger context,
and with many stakeholders outside of the SIO group.
Next Steps and Action Items
Drafting a report:
Gene Allen and John Hudzik will begin drafting a "preamble"
to the report.
We hope to have a draft report from the Study Abroad directors
by mid-May. Will circulate by email and get comment from the SIOs.
The report should include a summary statement of the current
activity within the CIC, and the fact that over 20% of the students
are now studying on "someone else's" program. Tying
study abroad to other needs of the institutions such as less commonly
taught language.
Other Items
Suzanne Rudolph will represent Rashid Khalidi for the coming year,
as Rashid will be in France .
It was observed that the SIO's "title" causes a barrier
on some campuses.
We need to find ways in which we can encourage broader discussion
with our study abroad directors and find ways to develop cross-cutting
discussion groups that would carry out work and move agenda items
forward between meetings.
Barbara Allen and John Hudzik and Kathleen Fairfax will discuss
and work together to consider some options for joint meeting times,
locations, agendas for the SIOs and the Study Abroad Directors
and share those for discussion and reaction.
John Hudzik encouraged volunteers to help lead Washington-based
initiatives. We do have effective Washington-based groups pushing
these agendas. Could the CIC better coordinate our own support
of these groups?
Stephanie Latkovski encouraged data gathering and sharing discussion.
Gene Allen also seconded this approach, and asked for guidance
in how to share information on a regular basis. All are encouraged
to share information through the CIC-SIO@CIC.NET email list as
often as possible.
Interest remains high in meeting in Washington, DC. The group
will aim to convene the day before the MSU-sponsored conference
in DC slated for October.
BMA
5.5.01
|
