Report

International Partners’ Conference 2014

Transnational Education (TNE) Purpose and Models

Contents

Executive Summary Conference Programme Transcripts Delegate List

Executive Summary The Regent’s University London International Partners’ Conference was held on 8-10 January 2014. The event brought together over 160 delegates with representation from 73 partner universities in 18 different countries.

The Conference, organised by the International Partnerships Office, aimed to: › Explore the Models and Purposes of Transnational Education (TNE) › Provide a forum for Regent’s staff and colleagues from partner universities to meet and discuss opportunities for further collaboration › Celebrate collaborative success stories and become a hub for partner universities to establish links amongst themselves › Showcase Regent’s University London (RUL) academic and pastoral provision and London’s prominent cultural landmarks Professor Aldwyn Cooper, Regent’s Vice-Chancellor, opened the conference and warmly welcomed delegates. He provided an engaging overview of the University’s recent achievements and particular milestones in 2013 which included gaining University Title.

This was followed by an insightful and forward-thinking address on the landscape of higher education, challenging Universities to be: “different”; “student focussed”; “responsive” and “genuinely international”.

We were fortunate enough to have highly distinguished speakers at this year’s conference, in particular the keynote address by Rt. Hon David Willets MP, Minister for Universities and Science, and the closing address from Sir Drummond Bone, Master of Balliol College Oxford and Chair of OBHE. The Conference was successful in bringing together key sector representatives, employers and former students who provided a very enriching overview of the purpose and models of TNE. Delegates enjoyed the thought provoking presentations which floated new ideas around enriching the academic curriculum as well as the opportunity to form new relationships with fellow attendees. Regent’s University London is very proud of being a hub for the fostering of new partnerships.

There was a widespread appreciation for the benefits of this Conference and we look forward to hosting next year’s event scheduled for January 7-9, 2015.

María Veiga-Sánchez Head of the International Partnerships Office

Wednesday 8th January Programme: Pre-Conference Day

Time 8.00 – 9.15 Event Breakfast Venue Refectory

Time 9.00 Event Campus tour for newcomers (booked in advance) Venue Main Reception

Time Event Venue Speakers

9.30 – 10.15 Opening Address Tuke Hall Introduced by Professor Aldwyn Cooper Vice-Chancellor and Chief Executive, Regent’s University London

Time 10.30 – 12.00 Event Meeting with US Affiliates – Programme Administration Venue D204 Speakers Lady Sophie Laws Programme Director, Humanities and Study Abroad,Regent’s University London Professor William Lynch, Webster Resident Director, Regent’s University London Professor Lawrence Phillips Head of Regent’s American College London

Time Event Venue

Time Event Venue Speakers

11.00 – 11.30 Coffee break Herringham Hall

11.00 – 12.00 Professional Group Workshop; Cross-Cultural Experience Requirements as Part of an Undergraduate Curriculum Tuke Cinema Jeannie M. Burns Assistant Director of International Education, Carroll University Christina Dinges Study Away Advisor, Susquehanna University

Time 12.00 – 13.00 Event Regent’s Star Lecture; Finding King Richard III Venue D204 Speakers Dr Nick Holder, Lecturer in English History

Time 13.00 – 14.00 Event Lunch Venue Refectory

Time Event Venue Speakers

14.00 – 15.30 Presentation: Regent’s University London academic offering Tuke Hall Programme Directors and Directors of Regent’s Institute of Languages and Culture (RILC)

Time Event Venue Speakers

15.30 – 16.30 MOOCS and TNE Tuke Cinema Marguerite J. Dennis, MJ Dennis Consultancy

Time Event Venue Speakers

16.30 – 17.30 The effects of study abroad Tuke Cinema Professor Evelyne Glaser, Head, Centre for Intercultural Communication, Johannes Kepler University, Linz

Time 17.30 Event Drinks Reception hosted by Regent’s Institute of Languages and Culture (RILC) Venue Herringham Hall

Thursday 9th January Programme

Time 8.00 – 9.00 Event Breakfast Venue Refectory

Time 13.00 – 14.00 Event Lunch Venue Refectory

Time Event Venue Speakers

Time Event

Time Event Venue Speakers

9.15 – 9.50 Opening Keynote Tuke Hall Introduced by Professor Aldwyn Cooper Vice-Chancellor and Chief Executive, Regent’s University London Rt Hon David Willetts MP Minister for Universities and Science

10.00 – 11.00 Panel: Governance / Policy Making TNE and Global Citizenship Tuke Hall Introduced and Chaired by Alison Goddard, Editor of HE and Former Education Correspondent for the Economist and Times Higher Dr William Lawton Director OBHE Professor Rebecca Hughes, Director of International Education, British Council Daniel Shah Assistant Director Policy (Policy) UK HE Unit

Time Event Venue

11.00 – 11.30 Coffee break Herringham Hall

Time Event Venue Speakers

11.30 – 13.00 Panel: TNE Higher Education Institutions’ Perspective Tuke Hall Introduced and Chaired by Professor Toni Hilton, Dean of Business and Management Faculty, Regent’s University London Professor Christine Ennew Pro-Vice Chancellor and Provost, University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus Professor Nigel Healey Pro-Vice Chancellor (International), Nottingham Trent University Professor Alex Hughes Pro-Vice-Chancellor External, University of Kent Brett Berquist Executive Director, Office of Study Abroad Michigan State University

Venue Speakers

14.00 – 15.30 Breakout workshop: Governance / Policy Making / Higher Education Institutions Tuke – several rooms Led by moderators from partner institutions and Regent’s staff

Time Event Venue Speakers

15.30 – 16.30 Feedback Session Tuke Hall Workshop Chairs

Time 18.00 Event Theatre trip Venue Main Reception, group departures

Friday 10th January Programme

Time 8.00 – 9.15 Event Breakfast Venue Brasserie

Time 13.00 – 14.00 Event Lunch Venue Herringham Hall

Time 9.00 Event Campus tour for newcomers (booked in advance) Venue Main reception

Time Event Venue Speakers

Time Event Venue Speakers

10.00 – 11.00 Panel: TNE and Employability Tuke Hall Introduced and Chaired by Cornelia Meyer Honorary Fellow, Regent’s University London Dr. Julia Goga-Cooke Chief Creative Officer, Gconsultancy Lexie Sims Director, Resourcing, Europe Intercontinental Hotels Group (WGSL 2002 alumnus) Jana Pione Recruitment Relationship Manager, Gartner, Inc. Manuela Doutel-Haghighi Professional Development Manager, IBM Global Services

Time Event Venue

11.00 – 11.30 Coffee break Herringham Hall

Time Event Venue Speakers

11.30 – 12.30 Breakout workshops: TNE and Employability Tuke – several rooms Led by moderators from partner institutions and Regent’s staff

14.00 – 15.00 Panel: Student Perspective on TNE Tuke Hall Introduced and Chaired by Professor Chris Marlin Pro Vice-Chancellor, University of Sussex Torquil Wheatley, Director, Citi Investment Solutions, Citi (EBSL alumnus 1991) Philip Ozouf, Treasury & Resources Minister, Government of Jersey (EBSL alumnus 1992) Freddie Ossberg, Managing Director and Founder of Raconteur Media (EBSL alumnus 2005) Sofía Petkar, Sky News (RACL alumnus 2005)

Time Event Venue Speakers

15.00 – 16.00 Breakout workshop: Student Perspective on TNE Tuke – several rooms Led by moderators from partner institutions and Regent’s staff

Time Event Venue Speakers

16.30 – 17.30 Closing Keynote Tuke Hall Sir Drummond Bone, FRSE, FRSA Master of Balliol College, Oxford

Time 17.30 Event Drinks Reception Venue Herringham Hall Speakers Hosted by Professor Aldwyn Cooper, Vice Chancellor and Chief Executive, Regent’s University London

Time 18.30 Event Vice Chancellor and Chief Executive Dinner (by invitation only) Venue Refectory Speakers Hosted by Professor Aldwyn Cooper, Vice Chancellor and Chief Executive, Regent’s University London

Transcripts Wednesday 8 January 2014 Introduction and Opening Address Professor Aldwyn Cooper Vice Chancellor and Chief Executive of Regent’s University London Professional Group Workshop; Cross Cultural Experience Christina Dinges Study Away Advisor, Susquehanna University MOOCS and TNE Marguerite J.Dennis MJ Dennis Consultancy The Effects of Study Abroad Professor Evelyne Glaser Head of Centre for Intercultural Communication, Johannes Kepler University, Linz

Thursday 9 January 2014 Opening Keynote Introduced by Professor Aldwyn Cooper Vice Chancellor and Chief Executive of Regent’s University London Rt Hon David Willetts MP Minister for Universities and Science Panel: Governance/ Policy Making and TNE and Global Citizenship Introduced and chaired by Alison Goddard Editor of HE and Former Education Correspondent for the Economist and Times Higher Dr William Lawton Director OBHE Professor Rebecca Hughes Director of International Education, British Council Daniel Shah Assistant Director (Policy) UK HE Unit Panel: TNE Higher Education Institutions’ Perspective Introduced and chaired by Professor Toni Hilton Dean of Business and Management Faculty, Regent’s University London Professor Christine Ennew Pro Vice Chancellor and Provost, University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus Professor Nigel Healey Pro Vice Chancellor (International), Nottingham Trent University Professor Alex Hughes Pro Vice Chancellor External, University of Kent Brett Berquist Executive Director, Office of Study Abroad Michigan State University

Friday 10 January 2014 Panel: TNE and Employability Introduced by Cornelia Meyer, Honoury Fellow Regents University London Dr Julia Goga-Cooke CCO, Gconsultancy Lexie Sims Director, Resourcing Europe Intercontinental Hotels Group Jana Pione Recruitment Relations Manager, Gartner, Inc Manuela Doutel-Haghighi Professional Development Manager, IBM Global services Panel: Student Perspective on TNE Introduced and chaired by Professor Chris Marlin Pro Vice Chancellor, University of Sussex Torquil Wheatley Director, Citi Investment Solutions Philip Ozouf Treasury and Resources Minister, Government of Jersey Freddie Ossberg Managing Director and Founder of Raconteur Media Closing Keynote Sir Drummond Bone, FRSE, FRSA Master of Balliol College, Oxford

Introduction and Opening Address Professor Aldwyn Cooper Vice Chancellor and Chief Executive of Regent’s University London

Colleagues, Good morning, it’s my privilege to open this three day conference of Regent’s University International Partners’. This is a very special year for us of course, it is the first year that we’ve held the International Partners Conference as a full University. We gained our title in March 2013 and I am absolutely delighted that we are welcoming even more of you than in previous years. For those of you who have attended before, I hope you are going to meet up with old colleagues and friends and also a lot of new people who are coming for the first time to the conference.

This year we have adopted a slightly different structure to the conference, really in response to requests from delegates. This first day is much more of an internal family event. It’s about things relating to Regent’s, future developments and the network. The next two days are more dedicated directly to considering the broader topic of the ‘Purposes and Models for Transnational Education’.

We are very fortunate throughout the three days to have an outstanding range of speakers. Tomorrow’s opening keynote for the open conference will be by the Minister of Universities and Science, David Willetts. Over the three days we have terrific input from our partners, external experts and our closing keynote is from Sir Drummond Bone currently the Master of Balliol College, Oxford and chair of OBHE. He has also been the President of Universities UK and Vice Chancellor of the University of Liverpool and a variety of other Vice Chancellor positions. He is an interesting man.

This evening we have a reception to launch our “Regents Institute of Languages and Culture”. This will be at the end of the afternoon in the Knapp Gallery. Of course, as always, we will conclude the event with the reception and the celebration dinner on Friday.

I am actually, slightly disappointed that we have a few delegates missing at the moment.

The global weather patterns are not in our favour with temperatures going as low as -40, or -50 with wind-chill, in the northern USA and some people are stuck there who may not make it at all. I actually thought I was going to have to swim here myself. I live out in Oxfordshire at the weekends and trying to get back in, it was difficult to decide what was the road, what was the river and which were the fields - it just looked like one great ocean!

In this first section I would like to give you some perspectives for the conference. I have called this “a world of change”. Clearly we are going through massive change in HE in response to the massive changes in the global economy, social and political issues. What I would like to do is talk about a number of specific issues. Firstly, about Regent’s 2013; what’s happened in the last year? Secondly, I would like to talk a bit about the UK, EU and global HE markets generally because quite clearly they all have an impact on the way in which we operate and indeed in which we have networks and work together. I want to say a few words about changes in the expectations of student outcomes, their expectations of what a University or HE experience is about and their actual experience that they want to have while they’re studying.

I want to provide a restatement of the Regent’s 2020 vision. We’ve recently completed the first two years of our 2020 vision. We’ve reviewed it at a number of meetings with our Trustee Board, in our Directorate and in our Senate and we have come up with one or two minor changes. No real changes in direction but certain changes in how we’ll implement the strategy in the light of changes in the world environment and indeed in our experience over the last two years. Finally, I would like to talk about the next ten years.

In 1992 at a lunch to mark her 40 years since her accession to the throne, our Queen described the previous 12 months as an “annus horribilis” for herself and her family. It had been a very difficult year for them. In contrast, this last 12 months has really been

an “annus mirabilis” for Regent’s, its staff students, alumni and partners. The great achievements for us have obviously included gaining full university title- the first notfor-profit institution that has achieved this since 1983 while receiving no government financial support and only the second ever in the UK. We are very proud of this as a reflection of all the hard work people here have put in.

Secondly we have acquired AIU London. It was part of our growth strategy that we would look at acquisitions of complementary institutions. This has gone very well and is helping the AIUL students who will all transferring over to Regent’s programmes over a period up until June next year. After this we will close the old AIU, or Regent’s Marylebone as it is known at the moment, so that it will all be part of the charity. We are committed to continue to be a not-for-profit charity.

We have got a rapidly growing reputation and engagement in the sector, not just in this country but internationally. We are receiving approaches now from governments and institutions around the world that didn’t really want to know us when we were a college.

We haven’t actually changed very much. We are still doing the same things of the same high quality and in the same way but actually gaining that recognition as a University is really helpful. We are getting a lot more media coverage in the UK and worldwide.

Our professors are being asked to give more opinions to the media. It’s been a very successful year.

We have also celebrated 100 years of higher education in Regent’s Park. You have either already got a copy of the book that we have published to celebrate this or will be given one today. It covers the period from the first years of Bedford College, University of London in 1913 through to 2013 when we gained our university title.

Bedford is a great predecessor for us. It was a pioneering and innovative organisation.

It was the first university in Britain to give degrees to women. Before Bedford, women could study at university but they couldn’t get a degree, they couldn’t graduate, so Bedford pioneered that. Bedford also had the first female Vice Chancellor, (we could do with more female VC’s now as the number is declining) and also the first female professors in Britain. We hope that we are maintaining our commitment to equalities and innovation that Bedford showed. Interestingly many of the Bedford alumni came to our re-launch and came to the publication party for the book. We hope that they will join us in future.

We have also had a really strong year in financial terms in a difficult period for HE economically throughout the world. Further, it’s not only this last year but the future forecast is looking strong and solid which is important.

We have strengthened our university governance this year in order to reflect the growth of the institution and directions that we are taking. We have appointed new trustees; we have also changed the committee structure. I now think we have a very strong governance. We were delighted, in fact, thinking back to the Bedford days, that it was reported recently in the THE and the Guardian that we are the leading gender balanced governance institution in Great Britain. We have more women than men on our governing body which is a tremendous rarity. In fact at first we were equal then a number of men stepped down and two women have joined. We didn’t do it by setting quotas, we don’t believe in that, we did it by looking for the best people and we got them.

Finally as I have said we have reviewed the Regent’s mission and I’ll be doing some looking ahead on that in a minute.

UK, EU and global Higher Education are going through an extraordinary churn at the moment, the like of which has never been seen in HE before. Even in the years since I took my first degree - which is more years ago than I like to remember - I think only 12% of people in Great Britain went to University, it is now very close to 50% go to University at some point in their life. That in itself is a major change, it has economic implications to it and quality implications to it, but very big changes.

I want to touch very briefly on a few things - what is HE for and is HE the same as a University education? I don’t think it is. HE is indeed about generating and disseminating knowledge. It’s about stimulating reasoned and rational debate between people to come to logical and defensible, evidence based conclusions. It’s about developing society in many different ways - economically and understanding socio-political relationships.

A University experience, on the other hand, adds more. In terms of a university experience, of course, it should include first class study that is strongly informed by the latest research to keep it at the cutting edge. But it is there, I think, to help students not just acquire the technical skill or knowledge base, it is there to gain a broader perspective of life. It’s there to have new experiences that otherwise wouldn’t have been tried, encouraged by the University. It’s there to make contacts that will be useful and helpful throughout students’ lives wherever in the world they end up working.

For a lot of students (the 18-25 year olds), it is also still about discovering themselves.

Perhaps I’m just getting old but I find today’s 18 year olds are the 13 year olds of my generation. They still have a long way to go in trying out the world and discovering who they are and gaining confidence in their own abilities.

The next thing is what is the value of research and what is its importance? Research is a key element of knowledge generation and dissemination but we must consider the kinds of research that are important. Yes we constantly want to refresh the curriculum and extend it on the basis of the research that we carry out and our partners carry out and globally HE carries out but it doesn’t simply need to be theoretical research, the kind of research in this country which you must do to get funding from the government through the research exercise framework. At Regent’s, we believe very strongly that research is also about developing the practical skills and practical knowledge and operational abilities and to be able to disseminate knowledge about that.

So what have been the big changes taking place in HE. Firstly there is a continuing and accelerating growth in global demand for HE. There was a paper by the British Council about 15 years ago called the 2020 paper and it projected the growth in demand and also projected what the UK share of that growth might be. That growth has been substantially exceeded now and this country hasn’t got that percentage of that growth that was originally perceived.

There has been a major globalisation of the world economy, we cannot survive now as single nations around the world or even blocks of crude blocks of nations. The EU is dependent on the old Soviet block, that is in turn dependent on trade relations with China.

We have got to learn to work together in a truly international way. Higher education funding has changed. There is no great appetite as we all know, for higher taxation to put more money into HE. The bill for HE is shifting towards the learner and employers aren’t tending to pick that up to any great extent. This means that there is a lot less money going in from the government which means that universities are going to have to work differently in the future.

Employers have different expectations today. It is no longer the fact that a degree is the hygiene factor that will get you a good job. Employers want to see a lot more than that. They want to see potential not just a pedigree. They want to see students who can demonstrate that they have commitment, ability, innovation, social, communications leadership, teamwork and entrepreneurial skills - all of those things and that has to change the way in which we develop the curricula for our portfolios.

There is a change, not necessarily in the United Kingdom but around the world, in the expected age of study. We complain bitterly in the UK that we aren’t hitting 50% participation in HE and that this figure is exceeded in many other countries in the OECD. However, what we mean is we are not hitting 50% participation of school leavers. If you take countries in the OECD who are very successful in terms of participation, like Finland for an example, they get more than 60% participation but they have a far lower participation at 18-25. For them, HE is a lifelong learning experience, people go out to

work, they then go back to education often in the 35-55 year old bracket and that’s what builds the 60% rate.

There is a huge and rapidly increasing domestic quality and capacity for HE around the world and established countries, the old major English destination countries (MEDCs) like England, America, Australia and New Zealand need to recognise that these other countries are now producing something of at least the same if not better quality than that which is still the general supply in Great Britain and traditional learner destinations.

There is also an increasing provision of programmes being taught in English, probably a good thing. However, while English is a wonderful language, so are many other languages. Language and understanding cultures is a crucial part of operating within a global environment but the fact that people can study in English in countries outside the general English speaking nations is making the competition for students to come to places like Britain, America and Australia really much more difficult. One can see the problems for the UK if someone can study and gain an undergraduate degree for 3000 euros in a country elsewhere in Europe and learn in English or they can study in England for anything up to and beyond 30,000 euros. There may be a quality difference, but not as great a difference as the comparative prices might suggest.

Of course there is increasing diversity of location, level, objectives, outcomes expected, business models for universities and colleges, costs basis, skills students have at the end, the methodologies that are applied, and we need to think what can be done through TNE to facilitate the very best and that of course is what the next three days are all about.

What I did want to say though, is that established countries like Britain need to be very careful. When we hosted the conference here two years ago, Professor Malcolm Gillies, the Chair of London Higher and currently still Vice Chancellor of London Metropolitan University, put forward three options for universities; Firstly, all these things people talk about are not really going to affect us the status quos fine, we will just ride the wave.

Secondly, well if it is an evolutionary pattern over the next 30-40 years we can just shift to that.

Or it is a revolutionary time and we need to take major steps to be brave about what we do. I think the conclusion that Malcolm comes to and I come to is that we are in a revolutionary position, we need to be brave about what we do, we need to be out there and at the forefront of leading education.

Last year we had Sir Peter Scott, now Professor at the Institute of Education London, past Vice Chancellor of Kingston University and indeed he was the Editor of the THE at one stage and he talked about the possibility that HE becomes something we just don’t understand in the UK in ten years’ time, he talked about it being a foreign country. That we get so confident in what we do that we are blind to what is happening elsewhere and suddenly we drop off the edge of a cliff both in terms of the research we do and in terms of the collaborations we can have. This will have a massive impact in terms of the student demand to come to country like this. Again I think it is one of the things we need to consider in the days ahead.

One of the problems perhaps we have had until now is that some of the top universities like University College London, King’s, LSE, Oxford, Cambridge have perhaps not paid as much attention to the teaching element and the dissemination element of knowledge as they might have done. They have concentrated very much on research because that’s where they gain their global rankings.

However, Professor Michael Arthur, who moved from the University of Leeds to become Provost of UCL about a year ago, spoke out in November of this year to say that having looked at the student feedback, universities like UCL have got to do better and pay more attention to the teaching and not just the research. They have got to switch back from

the position we are at now where top academics do a maximum of 40% teaching and 60% research to 60% teaching and 40% research. Even the top professors should now be addressing the UG’s in their first and second years not just waiting to supervise a few pots graduates doing their PhD’s. It is interesting that someone like Michael Arthur should come out to say that, I think he has a challenge on his hands changing an institution like UCL but I think he is clearly reflecting that students expect much more now that they costs are more obvious to them.

There are also people like Sir Malcolm Barber who is Chief Education Advisor to Pearson and was a permanent secretary, senior civil servant and one of the co-authors of a report this year that I recommend to you, called “An avalanche is coming”. This effectively tries to say that Universities are going to be swept away by this avalanche it is all going to become MOOCS and so on. I can see why Pearson might wish to say this for commercial reasons but there are elements of truth in what he is saying. There will be change that’s created by technology.

What outcomes do students expect at the end of their study? They expect recognition of the qualification that they have gained. It is important that all of us get that recognition from the national bodies and sometimes that is quite difficult to do. Regent’s is engaged with the department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and various other bodies in the UK to try and get better global recognition of degree programmes and also particularly jointly awarded programmes or co-validated programmes which are very attractive to students these days.

Students expect employability. When they come out of their degree they want to be able to walk into a job relatively easily, that is well paid and is secure. Employability is crucial. They want to be able to progress rapidly once in those jobs. They want to be in a situation whereby contribution is recognised so that they can move up the tree quickly.

They want real success. I’m sure your students are the same, our students here, might not expect but definitely want success. They expect to have developed a level of social and communication skills. They expect to have developed those contacts I mentioned earlier.

They expect an institution to give them not just support while they are studying but also long term support as part of an alumni organisation.

More and more they expect to see value for money especially when they are paying the fees themselves. This is where some of the Russell group universities in this country have failed, they only provide three hours of contact a week. Regent’s provides an average of 20 hours a week here. I was interested when I visited Belarus recently that they thought that even this was a very low number of contact hours. However, to some extent it depends on the pedagogy applied.

Students expect to have developed an international perspective. They recognise that an international perspective is becoming more and more important.

What are their expectations while they study? Teaching excellence and experience is almost a given. This is naturally something that they require and we must make sure that it is what they get and increasingly pay particular attention to pedagogy. They expect first class resources, access to libraries, online databases too and whatever specialist equipment they require. They expect or want to have high contact hours. People like to be interacting with others, all the research demonstrates this. So how do we ensure this happens in reasonably small groups so that they are developing real human interaction and learning from each other. They expect personal support, advice, counselling. They expect flexibility so that if they suddenly see a slightly different subject is really the one they wanted to study and now know that’s what they want to study they need to be able to move to that. They expect an institution to have breadth. We are not a large institution here but we do have breadth that runs from banking and finance and management through to psychotherapy and counselling psychology to media, languages and a whole variety of things where students can rub shoulders with each other in a collegiate way and learn that there is something outside their own field. It is very much C P Snow’s twin cultures built large.

They appreciate a varied demographic of the other students. A few years ago, when we

were forced into considering reducing the international intake of our students because of the rather blind policies of our government on immigration, the students came to us and said they understood why we had to take this position but asked us to try not to make it go on too long. What they value from coming to an institution like this where we have got 140 plus nationalities is that they also can learn from each other as well as their tutors.

Increasingly students throughout our network appreciate having more students from elsewhere in the world integrated not isolated within their institutions.

Students of course want to have fun; I know I did when I was a student. A lot of students are still in the 18-25 age group, but they are not the only ones who can have fun, the others can have fun as well. I think it is an important part of being at a University, that you are meeting people, having fun with them and building those relationships and again since it is such a strong driver, they want to see value for money.

The experience: people want small group sizes, appropriate learning methodologies, personal support, breadth of opportunity, international study, languages - what I call super-curriculum enrichment - not just the things that are the core of the curriculum but all kinds of other things they can do, things that amount to their experience and long term outlook on life.

People want work experience as well as part of what they do today and we are putting large investment into that here at Regent’s. Back to that fun thing again, they do like fun as do we.

We have reviewed our 2020 Vision. There are no big changes. We want to maintain and re-enforce our mission, which is “Creating tomorrow’s global leaders”. Our values remain unchanged and we still maintain our commitment to non-profit. We want all the money that comes in here including any surplus we make to be reinvested in developing the student experience, the abilities of our staff, our resources and our contribution to the community. When we put 2020 Vision together we looked at a growth of Regent’s at one stage to about 10,000 students by 2020 and it slowly crept down to 9,000 then 7,500.

We have now decided that about 6,000 is the right number of students for Regent’s. This comes from having listened to our students but also looking at the faculties strategic plans, looking at the realities of being able to provide the “Regent’s experience” to all of those students so that we are not spread across a series of office blocks in London but instead concentrated here on the Park campus and in the Marylebone village. We think that this is important to our students and they value it highly. We are making some new plans about our estate which we believe will allow us to ensure that the vast majority of students get the majority of their learning experience here or in the Marylebone buildings which we acquired and are about to refurbish extensively.

We want to strengthen what we consider to be our unique personalised pedagogy. It’s about learning the specific requirements of each student. We want to concentrate on practical, employment focussed programmes so that our students do come out ready to hit the road, to get good jobs wherever they want to work in the world. We want to re-enforce and develop further our internationalism; by that we mean real internationalism. Many British universities tend to mean recruit lots of foreign students to cover the funding gap from government. We don’t mean that. Internationalism is the core of what we do. It means exchanging views and developing perspectives between people from different backgrounds and cultures. It means understanding the economic realities of other countries, so students can actually go there and work effectively with others and share knowledge.

We want to build our profile as a University. We used to be called the greatest secret in British HE. Well, we don’t want to be a secret any longer, we have started to do a bit more shouting. As I said earlier we have featured more regularly in the press recently. We are starting to get invited onto committees including government committees. We want our name to be recognised for our excellence and difference and we want the name of the Regent’s network and our partners to be understood and respected.

We are going to strengthen our outreach activities. We are a charity and we believe very strongly in public benefit and citizenship. We have started to do more with the community immediately around Regent’s. In particular we are starting to work with some

of the schools in the community around the Park to help them with master classes for students and staff, to get parents of students at those schools in here to understand the opportunities available. We are delighted that Regent High School is going to collaborate in the Regent’s Arts Festival on campus.

We are also trying to work with adults in the community, get them to come in, take some classes, learn some languages and develop new interests. Another thing we are launching is to develop the Regents Park Educational Village. Around the park we have the London Business School, Royal Academy of Music, The Open Air Theatre, The Zoological Society of London, The Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and The Society of Physicians, all of whom are strong education contributors. We have many things where we can work together effectively and what we are trying to do now is put together Regent’s Park Educational Village based around Regent’s to represent Higher Education in this part of London.

The implications as I said is we have got to build the brand awareness through public relations. We have already considered student number targets. We are refining our academic recruitment strategy so that we get the right balance of research focussed staff and staff who have got the cutting edge knowledge and practitioner skills that they can share with students. We are developing a new International Strategy that we expect to be approved by our Board in February.

Maintaining and developing our estates and infrastructure are important to us. We will need to review our fee structures in the light of everything that’s changing in the environment. We are slightly shifting our research targets. While we still intend to gain our own research awarding powers, it is not going to be the primary focus driving us.

Research powers will fall out of the things we are doing because it is the right thing to happen. However, although it may take a few more years, it will be more strongly based.

In the next five years we want to maintain growth, to implement the new international strategy and to continue to build and strengthen the partnership network. We hope to develop law provision by one of a number of routes though we have not yet decided which and we expect to launch law degrees in 2015. We still want to get American Accreditation; we are in the process of applying for this. We are going to further strengthen our management team in order to be able to deliver all of the activities. We want to manage the brand awareness and we want to maintain what we see as a unique position. We are very different to every other institution in Britain and we want to stay that way.

Of course, one of the things that we look at is the extent to which there is an avalanche coming - to what extent is technology going to threaten institutions like this? It’s quite interesting. I believe that students, or at least students that come to universities like this and your universities, want more than sitting at a screen. They want human interaction and the ability to work together. Sophisticated though technology is today, it is still not at a level where it can provide the same roar of the grease paint, smell of the crowd experience, if indeed it ever will. For an interesting insight into this I strongly recommend the book by Michael Frayn written presciently in 1968 called “A very private life” where almost everything is done at a distance.

On the other hand Professor Seymour Papert the great artificial intelligence professor in the United States once said that - if you can envisage something, if the human mind can conceive of it, one day it will be there.

Eventually people may be able to have shared experience electronically. I did notice this week that a company said it will be launching 3D telephone communications in two years’ time. However, video calling has still not really become accepted.

You will have the opportunity to discuss MOOCs: Massive Online Open Computer Systems or SOOCs: Small/ Specialist Online Open Computer Systems over the next few days. Just before Christmas the NY Times published an article that was really quite devastating. Of the numbers of potential learners who sign up to MOOCs, 50% do not even start and only 4% actually finish. If they do finish, what have they actually gained at the end of it? Is this

form of learning attractive to employers? Does it change students’ lives? For some people it will impact on their lives; people in countries where at present they do not have access to anything else it will have a massive impact. It may perhaps provide an opportunity for them to be channelled into further education experience elsewhere.

We really have to look here at the potential for technology. Technology is wonderful.

I’ve always been an early adopter of technology, often to my detriment. I remember carrying around great brick mobile phones and I remember the first mobile computer I had was something called an Osborne which was the size of a steamer trunk that you lugged around and it had a screen about 10cms by 8cms. I hope I have learned from my experience but I’m not sure the world has.

I am one of the grand old men of computer-based learning. I have been doing it since 1968 in everything from teaching machines to mainframes, minis, micros and MOOCs. However, although I have learnt all the lessons and I report them through to the government, they never believe it. It is a bit like living Groundhog Day, seeing the same mistakes made over and over again.

Arthur C Clarke has something called the ten-factor theory of change. What Clarke says is that when the capability of a technology increases by a ten factor it changes society in a profound and irreversible way. In the past when technologies changed by a ten factor they did so over tens of thousands of years or thousands of years or hundreds of years or at least a reasonable number of decades. Moore’s law on the impact of computer chip size, the number of operations that a computer chip can perform, has shown there has been a 10-factor increase in computers technology five times in the last forty years. Think about the possible impact of that.

Society has changed irretrievably through recent technological advance. Also the fact that my watch has more computing power than the flights to the Apollo spacecraft. Every time it comes along people say this is going to change education irreversibly but quite frankly it hasn’t. Billions and billions have been spent by commercial companies, universities and governments. I have sat on all kinds of committees like the ‘Development of European Learning through Technological Advance (DELTA) committee and we gave away billions of what were in those days were Ecus, Euros today, to companies and none of the projects exist any longer. Why not?

Well part of it is that a lot of the initiatives are driven by obsessive technophiles not educators. John D Clarke (another Clarke) said that fanatics are always followed by fools, of which there is an inexhaustible supply. The technology that needs to be considered is not actually computing power. The technology that needs to be considered is educational technology. It is understanding how people learn then applying the technology to assist them to optimise the great flexibility of the ways in which they learn. Learning is all about human expectation. Psychology and society really just hasn’t kept pace.

I was very pleased during the OBHE conference here in December, that Dirk Van Damme, Head of Education at the OECD, made more or less exactly the same point in a panel session to which we both contributed. He said that it is extraordinary that an awful lot of universities don’t actually have a pedagogy department that advises people thoroughly on the way in which people learn.

It is one of the great things about The Open University in Britain. From its outset it had an Institute of Educational Technology (IET) that I think at the time was larger than any of the faculties. It advised on the way in which the programmes were designed. To me, this is why The Open University made such a huge contribution to HE worldwide and continues to do so today. In terms of understanding that we are, in T S Kuhn’s terms at a preparadigmatic stage of the science waiting for sufficient knowledge and evidence of a new world before collapse the old Socratic form of education. We want to focus on practical programmes, reinforce and develop further our internationalism here build the profile, strengthen the outreach and fundraising but we will look at what technology can do to assist us in that.

So my conclusions are that Universities, which succeed and survive and indeed grow in terms of their reputation as well as numbers (because numbers are not everything), are those firstly who are different - different to the rest of the pack. Sir Allan Langlands the then Head of the HEFCE, came here for lunch last autumn (sadly he’s now left HEFCE and gone to be Vice Chancellor at the University of Leeds) he said “It is great what you have done at Regent’s. You are different. Your greatest danger as an institution is to slip back into the pack and be one more like every other.” I think that is important, I recommend that to everybody - be different.

Secondly be very student focussed, I am sure we all say that but from what I see at many Universities, they haven’t quite picked it up properly yet. We must all really understand what students want, what students need and what students can be persuaded to want.

They are not always right but they are susceptible to rational argument. We must offer the very best pedagogy, understand what we are doing, and allow for the flexibility of human learning styles. Use technology where appropriate and don’t use it where not appropriate. Use big lectures where you are going to gain a big benefit from it, use small groups and personal tutorial where that’s right. Make sure that you can put that into your delivery structures.

Be very responsive. The world is changing rapidly. Those institutions who sit back and say well that’s the way we’ve always done it, are doomed (most of them) to failure. Some will still survive, some will still do very well for a period but most of them are going to be in a very difficult situation and some are beginning to be in that position now. Use technology effectively, students expect it, they expect high bandwidth. By the way do you know what the university’s biggest bandwidth usage is for? It’s for online dating sites - I’m amazed by that. You would think all the students and indeed staff would be able to meet people they want to talk to, I find it very odd.

Be genuinely international, by that I mean use internationalism as a means of getting people to have interesting, stimulating, rational debate and understanding between nations and cultures.

Be collaborative. I think for us the future is in excellence of collaboration - the building of networks - the development not just of Regent’s with our partners but between our partners and each other. We must build strong networks where we can share experiences, hopefully share staff and have student’s study and visiting students and so on.

I believe that for universities like ours, all of us, there is a great future out there. I noted the other day that the Chinese symbol of crisis is often talked about as meaning opportunity and threat. I then read further that this is absolute nonsense. The Chinese symbol for crisis doesn’t mean that at all. It does mean threat and then on to explain a variety of threats. The truth is that in any time of turbulence, if you keep your eyes open, there are opportunities that can be taken up providing that you are not just one of the pack, blindly following other people’s leads.

I wish you all extremely well for the three days and I look forward to talking to you more and seeing you at the reception this evening and at the reception and dinner on Friday.

Professional Group Workshop; Cross Cultural Experience Christina Dinges Study Away Advisor, Susquehanna University

This is going to be a mini session this morning. My colleague and co-presenter Jeannie Burns was one of the many folk caught in the weather in Chicago so she sends her apologies. So I’m going to change the format a little bit and give you a profile of my University and I would like to hear from you all what you’re doing on your Campuses and give you more information that way. So I hope that everyone is next to someone because this is going to be a little interactive, or sitting near someone. Feel free to move around if you need to.

For those of you that just came in I was just telling everyone that my colleague Jeannie Burns can’t make it today because she’s caught in the snow in Chicago. I’m going to be giving you a short presentation on my University, I’m Christina Dinges, Study Away Advisor at Susquehanna University which is located in Central Pennsylvania. I thought that maybe instead of giving a long spiel about Susquehanna I’ll just show you a couple of pictures.

So even though I’m from North Carolina I actually started working in Susquehanna for the past two years, so a little bit of time. I did my graduate research in Germany where I actually piqued my interest in education abroad so after I went to Germany, University of Manheim and studied there in grad school I decided to go ahead and pursue a career in education abroad. I came back and subsequently got a position at Susquehanna University.

The picture right here of the beach is of Cyprus. Cyprus is a place that I have visited quite often and did quite a bit of research on so this summer I am taking 24 Susquehanna students to Cyprus as part of the course to study “food and conflict” with two other faculty members. At the bottom is Amnesty International, I’m a huge advocate for human rights. I’ve been part of this organisation for a really long time - it’s one of the things that I’m very enthused about.

So Susquehanna University is a small, private, liberal arts university in central Pennsylvania.

For those of you who are maybe not too familiar with central Pennsylvania it’s in the middle of the state. I think central Pennsylvania is known for Amish culture. The capital city is Harrisburg Pennsylvania which is one of the oldest cities and also one of the most interesting cities in Pennsylvania. Before I get started I would like to introduce my colleague Dr Ali Zadeh. He is faculty and Department chair of our Business School, his wife Faye is here as well. They are Co-Programme Directors of our London Business School Programme at Susquehanna University with FSU (Frostburg State University). Susquehanna University has about 22,000 students over its campuses; it’s a relatively small university. I think one thing that sets our university apart from the other small private universities is our GO Programme so that’s what I’m going to be going over with you today. I’ll give you a profile outline of what that is and how we came to have this programme here.

[Picture of map] So again, from London to PA (Pennsylvania) right in the middle of the state. [Presentation slide 7] So now we are going to do something interactive. I know, in this Conference, even though it’s small you might not have the chance to talk to one another. So what I do with my students is something called the “Name Game” and the core part of this is to help them understand and give them a peek into what culture really is. So that’s why I said earlier that I wanted you guys to be sat with someone, hopefully you don’t know. The purpose of this game is we are going to take about one minute and you’re going to talk to the person next to you for one minute, answer these questions that are on the screen [Presentation slide 8]. The important thing about this particular exercise is that you cannot stop talking for one minute and also that the person that is listening to you shouldn’t interrupt you; they should give you the full minute and let you talk. Then after one minute is over I’ll wave

my hand and get you to switch partners and that person will speak. After, I will ask you guys to share some of the things you learned about each other. Any questions? Hopefully everyone has someone in mind that they would like to speak to.

[Audience participation] [Claps] Who wants to be the first to start and share something they’ve learnt about the other person that was interesting?

[Audience participation] So what I do with our students, the interesting thing is, a lot of them really don’t think they have anything interesting to share, but the more they talk, traditional types of naming, traditions will come out. Like they will say “my mother named me” or “my father named me” - this is very traditional in certain cultures. They can talk about their last name; one student told me his name had 16 letters so it’s really hard for people to spell his last name.

I think culture kind of starts with naming and if you can talk about it more and think about it more then that’s maybe a nice starting point.

So today I’m going to be speaking to you about Cross-Cultural Requirement at Susquehanna.

It has three components, the first one being preparatory course work. All of our students at Susquehanna University are required to complete a cross-culture experience before they graduate. As part of that requirement all of them have to take a course before they go and then the actual requirement itself is a reflection but the perquisite for that is a cross-cultural experience. I’m going to break those down a little more.

I think what’s unique about Susquehanna is there are a number of schools and universities that have certain study abroad requirements but I think what makes our university unique is that we focus on the reflection piece. And so when students return from their experience they have to take a two credit course with faculty across different disciplines and they are taking that course for the one semester to reflect on their experience when they get back.

So, the experience part; it has to be off campus, it has to be two weeks minimum and it does not have to be for credit. So the picture that you’re seeing is actually a programme that is run out of New Orleans, Louisiana [Presentation slide 13]. It’s a programme that started through hurricane Katrina, as a service project to help the population to re-build homes and it kind of morphed into a study of Cajun food and cuisine and culture so they do a lot of different things. They don’t receive credit for that particular course.

Now the GO Program options are called GO, it stands for Global Options. The two most popular programmes actually are here in London. The Sigmund Weis Business School at Susquehanna University takes about 24 students a semester for a semester-long programme where they study business and then they also do a lot of hands on internships and visits. In fact Dr Ali Zadeh will probably tell you more about that as well. And then also Regent’s University London is our second most popular programme where students can study across different disciplines. GO Long is the traditional study abroad semester.

GO Short is for faculty, so I’m taking students to Cyprus, and then there’s other faculty involved as well. Primarily those programmes happen in the summer but we do have a few that happen in winter break as well. This past winter we took our first group to hike to Mount Everest base camp in Nepal and then we have programmes that run in almost 12 or 15 different countries in the summer, so we try to keep it interesting. And then the last option is called GO Your Own Way so we don’t just throw the students to the wind and have them build their own programme, we do help them self-design an academic or experiential learning programme. They can do a service project or they can take classes in the summer through one of our approved programme providers or they can actually just self-design something. So, for example, we had three students who went to Vermont to stay in a Somali refugee camp and then we’ve had students go to Israel and participate in a study of military. So it’s very ethnic, very personalised.

One of the programmes I’m just going to talk a bit about is called “The Chinese Scholar” it’s a short programme with one of our faculty, Josh Davis, the Professor in our Music Department. The Chinese Scholar Programme is basically a mini-study of what it means to be a Chinese Scholar. So students will master certain things like calligraphy, painting, music and chess. So all the students will go abroad and they will talk to different masters of those particular genres and when they come back they will get a certificate in being a “mini scholar in Chinese”. So that’s one of the programmes that I think is pretty interesting.

Susquehanna’s cross-cultural requirement is based on four learning goals. I think I’m going to break those down for you today and then have a quick discussion. The first one is that we want our students to be able to develop a working definition of culture. How many of you guys are familiar with the “Iceberg Model”? I think this is an old traditional way to show what culture really is. We always tell our students we don’t want them to top-end the boat with all the tourists, we would like for them to kind of try to get below the surface, we don’t expect them to be able to dive all the way in there because in a traditional semester abroad where we have a two week programme it’s impossible to learn everything about a culture. But we can kind of push them to try to explore views of the world or concepts that won’t necessarily be seen right away, so this is one of the activities we use to help them to define a view of culture.

The second learning goal is teaching them to learn the difference between American culture and the culture they’re immersed in. I think the important thing to kind of start with looking at your own culture is to start with stereotypes. So we show them a picture, we’ve developed like a picture module, and we ask them, where do you think these people are from. Can anyone tell me? Australia, that’s correct. So these are aborigines from Australia, we want them to start looking at more cultural sensitivity, and not just focus on what they see in magazines. We want them to be able to know about the indigenous population, the history of the area, to be more culturally sensitive to those particular things. And we also want them to be able to define ethnocentric and I have a definition here from “What’s Up Culture” – I don’t know if you guys use it, but it’s a great website through Pacific University – and it says that ethnocentrism rests on the assumption that the world’s view of one’s culture is central to all reality, so basically “my culture is the best”, and I think in America we have a little problem with that.

So we want our students to kind of think about that and we use an exercise called Nacirema. Has anyone used this before? So basically, this is anthropologists who studied a culture and one of the key things about this culture is they believe the human body is very ugly, it has a disability to disease, so there are rituals that this culture does to try to dispel those diseases of the ugliness of the body. Everyone in this particular culture has a shrine in their household dedicated to this particular ritual, the more shrines they have the richer they are and they start with their children early, teaching them about these practices. So does anyone know what this culture is? This is American culture, Nacirema is American spelled backwards. So in American culture, we’re known for our love of plastic surgery and our constant trying to make ourselves look better. In certain cultures one of our Professors in music grew up in the Amazon jungle and said that while he was there, in a particular tribe, they did not wash because your body scent was part of your character. To wash off your body scent was basically like cutting off your arm, it’s like part of who you are. So in American culture and other cultures as well we tend to wash that way so others can’t smell it and are perceived as bad. So when students watch this they see that American culture looks kind of weird from the outside also so they tend to have a more open mind, hopefully. So the reference to shrines are to bathrooms, so of course, if you have a house with 12 bathrooms you’re probably pretty wealthy, living in a mansion. And we do start early with our children telling them to go to the bathroom, to brush their hair, to brush their teeth, to do these rituals that we feel will make ourselves feel better and look better. So this is an example of how we kind of try and let our students know what ethnocentrism means.

Now learning goal number three is wanting students to recognise how their own attitudes will affect their cross cultural experience and be able to identify certain cultural values in

the US. I think one of the ones that probably a lot of people are aware of is something called “Ugly American”. It’s something that if you Google on YouTube you can find hundreds of videos, the two that I show to my students I’m not going to be able to show today because the link isn’t working. It’s a newscaster and comedian and he goes around and he asks Americans different things, for example, he asks about seven or eight different people just walking down the street in New York, “What Country starts with U?” People said all kinds of things and he said “What about United States of America?” - no one had actually thought about that because we consider ourselves Americans, not United State of Americans. Then the second video I have actually taken from the University of California, it’s a great video, we have to share this with you guys. It’s where students tell other students how not to be an Ugly American, so one thing that they do say repeatedly is not to be so loud because Americans are very loud. We like to laugh a lot, we are very exuberant with how we feel in public and this might not necessarily be acceptable to all cultures. So we try to teach our students to be aware of these different stereotypes and how to try and dispel them when they are abroad. Maybe that’s why Susquehanna students are so quiet, I don’t know.

Learning goal number four, the last one, is to want them to be able to reflect and that’s where the reflection course comes in. To reflect on their personal growth, social responsibility and the value of active participation in human society. So we do that through the Cross-Cultural Reflection course and coursework is graded, like I said, it’s for one semester. They might write papers, do journals, presentations, individual interviews and other creative work, we’ve had some of our theatre partners do improvisation, different sessions. We’ve had students do televised interviews, so they can do a lot of different creative work and the cool thing is they work with faculty from different departments so they get to bring in their own expertise, and kind of make the classes unique and their own.

So one of the big questions we get when we talk about this is particular format is how do we do assessment. I think the short answer is it’s a work in progress. We currently have some tools that we use for measuring. Before students leave, they set goals; we actually have them write down goals based on academic, cultural development and personal development. So they set their own goals before they go. I hold on to this and when they get back I have them do the second part of the assignment which is to rate how well they did. So students are basically doing self-assessment and then this information is shared with reflection instructors and they will use these to kind of build around their course.

So if any of the students didn’t do such a good job, hopefully the reflection will be able to build in some assignments to focus on cultural observations or wherever they think their students are lacking. So that’s kind of a short version of where we are right now with assessment. We are currently in the process of getting different agencies in to help us with that in the future and we are working with our alumni office to do some follow up work to see where our students are now. So that’s something that’s currently in process as well.

So some reflections on being a Study Away Advisor and I think it’s been interesting advising students and faculty at Susquehanna while under that requirement. Previously I’ve worked at other institutions where they haven’t, so I’m just going to go through some of the benefits and some of the challenges that I think I have and then hopefully we will get some of your input.

So at Susquehanna I think one of the huge benefits is the programme is fully funded, so what does that mean? Susquehanna basically, sets aside specific funding for this programme. So students who have financial need, I think it’s something that a lot of institutions run into, as soon as we have a strong or financial need are able to get up to 75% of their programme paid for by the University. And then of course the challenge to that is that there are still some supplemental costs, so no matter how much money we put into the programme, students will always have to pay for air fare, for visa fees, things like that that they always complain about. And then another benefit is the retention of faculty and staff. I think this programme has attracted some young faculty and also staff as well. At Susquehanna we don’t differ between faculty or staff, “senior one” can start the programme, so I think that helps to pull people in, they feel ownership of the programme, they stay longer, hopefully.

Then, of course, there are the challenges. Faculty and staff are really stretched to the limit, so this is an extra responsibility on top of what they are already doing. And then another one is students who are cross-culture and graduation. This needs a little more assessment.

So 85% of our students who actually went internationally are first class graduates of 2013 and all of them had the cross-cultural requirement and we gave them an exit interview and all of them indicated that they were, or felt that they were, better prepared to go into the work environment with more cross-cultural skills. And the challenge of that is that the cross cultural requirement is built into the curriculum so it will not appeal to every student.

We have a strong debate right now with our admissions office about how this is affecting enrolments, what types of students we should recruit because this has kind of changed the type of student we have attracted to come into Susquehanna in a way. So the idea is in the future hopefully we attract students who want to come to Susquehanna because of the requirement. I think we’re still in transition with that.

A benefit is with unlimited partnership growth potential. It happened really fast, with my two years I’ve been in Susquehanna, the requirement has been implemented, and we set our first class, we hadn’t quite built up our staff to the level required, so we’re pretty heavily dependent on third party providers right now, to provide us with the level of high touch that students expect of Susquehanna. But hopefully in the future we can raise our staff to a number that will allow us to extend our partnerships.

Of course, another benefit is also a challenge, of building this into the curriculum, so students can use their financial aid, that can make a case for that when they satisfy the requirement and then of course there’s programme cost to the University. This is a huge cost to the University and it’s always going to be. And benefits also, because all of our students have to do a cross-cultural experience, many of them expand that to internships so when they come back from their experience, some want to go back abroad and do something that is related to cross cultural – do an internship. And then I think if anyone else here is also a private university or a university that is high touch (I think probably Regent’s is that way as well).

Students they expect a certain level of high touch between students and staff. They expect an individualised experience from us. So, as the sole Study Abroad Adviser at Susquehanna that is a challenge for me just to be able to customise each and every student’s experience.

So I spend a lot of time on campus, after hours, working on that. It’s something I think will probably always be a challenge, but will probably be dealt with by a little extra staff.

So that’s most of the things I wanted to reflect on. You probably can’t see this, it’s really small, but Jeannie Burns was kind enough to share some of her graduate research [Presentation slide 35]. So she’s gone out and looked for every university in the United States right now that has a similar type of requirement. This is a really short list, these are the universities that are doing this type of requirement now. She actually put this in a Dropbox so if you look at the link at the bottom you can actually access this list if you would like to contact anyone, or you can leave your card and I will be happy to email it to you later.

So now I just want to find out if you have a summer requirement or maybe you could give us a profile of your university or if you have any questions for me?

[Audience question] What numbers are we talking about?

Christina Dinges: We send approximately 500 students away each year. Primarily 250 students are on faculty led programmes and the rest are either semester long or selfdesigned projects.

[Audience question] And when they choose to do an academic semester it has to be related to the course of studies they are doing?

Christina Dinges: We do encourage them to do that, but some students, for example I had a student that just wanted to study Italian cooking, she was a business major, so we made it work. She did a semester abroad in Italy at a culinary arts school and studied Italian cooking for a semester. So it’s pretty flexible as long as they’re on track for graduation but we don’t want them to get too far behind, that’s one of the challenges

that comes with a semester away. Generally, most students study in their discipline and like I said, the Sigmund Weiss Business School in London we have 26 this semester, so a large number of business students will go on that particular programme and that’s our requirement that way.

Dr Ali Zadeh: Students, before they go to a programme, they go to the different department chairs and have their courses approved so when they take these classes elsewhere all the classes would transfer so they can graduate on time.

[Audience question] Languages, are most of the exchanges in the English language?

Christina Dinges: The most popular programme is in London, I do try to encourage the students to study elsewhere. In Susquehanna we have a foreign language requirement, they have to do up to HND level, so three semesters or two at one level. So a number of our students study in the language that they’ve learnt. The most popular language is Spanish and the second would be French. So a lot of our students would study in a foreign language, I would say it’s probably more like 60/40.

[Audience question] I think it looks like an excellent program. Would you be able to tell us a bit more about how it’s organised? You have the pre-course that all students take before they go abroad but you do that for 500 students every year so I ’m just curious to hear how it’s all organised.

Christina Dinges: The Sigmund Weiss Business School is broken down, for the GO Short students, we call the faculty led programmes, the programme directors on those programmes are responsible for teaching the preparatory course, so I don’t have to do that.

In the Sigmund Weiss Business School, business school staff or the programme directors will teach the preparatory course before they leave. And then for all of the other programmes, for example, all the other semester long programmes, GO Long, I am responsible for teaching the preparatory course, so I teach the course for going away and the self-designed classes and also the GO Long course. So I teach approximately 220 students a semester.

To break down that thing about the courses a little more, when the students get back the programme directors are also responsible for teaching the reflection course and then we have instructors across campus that teach the GO Long and the going away students, so they are kind of broken down that way. The Sigmund Weiss Business School is a unique programme so the business school faculty also teach the reflection course.

Does anyone here have a similar programme? A cultural requirement or study abroad or study away?

[Audience] Yes, study abroad is a requirement for students of a particular programme, they all have to go abroad for one or two semesters. But they have to do an academic semester, there’s only a small allowance for internships abroad, or cultural studies abroad, but they cannot make up their own program so flexibly as yours. It has to be a lot more to do with their degree.

[Audience question] This is interesting what you are saying, particularly if no student is actually forced somehow to do that, it’s an initiative and yet you managed to get 500 involved, indeed we send many students abroad, every semester, but its programme linked.

So we have three programmes which require study abroad and two of the semesters are spent abroad. It’s a rather large programme hence we send many students but we also make that as an option to other business students. It’s interesting to see that not even 5%, possibly only 3%, take that option. My reading of that is perhaps, we are in London, it is the capital city, and even prior to that, possibly more important, that many of our students, as many as 80%, possibly more, already come from abroad. So coming here is studying abroad and English is for them, for most of them, a second language already or a third. So I ’m always aware of the need, somehow, for the academics and the programmes to have an embedded study abroad or languages at Regent’s. Whether that is long or short or just faculty led, whichever, but as part of the programme we also want to have graduates similar with what is Regent’s and what is unique for Regent’s.

Christina Dinges: It sounds like in Europe, study abroad programmes are more widely spread than looking at the United States. Part of that is funding, so how do you fund your programs, obviously, some things are paid for by the institution, but how do the students continue to receive funding?

[Audience question] Here, all our study abroad is on an exchange basis so there is no tuition that needs to be paid at the home institution so it doesn’t make a difference to students from a tuition perspective whether they continue studying here or abroad. From a living perspective or a living cost, it’s often cheaper elsewhere than in London. However, now due to our charity status we recently appointed an Outreach Manager, and we do provide some funds. So those students who are studying here on a scholarship have scholarship continued support whilst abroad, and its full support, it’s the cost of living, its travel, it’s everything. At the moment I think we only have two students in that situation.

Does anyone else have study abroad requirement?

[Audience question] Actually, we require all of our students to study abroad for one term. We are a small business school. Firstly, thank you for the presentation. Secondly, the evaluation part that we are talking about, what type of feedback do you get from the students? Do they say after the sessions “well I really still needed that to somehow assess the change I made during the time” or do they say “well it’s good that we have that but, where’s the credit?” The third thing is, do you have a similar kind of programme to engage your faculty into more international experiences, academics or within administration? OK, that was quite a long question.

So firstly I will answer your question about the students and the reflection classes; I think, because our students have never experienced not having reflection (does that make sense?), so they don’t really value it, I think, as much as a student like me who has studied abroad in Germany. I would have loved to have come back and talked about my experience, because I know it was awesome. So that’s what students bought into, when they come back, they are pushed back into their old environment, they don’t have any resources, even though some schools have a kind of re-entry workshop or something like that, that’s what I experienced.

So our students, I think they do see the benefits of it. I think it’s one of the challenges maybe to consider is that they are reflecting the entire semester, so if a student went abroad and they did not blog or journal or take a lot of pictures or something like that, they are going to have a really difficult time. So we had to have students take a reflection class because they weren’t able to reflect from their memory. At Regent’s actually we implemented a new course, so any student that comes to Regent’s University London now is required to take a blogging course, so we find that it’s been really helpful for this group that just came back in Fall 2013, so now they can use all the different prompts. We basically give them different prompts so that when they come back they can describe exactly what it was that they did, or something that happened to them that made them think about American stereotypes or something like that, so they can be better prepared for the course. So I think this is kind of like, a hybrid model for maybe a standard for the whole entire campus. So I think in future we will require all of our students to take a course like an online class while they’re away or work with our partners to make sure that it is implemented.

And then your second question, could you repeat it please?

[Audience question]This was something about your Faculty.

Right now there isn’t, well I think there is kind of, if faculty are willing to take students abroad for the GO Short programme then they are able to indirectly become more cross-culturally aware because they have to, because they have to teach the course before students go, they have to teach the course when they return, but not all faculty do that. I think that is an area where we could improve, there are a lot of different ways we could do that, there’s foreign faculty exchanges. Right now we’re also looking at possibly having more localised training, cross cultural training on campus for faculty and staff because our students are coming back and they expect our campus to be internationalised because they’ve just come back from London and central Pennsylvania is in a rural area. We try and push that more now; we kind of have a situation where we are forced to provide

more international events on campus, more foreign languages. We’re still in transition, we’re making those changes as we go along.

[Audience question] A quick question- You’re talking about blogs, student blogs, are these monitored in some way? And I only ask, when you said 500 students go out and they all blog, who’s going to read all of this? As we all know, staff levels will be impacted for those sorts of endeavours. I did a class with six or eight students and I couldn’t keep up, I don’t know how you would do 500.

Christina Dinges: Right now, I am the one viewing all the blogs. For Regent’s University London we send about 25-30 students in the fall and it’s a smaller group in the Spring. It’s pretty manageable, but it’s pretty time consuming because a lot of them I try to read them in case a student is struggling, so it is quite a bit of work. If it was to expand campus wide, I imagine it being kind of like the reflection classes. We would break it down, you know, programme directors would read their own students blogs. The GO Short tutors, I would assume would read their own students blogs. With the GO Long students, I imagine we would try to recruit some faculty or staff to help us out with that, just like we would the reflection classes. So that is something that we’re kind of playing around with.

[Audience question] In relation to the blogs. Are you thinking of blogging that all students contribute to one blog, say 20 students contributing to one, or are you talking about actually 20 separate individual ones?

Christina Dinges: Right now, all blogs are private and confidential.

[Audience question] But then how can students benefit from each other?

Christina Dinges: I think the idea was that they would benefit from each other at the reflection class. I found that the students going through the blogs, for example, for Regent’s they had different statements that I don’t think they would want to share with the entire group. So we asked them what we could do to make this easier for you. They said they really didn’t want anyone reading what we put, they really did say that. So I had to read 30 different blogs, individual blogs, and so that can be a challenge I think. But those blogs will be available to them in the Spring, and so hopefully they will take out their laptop in class and they will participate in discussions more. It’s more for the student’s benefit now and also the reflection instructors will have access to those blogs to see the reflections of the students. So I think if it does grow, I imagine it changing to a more group conversation or forum maybe once a week or something. So we’re looking at different models and other Universities are also using this as well, and we’d make it a little more manageable.

Right now, I can handle 30 but I think 500 is too much.

[Audience question] One question. Do any of the students in the GO Long programme for example bring credits back?

Christina Dinges: Yes, all of our students transfer credits now.

[Audience question] What do you do if they don’t bring enough credits? Can they make them up if they fail them or whatever?

Christina Dinges: Students have to make a C minor to transfer back to the university, if they don’t make a C minor, they don’t get credit. So it doesn’t affect their GTA but it can affect their financial aid package, so a lot of students have a financial package attached to the programmes so if they don’t make the 12 credits they won’t be able to have funding for the next semester. One thing I’ve found is that we haven’t had a lot of students that come back and fail. I think something that’s interesting is students with really low GTAs do better when they’re abroad, they have less distractions, they are able to pull up and bring back As and Bs. So I think indirectly it may actually help them. We have only had a few students who failed and no students at the moment that failed the semester so fingers crossed it won’t happen now.

MOOCS and TNE Marguerite J.Dennis, MJ Dennis Consultancy

Sophie Laws: Welcome and welcome particularly here to Marguerite Dennis, a very old friend of Regent’s College as it then was, and Regent’s University London as it now then is, from her time at Suffolk University in Boston, now one of our Trustees. I listened, bemused and fascinated, this time last year to Marguerite talking about MOOCs, and now it’s more and better, or more and even more MOOCs, and their relationship to transnational education. It’s very good to have you, to hear you again.

Marguerite J.Dennis: Thank you very much, Sophie. And thank you all for joining me here this afternoon. Although I would never be one to tell Maria or Lady Sophie what they should put on their agenda for next year, I would dare say that a year from now, this just isn’t going to be a topic that would warrant all of you giving up an hour of your time.

I think MOOCs or SPOOCs, or however you want to pronounce that, will be part and parcel of the mainstream of how higher education is administered. Not at all schools, not in all countries, but it just won’t have the headline-grabbing attention that it has over the past two years. I’m a reporter this afternoon. I am neither an endorser or a contrarian of the subject. I do believe that MOOCs will play a role in the future of higher education. I do not think it will ever (technology will ever) replace what we’re doing here now, or, for any of us who have taught, replace what we do in the classroom. It just cannot do that, and I hope that I will prevail this afternoon in pointing that out.

When we talk about MOOCs, and all the writings that have been done about this, we’re really talking from the vantage point of Europeans or Americans. We’re not talking about those people for whom MOOCs may hold the greatest benefit: students from Africa, students from parts of India, students in parts of China. Those of you that attended the borderless program last month on MOOCs will remember that there David Willets talked about Africa and African students as perhaps being the next new frontier and possibly the greatest frontier for MOOCs technology.

We’re also talking, and I’m probably the oldest one in the room, but we’re talking from the vantage point of digital visitors. We are not digital natives. We are older people, we weren’t born with technology. I have nieces and nephews, and I’m sure all of you do, for whom technology is just part and parcel of the way they live their lives. In the United States there are 2million students in elementary and secondary school who are already taking online courses, and there are 7million college students in the United States who are already taking college courses.

Samuel Kahn, after he got out of his closet in Cambridge where he was helping his niece with algebra, and founded the Kahn Academy that now has 60million users around the world, 1000 classrooms and ten languages. Now something’s going on here. We cannot dismiss it and say this is a disruption that I don’t want to have anything to do with, nor can we say this is the wave of the future. It is a part, and I’m going to re-emphasise that over and over and over and over again.

I have probably 300 factoids in this presentation this afternoon. I have been told by Maria and her team that you don’t need to take any of this information down; all of it will be available to you at the end of the conference. I also want to issue an apology. I worked very hard on this presentation, so this is a joy for me to be able to give it today. I did it in Cape Cod this summer, where we didn’t have two degree weather like they’re having in Boston right now. We had lovely, warm weather, but the information that I will present to you, I have to add, is as of the middle of November. I simply could not continue to add, because the numbers change so much.

So, for example, from the middle of November until now, COURSERA added 32 courses to their stable of courses that they offer. In 2011, COURSERA had two courses available;

right now they have 532 courses. They had one college that was affiliated with them, they now have 107. 49million hours have been spent watching videos, that for those of you that are good at math, is 5565 years. That’s how long it would take you to look at all of those videos. There are 10million assignments that have been completed, 19million course enrolments, 5million students. So something is going on. We can’t dismiss it, nor can we be threatened by it, in my opinion. I think the MOOC format asks us how students learn.

And the digital native of the future is going to have a part of that, of their learning process, come through technology. The elephant in the room, in my opinion- MOOCS is old newsthe elephant in the room is competency-based degrees.

Competency based degrees are gaining a lot of traction, both at the state level in the United States and the federal level. That opens up a whole other can of worms: accreditation issues, awarding of academic credit, the registrar. But that really is another disruption, competency-based degrees. And if you look at how technology has changed our lives: five years ago, ten years ago, would we have thought about robots in operating rooms? Or computers flying airplanes? Driverless cars? ATMs? I guess they’re more than ten years old. Digital newspapers? Greeting cards? What’s happened to the music industry? Last month, at Christmas time, the stock people were just very upset because the big box stores did not have the returns on their Christmas presents that they had anticipated. That was one day. The second day, they were thrilled, because e-commerce, those people who had ordered presents online, exceeded all of their expectations. So you’ve got people, they’re not shopping in malls, they’re shopping online. And, I will just add with this, that there’s a programme in the United States, those of you who are here from the US, called “60 Minutes,” it comes on every Sunday. And the last week, or I think the week before Christmas, there was a session about drones and Jeff Bezos who is of course, the founder of Amazon. And what he presented to Scott Pelly, the reporter, just seems so futuristic. But again, look at all of those things that would have seemed futuristic to us. What they were presenting is this: that drones will deliver packages of a certain weight and a certain size, in the very near future, to the person who ordered it, within a half hour. Drones being these robotic kinds of things, now that seems very strange to us right now. I don’t think Jeff Bezos is a fool, I think there is probably something in that for him. So, explanation is eloquence and I hope at the end of the session, you will agree with me that I have eloquently explained my feelings about MOOCs, and like they say in the airplane, sit back, relax, and enjoy this presentation.

Alright, again here is a definition, we all know that. Don’t worry about taking any of this information out, it will be available to you through the programme, through the university. But look, it’s already six years old. These Canadians coined this term. Six years ago, they had 2,300 non-fee-paying students, and everybody thought that was a huge number. I think one of the things that has grabbed all the attention about MOOCs is the massiveness of it. College Presidents, both in the United States where it started to gain a lot of traction, and around the world, thought “Aha! This is a way for me to add to the coffers of the bottom line of my university.” And I think that’s why it grabbed the attention of so many people so quickly.

Distinctions from other online: it is aimed at delivering to large audiences, it’s ideals at the best, you know, when the presidents of Harvard and MIT got together to form EdX, and these are not stupid people, these are not people who do not have the future pretty well (at least for those two universities), in their grasp. This was a way for them to, they believed, to bring high-level quality education to masses of people. Right now, at least in the United States, it is not offered for credit, but at the American College, there are four courses that have been approved for credits for the fall semester. We’ll see as it gets reported in the spring semester how that all sorts out. It’s free for now, but it won’t be free. We all know that. And unlike a lot of technology, this did not come from Silicon Valley, the tech sector. This came from the academy, this came from all of you.

The people who started this, at MIT, at Stanford and the people who are now on the bandwagon, are academicians and administrators. They have brought their technology team with them, but they were not the originators of this. And then you have, how do you say it, SPOOCs? That sounds really bad, but anyway, that’s for small, small colleges.

Stanford offered its first course, 160 showed up for artificial intelligence. Let me start

off by criticizing those who criticize people who don’t finish the course. Many of these people never intended to finish the course. They just wanted the exposure. I’ve given this lecture probably ten times throughout the United States over the last year. In every one of the lectures, someone has taken a MOOC course and loved it! And most of the time they’ve been faculty members, because I’ve been lecturing to faculty. But they didn’t want a degree, they didn’t want a certificate, they just wanted the experience of talking to someone from Indonesia, which is what one faculty member said.

So, again, the fact that these registrations are not going to gain credit my reply is so what?

What was the intention of the person who registered for it? Maybe it was just to get that exposure. Once you start putting credit and once you start charging, that’s all going to change and that will happen. Again, Harvard, MIT, Berkeley, partnered with EdX. Bill and Melinda Gates are not stupid people, it’s very difficult to get a grant from that foundation and they have awarded a grant to nine different colleges including Georgia Institute of Technology, which has just started a graduate programme. We’ll get to that in a little bit.

Berklee College of Music in my hometown of Boston is a very, very popular school and is very unique. That and Julliard and one or two schools on the West coast, are probably the premium of music schools in the country. They’re offering their course online, for $16,000, as opposed to $36,000 if you come to Boston. Is it the same? Absolutely not. Would it make sense to take half of the course in Boston and half online, as a hybrid programme?

Absolutely. Some people may do that. But if you decide you want to do it only online, that is what it will cost you.

Cornell University will offer a course in the spring with Udacity. GW are offering a course in nursing and political management. The private sector, these are again the heavy hitters in the United States. Udacity, founded by Stanford, COURSERA, again, my apologies, that is incorrect, there are 5million registrations, 232 courses - they’re global. Again, not stupid people that are partnering with EdX, to build Open EdX, which will go live early this year and then anyone like the World Bank, for example that has already partnered with Google to offer a MOOC. So this is not just for HE. This could be for corporations, foundations, organisations throughout the world, not just HE. It’s an option. It’s another way of delivering information.

MOOC by the numbers: totally inaccurate, so we’re not going to spend a lot of time because this is as of November 15 and this is now out of date.

Current MOOC facts in terms of the United States: 62% of all US schools offer courses online but only 2% are offering MOOCs and only 9% maybe 10% plan to incorporate them into the future. The Babson Research Study, the very good group at Babson College in Welsley, Massachusetts. And one of the reasons is, and those of you who are faculty, how would you like to say, well ok, it’s going to cost 100 hours of your time to develop this. That’s one of the reasons why there’s been some push-back. It’s not for everyone.

It’s not for every student and it’s not for every faculty member. Why are they booming in the United States? Forget this, the biggest thing, in my opinion, is for the last, well, since WWII, the majority of colleges and universities in the United States have been operating on a business model that is unsustainable. Increase costs every year, and that’s the business model. And students now, after the Great Recession, families and students are saying, “we’re not going to do it anymore.” So you have this incredible mobility from private to public, from public to two year that has taken place in the United States. We could spend 40 minutes just talking about that. State legislatures don’t, they see this as a way of lowering costs. California is mandating (the first time it was shot down, the second time it wasn’t) that certain MOOC courses will be accepted for credit. Again, technology, innovation, the digital native, all those people that have walked with their feet to these courses, are telling us something. Market expanding to prospective students, again, I was fortunate enough during my time at Suffolk to found a campus and synagogue in West Africa, in Dakar, and in Madrid, Spain. Would I ever do that again? Would I ever recommend that again? I do a lot of consulting on international programmes. I would never recommend that a college or a university go wholesale and open up a branch campus.

There are other more efficient and effective ways of doing it and this is part of it. And

then look at this: 5 to 10% of all of the college applicants are in high school. They’re using this to make their applications look better to college officials when they apply.

Affordability? There’s the Georgia Institute of Technology. They got the grant from the Gates Foundation and they are now delivering a Master’s in Computer Science for $6,000 US Dollars. Do we know what has happened to this yet? No, because it just opened up in the fall. We don’t have the details on this yet. That’s why I say a lot of the hysteria about all of this, about the all or nothing aspect of MOOCS, we just don’t know yet. But look at the difference in the campus costs: $45,000 US Dollars if you’re out-of-state, and $21,000 US Dollars if you’re in-state. Is it the same thing? No. It’s not. But for some people, they may only have the finances and the funding for $6,000 US Dollars.

Georgetown, the school that I worked at for 15 years (wonderful school), I believe this course is offered through the School of Foreign Service. They had a one week MOOC and I believe it was a Foreign Service course; they had 20,000 students registered for it.

Look at COURSERA’s enrolment: 66% are international, 34% are American. So it’s not UScentric, it is how the people who founded EdX, and Harvard and MIT thought it would be, an international phenomenon and not a US phenomenon. And again, here now, we’ve come into some MOOC facts. EdX will partner with France, it will partner with China, the Ministry of Education has entered into an agreement. Is there a potential billion new learners around the world? Maybe. Some of these people will take MOOC courses. We may hate them, we may say that they are (and I’ve heard, every conference that I’ve gone to, has reiterated this over and over and over again) not for everyone. But it is for some people. And to turn our backs on this and to just say that, dismiss it wholesale, in my opinion, is foolhardy.

I’m treading on very thin ice here, given MOOCs in the UK, especially since the Vice Chancellor, who’s one of really the forerunners of distance learning in the UK. But you’ve got, you’ve got especially Future learn. They went live in 2013, registered 20,000 students, 158 countries, within 24 hours. Something is happening. Something is happening here.

In Australia you’ve got some very good schools: University of Melbourne; Monosh, again, participants in this process.

In Germany, do we have any Germans here? Okay, so I have to again be very careful, but yours is considered the MOOC and I have to say something about the German administrators. I gave a similar topic in Istanbul, in September, on the effects of MOOCs on college administrators, because there are about 20-25 offices that will be affected if this goes wholesale. Everything from Admissions to the Registrar, to Career Services, to Alumni. And someone had warned me before the session, be careful, the Germans don’t like this, and you better be very careful with the way you talk. The people who came to see me after the session, were mostly Germans. And they thanked me for at least bringing to the forefront something that is getting no attention, zero. All of the MOOC articles we read are all about the academy. What are we reading about the administrative army of people? When I used that word at the observatory, people said, we just got to see how this plays out. That is so typical of HE: wait until something happens, and then plan for it? No, this is going to happen.

This is going to happen. So how does the Registrar prepare for that? What happens to your international recruitment plan? They all have to be or they all should be rewritten.

The University of Mongolia gives 10 student credits for EdX courses on circuits. The reason I put this in is because when I first got interested in this topic, there was a photograph in USA Today, of four Mongolian high school students who took the circuits course from MIT, ostensibly a difficult course to take, and they all passed it. They were high school students, from Mongolia. Again, what is this saying to all of us?

Here are some of the challenges: it takes the stage in front of the classroom, and maybe changes the role of the stage, to a mentor, to an advisor more. Poor engagement from weaker learners, obviously, it’s not for everyone. Exclusion, if you don’t have online access. It cannot replicate what you get in the classroom. Very high potential for cheating and plagiarism, but that’s been a problem for all of us forever. Susan Holmes, who’s the

Professor at Stanford in Statistics, (Stanford is at the forefront of MOOCs) she came out and said all of this. She said, “I don’t think you can get a Stanford education online, just as I don’t think Facebook gives you a social life.” Fair enough. Fair enough, she’s right. If it’s not meant to, it’s not meant to. If I were to write a business plan for my college or university using this, it would never be an all-or-nothing business plan, it would be incorporated as part of the business plan. It takes time, attention and nobody knows where this is going to go. And it distracts from some of the other reforms in higher education that we need: customising learning perhaps, discussion of how faculty interact with students, both online and in the classroom.

In the Sloan study (this is out of MIT) on learning outcomes, students from online classes displayed the same amount of competence. However, students that are enrolled in blended or hybrid courses have the greatest competency. 77% believe, of this poll that was taken by Sloan at MIT, that colleges perceive online education as the same or superior to face-to-face but the majority of faculty (this fascinates me, that’s why I had to put this in) who have taught MOOCs, don’t think they should be given credit for the MOOC. I mean, apparent contradiction, right? Then here you have 57, almost 58% of those with a blended programme, that feel that they learn more in a blended programme.

The Students’ perception of MOOCs, why do you take them? The topic, personal development, they’re free, the learning experience? Reasons for dropping out; wasn’t what they expected, too busy to finish, lack of incentive. Again, there’s no credit given and it doesn’t cost anything. And right now, with few exceptions, you don’t get a certificate of completion. You cannot go into your employer, the majority of employers, at the end of a MOOC course and say for example, “I’ve completed this MOOC course, and I’d like this to be part of my annual review for an increase in salary. I’d like you to know what I’m doing on my spare time.”

And there are a lot of push-backs, Amherst; Duke; San Jose, the faculty there said “absolutely no.” Now they’ve gone and the pendulum has swung from one side to the middle, that’s still a question mark.

Positive outcomes: You know there’s some reason why Google and Microsoft and COURSERA are going into Africa with this. Again, my experience in Africa was West Africa where there are a lot of French-speaking people, and these courses are now going to be translated into French. Even with the dropout rate, the number of students that are exposed to the courses that are offered online through the MOOC platform is still enormous. I mean, when you think about the worst, what’s the worst thing, or the least thing that can happen by taking a MOOC? You’ve exposed people to hearing some great lectures. I once had a faculty member, I remember giving this lecture at a small college in upstate New York, and the faculty member said, “yes, but if they hear somebody from Duke, why would they want to hear me?” Fair enough, fair enough. That’s part of the push-back. But why wouldn’t you, and I have responded to her, “why wouldn’t you want that student exposed to somebody giving a course from Duke or Stanford, why not?”

Potential positive outcomes: I see this as probably, right now, the greatest monetiser for MOOCs. Employers may start looking at this, a certificate from Georgetown or from Stanford, in a MOOC course, that is better, or more significant, or more relevant, than a BA or a BS from a second or third-tier school. COURSERA has a matching employee service and Twitter and Facebook have already signed up. Again, these are not frivolous companies that see the potential for this. Udacity has 350 partner companies, including Google and Microsoft that have signed up for its job programme. In the United States right now, the number one criteria for college selection is not affordability; that is now number two. The first is employment at graduation, that’s number one, because of what happened in the US, and around the world, in many of the countries that are represented here today.

We hear too many stories of underemployed or unemployed college graduates.

Textbooks: we can see how that can change. Again, there’s no reason to doubt that Pearson has a big interest, and Hobsons has a big interest in online programmes. And here are some potential business models: certification, students pay to get a certificate, they

have their examinations proctored, companies pay for performance records, employees or universities pay for records to screen applicants, the human tutoring and assignment marking. So you actually have a tutor working with you. Students would pay for that.

Selling platforms to enterprises, not just HE enterprises, to use in their own training courses. Sponsorship, third-party sponsorship and then just plain old tuition fees. The potential business model is, again, I see the greatest potetntial in certification and employee recruitment. COURSERA, over the last 6 months, has realised more than $1million in paid certifications, stating that students have passed their online courses. Students pay $100 for the service. You can sell directly to students, charging as tuition. You can sell other universities courses, you can sell testing services, you can license your courses and you can test services. Selling to corporations, corporate recruiting it’s limitless because the technology has yet to be fully realised.

EdX is pulling non-higher education partners, so the IMF will be the first non-higher education entity to use the platform for its small audiences. They have developed a programme for the IMF and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. If the IMF has a good experience, there will be other corporations around the world, not just in the United States, but around the world, that will use the MOOC platforms.

Conclusions oh, I wish I had said this, but Jeffrey Salingo, who in my opinion is one of the best writers on HE in the United States and maybe in the world, he’s on the staff of the Chronicle of HE, this is his quote: “Navigation is the literacy of the 21st century.” And, to reiterate again, the percentage of students who took at least one online course, you can see how that graph has increased. Predictions run the gamut; it will disenfranchise students, and the global learning communities will either, for those that did not have access to higher education, will be happily involved. For some schools, and for some people, and for some faculty, and for some students it will never have an impact. Some predict, this was in the Times Higher Ed 2013, that this will be the end of liberal learning, a generation will be unable to communicate. We all know of people who could be sitting next to someone, and they will email that person, maybe you’ve all done that yourself! You don’t talk to that person. If you spend as much time as I do in airports, or on planes, or on trains, or buses, you see, no matter what part of the world I am in, everybody is on a device. People don’t look at each other. It’s not the MOOCs that are doing this; it is part and parcel of this digitization, if you will, of society. And some people think that MOOCs will wear off, and there will be smaller enrolment figures and higher completion rates. I believe that once you start granting credit, or a certificate, or you start charging, then you will see higher rates. However, most people agree that it will affect higher education to scale globally, and it has the potential to disrupt the conventional classroom as a substitute, and as a supplement. I was talking with some colleagues earlier, before this session began, and I said, “I taught in the graduate programme, I taught higher education administration.

I would not want to have what I did in that classroom disrupted by a MOOC, but, if I had a class that was being offered today, and I chose to be here with you today, and I could have part of my lectures online, made available to my students, that would be great! And if somebody from Switzerland wanted to take that part of my course that would be great too.” So, again I really would like to take (if we get nothing else out of the session) some of the hysteria and the hype, and the either/or kind of thing about MOOCs. There are 4,500 colleges in the US, I’m sure that’s out of date as well. There are about 11,000 schools, 2billion people and again, most college presidents aren’t sure and HE is very risk adverse. Those people from those top tiered schools and you can sit here and say, “Yes but what does Harvard do if they lose $60 million, or MIT or Stanford or Duke, so what? But I’m a small college in Appalachia, or Nigeria, I can’t afford that.” Fair enough, then maybe this is not for you.

Okay, I have one thing I would like to do before we leave today, and I would ask, if you wouldn’t mind, each of you taking one of these. This is a true story. I write (I don’t want to call it a blog, because it’s not a blog) a weekly research report and if any of you would like to receive a copy of it just give me your card and I will sign you up for it when I get home. So this was one of the research reports. I made it up. What I did was take all of this information and fictionalize two people and walk them through the potential. So this

is what happened and I have a reason for this so just bear with me. “Mark Brown decided at the end of his son Jack’s sophomore year of high school year to have a frank discussion about college. Mark is a middle manager in a water processing plant in Boston. He knows Jack wants to go to college and wants to stay close to home. Even though Mark has been saving for college for years, he knows the family cannot afford most of the private schools in Massachusetts. Jack thinks he wants to become an engineer and the family’s discussion centres on matching good engineering schools in Massachusetts with affordable costs. So far there are no matches, but Jack has a few ideas. He has already completed a few of the courses offered through the Kahn Academy. Jack has been reading about MOOCs and plans on combining online learning with classroom instruction-he wants to be a hybrid student. Mark and Jack visit the high school guidance counsellor, and after reviewing all of the MOOCs currently offered, the counsellor is able to give the family a list of Massachusetts engineering schools that accept MOOCs. Jack decides to sign up for one of the courses during his junior year, and he takes the course “Think again-how to reason and argue” taught by a professor from Duke. After passing that course, he decides to register for another course, “Introduction to Computer Science,” from the University of Virginia.

By the time he graduates from high school, enrols in a community college, because that is the cheaper, less expensive school, he has six MOOC credits that will transfer. He decides not to take AP courses (oh, the college board would love this). He decides not to take Advanced Placement courses, preferring instead to study online.

Halfway around the world in Chengdu, China, Jenny Choo and her family sit around their kitchen table to discuss Jenny’s college options. She wants to study Italian and travel to Italy. Jenny’s father has a good job as a plant manager but Jenny knows that her family cannot afford to send her abroad for her college degree. She also knows that her high school grades and gaopao score are not high enough to allow her to be admitted to a top-ranking Chinese university. And that will impact her chances of getting a good job after graduation. So the Choo family agrees that Jenny will aim to enrol in a secondtier Chinese school, and study abroad in Italy during the summer term. Jenny also has read a great deal about MOOCs and decides to enrol in Fugan’s course, “Introduction to Philosophy” (all of the courses in this article are in fact offered MOOC courses I just selected them from the group that I was reading about). Jenny passes the course and transfers the credit to her university.

By the end of his freshman year, (we’re back to Jack now) Jack has transferred to a fouryear engineering school. He has 41 credits from use of the community college, including 12 credits from MOOCs. Jack has been dating Rosa (it gets a little interesting now)who is studying for the spring semester in Florence, along with her friends Faith, Lucy, and Grace.

Jack doesn’t know if he can afford the time away from his engineering programme, but he plans to meet Rosa in Florence. Rosa meets Jack at his hotel, and introduces him to her new friend, Jenny Choo from China. Jenny is studying Italian, and the girls met online taking a MOOC course in the fall semester, and they realized that they would all be in Florence at the same time.

Back to Jack, he is now a Junior, and he meets with the career counsellor to discuss how to best position himself to get an internship the following summer. The counsellor looks at Jack’s transcripts and notes that he has several MOOCs. He gives Jack a list of companies who consider MOOCs when hiring college graduates. The summer internship at the engineering firm materializes and, because Jack did so well as an intern, he was offered a job after graduation. After consulting with the Registrar and adding all of the MOOC credits to his classroom credits, Jack had enough credit to graduate in January, not in June, so he saved himself six months of tuition. By attending a community college for one year, and with a combination of scholarships, working, and help from his family, he has a $10,000 college loan bill. The average loan bill in 2013 for US college graduates was $29,800. So, Jack did pretty well. Along the way, he accumulated 27 dual credits, and again, it allowed him to graduate sooner and with less debt.

Jenny returned to Florence for the second time and continued her study of Italian. Like Jack, she completed a MOOC each semester, and her 8 MOOCs counted toward her degree. After graduation, she was offered a job at a large travel agency, taking Chinese

tourists to Italy to purchase luxury goods. By enrolling in less expensive MOOCs, Jenny’s parents were able to afford sending her to Florence, and that gave Jenny a competitive edge when applying for the job with the travel agency.

The events in this article will take place from 2014 to 2018. Why am I sharing this with you? Okay, so about two weeks after this was published, I received an email from a reporter from the BBC. She said “Oh Mrs Dennis, I would like to interview Jack Brown”.

She thought these people were real, she thought these events had actually happened.

When I explained to her that these were in my mind, that I made these up but thought they were plausible enough. Obviously she thought they were plausible enough because she contacted me to set up an appointment with the two Browns. I said to her “Heather, these are made up. This hasn’t happened yet.” I said, “But I would be happy to meet with you,” she said “no, that’s alright.” So what I’m saying is a reporter from the BBC, not a stupid person obviously and she read this and thought it was real.

So I’m going to end on two wonderful quotes. Henry David Thoreau, I wish I could say some things like this. “We boast of our systems of education, but why stop at schoolmasters and schoolhouses? We are all schoolmasters, and our schoolhouse is the universe.” And he said that a long time ago. And then Times Higher Education, this past August, had this wonderful, wonderful quote. “Aristophanes complaining that universities or “Thinkeries” left students heavily indebted and without practical skills.” How much has changed?

We have about 10 minutes, and I’m happy to take your questions now, or not. But I’m happy to hear your comments, I hoped that I have presented and explained both sides of MOOCs with eloquence and with information that I have really spent a great deal of time trying to create for a balance for you this afternoon.

[Audience Question]: Thank you, that was really interesting. I’ve got two thoughts, questions actually. The first one is sort of based on what you were saying about the transformation that has been going on with MOOCs and that some people are now starting to give credit, some are starting to charge for MOOCs, it sort of begs the question when is a MOOC not a MOOC, or backed online courses or neither. So that’s one. Then the other one is, I’m curious if there have been any studies, have students who have successfully completed MOOCs, have any of them moved on into traditional online degree programmes, or even seated or blended programmes? If the MOOC is what inspired them to do it?

Marguerite J.Dennis: Two very good questions and I’m going to answer in the same way: jury is out yet. I have only put up the Babson and the Sloan studies, definitive reports that were done. Those are two questions and those are two reports that should be done but they have not been. And that’s why, again, if we were a year from now, this wouldn’t be worthy of a session, but it might be worthy to give an update. I think an update on ‘where are we?’ at the end of 2014 with MOOCs, I think the hysteria will be gone, I really do. What I would like to see, and which I cannot get anybody except AACRAO (American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Office) they published two articles I wrote on the effect of this on the administrators. I cannot get people interested in that, and yet I do believe that there are by my estimates about 20 offices that will be definitely affected. If anybody would like to do some original research with me on that, I’d be happy to take that on with you, because like so many (and I spent 40 years as a college administrator) it’s a very reactive, reactive body of people. They don’t think ahead of how this is going to change look at what the Registrar has to do. Right now that is the office, at least in the US, that says you have enough credits to graduate. Alright, but you may have credits from 12 different schools, you may have two community college. By the way, the average college student one out of three does not graduate, in the United States, from the school that they entered, one out of three. So right away you’re going to have multiple transcripts. Also, and this statistic hasn’t changed in about 45 years, we are still graduating 57% of our students after six years. 57 it hasn’t changed. Would this have the opportunity to allow people to speed up their degree completion by allowing them to take courses simultaneously? Last year at this conference, I suggested that, and again I’m basing this on US schools, we create a third semester in the summer? When you think about it, our semesters are 14 weeks in the fall, 14 weeks in the spring. When I tried to

do this at Suffolk I was told, ‘well we have to do maintenance in the summer.’ Okay, maybe you have to do maintenance in the summer, but you could put together an online, or hybrid programme in the summer that was equivalent to those two bookend semesters, allowing students to go to school around the clock if they want. So I think your questions are valid, but there has been nothing that I have read, and I have read a lot, that I would be comfortable answering, because I just don’t think that information is available.

[Audience Question]:When Phoenix University got going, there was quite a lot of talk about the modernization of higher education and having a standardized product that was very widely accessible. We had no choice about it, it kind of delivered at a low cost. Without talking about what happened to that hole, this strikes me that you could have a different modernization model here, where actually you have a franchise operation, that a whole lot of local deliverers do the blended learning with the standardized stuff from the MOOC, that you build it in. So you not only have the Registry issue of transferrable credit and credit recognition to a degree, which is really important, but you also have a sort of sense of, well, you’re a local deliverer of a product, which is generated elsewhere, which claims to be very high quality, but you provide part of the delivery of that.

Marguerite J.Dennis: And I agree with you. Two points I’d like to make. The first is that the originators of Phoenix Apollo were business people. They brought in the Academy, if you will. This came from the Academy, this didn’t come from business, so the mentality is different. Now, COURSERA and Udacity are different, EdX will be the first one to tell you. MIT and Harvard, they will say, “no we really want this to democratise education.” I can just tell you from my experience in Africa, my students, they would have loved that.

We could not offer, our courses were so limited, it was a 2+2 programme in Africa and I go back to Africa because, again, those of you who have been reading my research, I think Africa is the next frontier. I’ve been saying this for two or three years. Africa is the next frontier. The connectivity, you can say, “we’ve all been there, and the electricity goes out, the lights go out, the generators go out all the time…” Yes, I had all of that, but it’s getting much, much better, and I do believe that, for those students in Dakar, who would never have the opportunity to leave that small tiny campus that we carefully constructed, taking a course from Georgetown would have been just fine. Again, we can’t look at, I think, from just a UK, Europe, US-centric mentality. There are other parts of the world for which I think this would play a great role, and if it’s a franchise, so be it, so be it. Yes, mam” [Audience Question]: Would you comment more on competence-based learning, because I think when you take that and MOOCs and you match those up, it changes everything?

Marguerite J.Dennis: Absolutely. I do believe that’s the elephant in the room. And I agree with Jeff Salingo when he wrote just recently a beautiful essay in the Chronicle, where he said “get off this stuff. This is nothing compared to what’s coming, you want to talk about disruption?” And Southern New Hampshire, Paul LeBlanc, President of Southern New Hampshire University, is one of the most innovative, creative, dynamic individuals in higher education. Those of you who read Clayton Christianson’s book on the innovative university, where Clayton Christianson turned this disruption, uses Paul as a model. This tiny school, in this tiny, remote part of New Hampshire, he has been granted a big grant by the Department of Education, and they are issuing, they will be issuing degrees based on competency-based learning. It’s a prototype, it’s not for everyone. But think about what that means. Again, this pales in comparison, so I agree with you. Maria isn’t in the room, but that’s what she should have on next year’s programme- competency- based education.

Not for everyone and there’ll be tremendous push backs, and there will be all the naysayers, and there will be the Academy who will say “you cannot do this,” but it’s going to happen, and it’s not for every school, it’s not for every student, but it is for some students, and it is for some schools, and that’s what I’d like you to leave with today.

[Audience Question]: Any advice for small schools, small liberal arts schools?

Marguerite J.Dennis: Yeah, these are the ones that I advise. My advice - I would be cautious. First of all they do not have the infrastructure, the IT support, they do not have the resources, the financial resources to implement and that’s why I made the statement,

“Sure, Harvard, MIT, Stanford can afford to lose money, they can afford to pay people to do all of this.” My advice to the clients that I have, and my answer to your question is wait. Just wait. Develop your own hybrid programmes, though. Develop your own online programmes. You don’t necessarily have to sign on to one of these, but your students should be able to take hybrid courses, they should be able to go to school in their dormitories or in their residence halls if they wish, they should be able to do a 24/7 of taking your courses online. That would be my advice to smaller liberal arts schools. Okay, I think we’re all done, and I think we’re ready for you (next speaker). Thank you all for coming this afternoon.

The effects of study abroad Professor Evelyne Glaser Head for Intercultural Communication Johannes Kepler Linz

Thank you for your attention, thank you for coming to this session. I’m very honoured to be allowed to talk to you this afternoon. My name is Evelyne Glaser, I come from Johannes Kepler University in Austria, it is a relatively large university with about 15,000 students, and I would like to talk to you today about “The Effects of Study Abroad”.

Well, I’m actually preaching to believers, so it’s not really difficult to convince you that Study Abroad is a very, very important and valuable thing for our students, but I would like to present to you this afternoon first of all some results of a study that we have conducted that reconfirms our beliefs, and then I would like to talk to you about one model of Study Abroad that we have been engaged in for the last eight years and that is maybe, or from our perspective, a bit special and maybe it will give some of you some ideas about how to add something to your Study Abroad programmes at your universities. Now in Austria, we are in a very fortunate position still because the federal government is responsible for covering all costs related to higher education. In other words, Austrian students, and also EU students don’t pay tuition fees. And in addition to that, in 1991, when ERASMUS began, students even got grants from the Federal Provence of Upper Austria to encourage students to go abroad.

Now why is it that we want to send students abroad? Well, it is common knowledge now that students will be working in a global marketplace and living in a global society, and to become leaders in this new world they need to learn new skills, or different skills, than what we can provide to them if they just study in one location. And they will also need different perspectives than what some of you, or particularly me, learnt in our educational systems. So they must be prepared to work and trade with, and communicate with people from very different backgrounds than their own. So in order to be successful and to be good leaders in today’s world, they need to know about the rest of the world.

These aims have already been formulated also by the European Commission, who said that the period spent abroad doesn’t only enrich the students’ lives in academic and professional fields, but also improves language learning and cultural skills, self-reliance and self-awareness, and the experience gives students a better sense of, well - being the European Commission - being a European citizen. In addition, employers’ value the period abroad, and we’ve talked a lot already today about employability, so the Study Abroad programme also adds definitely to the employability of students.

So once our local or provincial government decided to fund students studying abroad, they have been doing so over a long period of time. So for about 14 years they have funded about 6000 students who resided in the region of upper Austria and spent about €4.3million Euros to support these students studying abroad. So after this period of time, they felt it was time to evaluate whether what they had been paying for actually made sense. At the beginning of the programme there were some objectives that were laid down and they wanted our Department of Sociology to test whether actually the students had improved their language skills, whether they had developed personally, whether they had grown academically and broadened their horizons, whether they could actually apply the skills and knowledge they had acquired abroad to their professional careers, and whether there was an impact at all on their professional careers and whether they had increased their professional mobility.

Now, that may be a particular thing for Austria, because Austrians in general are not very mobile with regard to professional lives. So when you go to an Austrian company, even a very international company and ask, “So how do you select the people you send abroad?” they will tell you, “Oh, well we actually have to take those who are willing to go, we can’t really select.” So Austrians are born in a little village, they grow up there, they stay, and they

die there. That’s more or less still our mentality. This is why professional mobility is a big topic, because our companies of course are not that way.

So the total number of study abroad participants funded between 1991 and 2001 was 3,600 students. We randomly selected 1,800 participants for the study we conducted. Then for a comparable sample, we selected 1,800 students with no Study Abroad experience and then deducting all the questionnaires that came back only partly filled in and with wrong addresses and things like that, we ended up with a test sample of 549 students, and a control sample (so students who hadn’t studied abroad) of 544. We used the standardised questionnaire, a fairly long one, with 60, respectively 50 questions for the non-Abroad Studying students and we used two statistical methods to measure the results. One was multivariate analysis and also propensity score matching. For this study it was obviously not possible to use experimental methods with surveys before, during and after the period spent abroad, because the students had already graduated. And non-experimental methods, on the other hand, can gain in significance for example when you use random sampling as well as propensity score matching, and the method requires sufficiently large test and control samples to exclude hidden factors leading to errors and misinterpretation from the beginning. So the authors of the study are aware of the limitations, on the one hand, of the statistical methods used, because the equivalence of so-called control samples is never truly given due to the impossibility of excluding the so-called confounding variables such as the individual’s socialisation. We can never guarantee that the two have their social life in the same way, their attitudes, motives, and in particular the self-selection criteria for Study Abroad. But with propensity score matching, we were able to control for these differences, and so in the end we came up with results that can be regarded as robust in terms of analytical methods chosen, and I would like to share with you some of the results.

So the study looked at skills qualifications developed during study programmes at university, including Study Abroad. And the results showed statistically significant differences in eight out of ten variables, defined to measure the effectiveness of the internationalisation programme, and thus the effectiveness of Study Abroad. And this figure shows you the difference between the two samples [Presentation slide 6]. The vertical axis shows the scores of the control sample - the students who had not studied abroad - and the horizontal axis shows the scores of the participants of the test sample - so the students, graduates, with the Study Abroad experience - and the extent to which they exceeded the control sample. And you can see very clearly that language and intercultural and social skills stand out clearly amongst the skills that the participants were able to develop in Study Abroad programmes, while graduates with no Study Abroad experience felt that they had improved mainly with regard to skills related to their specific area of study, to IT, and to methodology.

Now all these did not come up with the students who had studied abroad because they felt that they had not improved these more than if they had not gone abroad. Now, with regard to language skills, one of the key objectives defined for study abroad was the improvement of foreign language skills. [Presentation slide 7] The skills the respondents were asked to evaluate were: factor one, reading and understanding; factor two, speaking; and factor three, writing. Each factor comprises, again, between two and four different items, and the most visible difference could be found for factor two, that is speaking skills.

And as language skills mainly improve with practice, the regular successful use of a foreign language tends to increase the speakers confidence in their own skills. It can therefore be concluded that a study period abroad provides a subjective boost to language skills, even though the interviewers did not have to take any formal language tests after their study period abroad, so what we can see here is just the personal evaluation- how they felt they had improved. And they are not based on any test results.

As to other pertinent effects of study abroad, I would like to mention the career path of the graduates in combination with their income. And these are very interesting results because the data show very clearly that participants who had studied abroad, even though they received the same salaries, or roughly the same salaries, as other graduates at the beginning of their careers, benefitted from a much steeper increase of their income after approximately 3 years. So the first 3 years were more or less the same, but then

they took a steep increase, and were earning about â‚Ź10,000 more a year, which is quite a considerable increase. And particularly, female graduates profited from it. In Austria we still have a fairly wide gap between male and female salaries in the industry, and the students who had studied abroad (the female students actually) had a much lower gap.

What the study also brought to the fore was that graduates with study abroad experience display a higher degree of mobility-professional mobility, so, unlike the average Austrians.

The blue lines show you the students, or the graduates, who had not studied abroad, and the brown bars show you the students who have studied abroad. [Presentation slide 8] So you can see the flexibility for those who graduated without the study abroad experience is very limited -60% only want to work in their hometown or their home region, and then Austria. But the brown line shows very clearly that the students with the study abroad experience are willing to go work abroad in other parts of the world including very far regions like Africa, or Australia and New Zealand.

Finally, the study also analysed whether the duration of the stay abroad had any influence on the acquired skills, and the results clearly show that the stays abroad exceeding 12 months generally lead to a significantly greater increase in language, social, inter-cultural, and professional skills than shorter periods abroad. And very short stays abroad show hardly any effect on the skills measured in this study.

Although most students, when they come home from their study abroad experience, make very fervent accounts of their experience upon their return, there are still a lot of critical voices among academics that these stays abroad do not always produce the desired results. They argue that students, rather than becoming inter-culturally competent, very often return with even stronger stereotypes about the host country. Also, as exchange students typically find it hard to create relationships with local students, and thus mostly mingle with other international students, they do not really improve their foreign language skills because they mainly use English as a lingua franca in the foreign country. And, as regards their cultural learning, it is mostly based on observation and deduction, rather than a true understanding of the host culture. Therefore, only very few students can claim to increase their inter-cultural skills during a stay abroad. They may have had the experience of a lifetime, as they often say, or they may have experienced personal growth and find out things about themselves they were not aware of before, but when it comes to honing the inter-cultural competences, we cannot be sure about the gains achieved.

Now, these views may sound overly pessimistic, particularly in view of other studies that revealed more positive results. I would just like to recall to you the 2009 study of the Georgetown Consortium, by Vandeburg and his colleagues, and the authors were looking at learning in the areas of target language, inter-cultural skills, as well as subject learning, and found that students participating in study abroad programmes made more progress in inter-cultural learning, and in speaking the target language, than the control students who studied the respective languages at US universities. Particularly, female students increased their proficiency in the foreign language (so much for prejudices about communication). The authors detected also a relationship between oral proficiency in the target language and intercultural skills. So those students who actually improved their language skills also improved their inter-cultural skills. Around the same time, so also around 2008-2010, other researchers started to argue that exposure alone to another culture did not automatically trigger intercultural development. So they pleaded for interventions, or mentoring, to guide the students in their learning process during their stay abroad. Paula Pederson assessed the inter-cultural effectiveness outcomes of a year-long study abroad programme. In her study, and she calls it the “Island Programme� she compared three groups: one with diversity training pedagogy, as she calls it; one without this support; and one control group at home. And she found that only the group with integrated inter-cultural effectiveness and diversity training pedagogy, including cultural immersion, guided reflection, and inter-cultural coaching, showed statistically significant differences. And she concludes that if inter-cultural effectiveness is a goal of study abroad, we need to do much more than send students abroad. We need to look at quality beyond the academic curriculum we are offering. We need to work with students during their experience, using guided reflection and inter-cultural pedagogy to help them grow interculturally from that experience.

Now the question arises whether the student’s development of inter-cultural competence is primarily an idealistic concern of educators and international affairs officers, or whether graduates will actually profit from this in their professional careers? To answer this question, Trooboff and his colleagues conducted a survey of 352 CEOs, Presidents, campus recruiters, and human resource professionals from a wide range of industries and organizations across the US, to find out whether these professionals actually value a study abroad experience, and provided they do, what is it they’re looking for in their graduates they prefer to hire? Apart from the fact that they look for graduates who have majored in the subject relevant to the organisation, which is more or less understandable, they also favour candidates with a study abroad or an internship abroad experience, and with foreign language skills. This applies particularly to companies that generate a large amount of their revenue internationally.

Above all, employers believe that longer study abroad programmes are more beneficial and they place relatively high value on experiential learning, so on programmes that feature service learning and especially internship opportunities. When it comes to skills and personal qualities in prospective employees as enhanced by study abroad experiences, they list the following, in descending order: so the most important one is recognizes that own world view is not universal; they want students, or graduates, to be curious, and people who want to discover more; they want them to be non-judgmental towards other world views; willing to take risks to learn new things, to be flexible, adaptable, and self-motivated; to show initiative; to be enthusiastic and outgoing; to listen and observe well. [Presentation slide 11] So recruiters are looking for very interesting things from our perspective, I find. When it comes to personal skills of prospective employees that are important for hiring and that derive from inter-cultural or global competence, employers place special value on listening and observing well, acting well to change, working well under pressure, analysing, evaluating, and interpreting well, and working effectively outside their comfort zone. [Presentation slide 12] The employers surveyed also looked for team skills in their prospective employees, but they actually said in that survey that they didn’t believe that these can be enhanced by the study abroad experience.

Now all these studies that I have cited prompt us to pay more attention to the way we plan and design study abroad programmes, so as to make sure that they are more likely to produce the desired effects, and to increase the employability of our students. In the following, I would like to describe a programme that endeavours to meet some of these requirements, at least. At the same time, I am fully aware that it will never be possible to organise all study abroad programmes in this way, as it would be far too demanding with regard to the resources required for the implementation. So what I’m trying to talk to you about is a programme that we call, in my university, the “Joint Master Program in Global Business” and it can be looked upon as an attempt at implementing inter-cultural pedagogy in the sense of Pederson. [Presentation slide 13] Some eight years ago the Johannes Kepler University, Linz joined forces with two of its partner institutions and they were longstanding partners namely, the University of Victoria in Canada, and the National Sun YatSen University in Taiwan, to launch a programme in global business at Master’s level, which places a special focus on the enhancement of inter-cultural learning of its participants, thus developing graduates with what we call a global mind-set, who would find it particularly attractive to work for global companies, and who would have the skills to do so.

The participants in this programme form a cohort of approximately 20-30 students, who spend 1/3 of the programme, approximately three months, in each of the partner universities. The main purpose of the programme is to allow students to experience the host cultures as intensely as possible, and to enable them to hone their inter-cultural skills through continuous interaction with their peers from the different cultures. Now their inter-cultural learning is enhanced by regular interventions from academic staff closely involved in the programme. The programme extends over one academic year, as I have said, and the students travel first to Victoria, B.C. The programme starts in late August, so the last week of August, and goes until the middle of November, approximately. All this depends a little on when Chinese New Year takes place. Afterwards, from midNovember to the end of January, Kaohsiung, in southern Taiwan, and finally, from February until the end of April, they go to Linz. Each partner university selects, ideally, about 10 students; sometimes Canada selects a few more. Frequently the students from Canada come from very different cultures. Now, the students even apply from China, Latin

America, Russia, the Ukraine, from all over the world. The students from Austria and from Taiwan are typically much more culturally homogenous. All participants are selected upon a written application, their academic records, and face-to-face interviews during which particularly their fluency in English is tested and also their motivation to take part in that programme. The age range is typically between 22 and 30 years and in total so far 208 students have participated in the programme.

As can be seen from this figure, the programme starts in Canada, where the selected participants meet for the first time. [Presentation slide 13] For the first 3 months, they go through a programme that provides them with the core concept of international management, and of doing business in North America. They have typically the subjects that you would find in any international business programme, in addition to how to do business in North America. They then move on to Taiwan for another three months, where they are introduced to principles of entrepreneurship and find out about doing business in Asia, with a strong focus on China and Taiwan, and during that period they work on a team project related to entrepreneurship. And the final portion of the programme takes them to Austria, and here they learn about doing business in Europe and they have to work on a project that is something like a consultancy project with a company in Austria. And they have mentors in their companies, and then they have the academic accompaniment to give them guidance in their project. And the projects range from market analysis, to company branding, international human resource management, customer relationship management, and others. Now, the complexity of these projects, and the time constraints- they only have about 2 months to complete the project- require really the joint effort and the specific skills of all the team members. The students would not be able to complete the projects without everybody’s input. Now that’s very different to teamwork that usually happens at university level, where sometimes the more motivated students just take over for those who want to be free-riders.

Throughout the entire programme, the students also have bi-weekly language classes in Chinese, English, or German, depending on their native language. Another course that spreads across the three countries deals with global leadership and cultural intelligence and this course is taught by faculty members from two of the universities (that is from Canada and from Austria) and these faculty members also go to all the three universities. And the students are guided in their learning process on cultural differences, because one of the key pedagogical aspects of this course is really experiential learning and reflection. So the students have to not only complete certain tasks, but they also have to do a lot of simulations, business games, role plays, and they have reflective feedback sessions after these games.

The overarching idea of the programme is really to develop the participants’ inter-cultural competence and global mind-set. [Presentation slide 14] We do this by focusing very strongly on teamwork as well as interventions that encourage reflection. So we have, what we feel is a quite innovative teaching approach and I will share some of these activities with you. Even though the period spent abroad is relatively short for each country, and it’s probably not long enough, certainly not long enough to really understand the host culture, what makes it easier to come to a better understanding of the culture is that the students really rely on one another. So, because their interpersonal contact is so intense, they live together more or less, they are in the same accommodation, they get up in the morning and go out in the evening together, so in every location they have one peer group of local students that helps the others adjust to the culture as quickly as possible and enables them also to cope with every day and academic life in the respective location. These students serve as a reference group that is ready to answer all the questions pertaining to the local culture. As all the participants are continuously sensitized to culture and to culture-related topics, they develop a very strong interest for their environment, while the host students become very eager also to explain things to the foreigners so that they can understand.

Teamwork is also one of the pillars of the programme. In every country, the students work in different multi-cultural teams, so they’re assigned to teams and they have to master all the tasks in that particular team in each country. And in these teams they are also encouraged to test their leadership skills, and their ability to deal with different personalities and different attitudes towards teamwork. As they’re assigned to the teams,

they cannot choose freely with whom they would like to work, and that means that sometimes, clearly, conflicts occur in those teams. Now, whereas in regular academic programmes, students can relatively easily avoid resolving conflicts because they avoid the other individuals if they don’t get along with them, it’s not really possible because it’s such a closely knit group in this context. So resolving conflict is another skill that they really need to learn in this programme. And what they also have to do is learn how to give constructive feedback during and after teamwork. This is especially important because they also need this skill very urgently in their professional careers.

Now, at the end of the programme, the pressure, obviously, in the teams gets really intense, because the consulting project is something that they get very engaged in.

They have to present their findings to the companies, to the management board of the companies, so this close to professional life experience during the project phase shows the students how interesting, but also how challenging it is to work with people from other cultures on a professional basis. And even though they know each other quite well by then, they still have to cope with cultural differences, or personality differences, and also with different language skills. So the students from Canada sometimes complain that they have to do all the writing tasks because their writing is still much better than the writing of the Taiwanese students, for instance. However, having gone through intense learning processes regarding culture and culture-specific behavioural norms they mostly manage quite well to cope with these stressful situations.

Another very important element in this programme is the continuous guided reflection on cultural issues and group processes. So throughout the programme, the students have to write reflective essays on their cultural learning and on the group processes. They have to write an essay every two weeks, and they upload these essays on Moodle, and in every location then they meet with the Process Coordinator, who discusses their personal development and their development within the group, and how they get along, and how they feel about their own cultural learning experience. And these reflective processes are of particular value as the students are encouraged to become conscious of their development with regard to their intercultural skills, their personal development, and their own cultural identity. They also become aware of the interpersonal challenges they are facing due to the close contact with their fellow students, and discuss with the Process Coordinator how they can cope with them.

All these pedagogical and organisational efforts make up the special character of this programme, but also make it very challenging for the academic and administrative staff involved in it. [Presentation slide 15] These students are getting much more attention than those who take part in regular exchange programmes. Also, as the three universities are involved in the programme, we also have to face changes every year. For instance, the deans change, and with the deans, the focus sometimes changes. Sometimes the people who teach in the programme change, so even the academics learn a great deal from the programme, as we come to understand the intricate workings and sometimes powerplays, and different priorities in each school. Nevertheless, we are all convinced that this is the best we can do, so far, to prepare our students for their future challenges in their professional life, and also, to some extent, in their personal lives.

And, to conclude, these are the things that we are trying to give the students in this programme. [Presentation slide 16] So they get a pre-departure training before they go into the programme, then they get an orientation training at the beginning of the programme. In Canada, they have weekly classes on cultural awareness, and then in the other two countries they have also sessions on cultural awareness and leadership. Then the course instructors from the different cultural backgrounds travel to the other universities to give lectures. There are regular interventions to encourage learning and reflection.

There are individual reflections with the mentors, there is the shared accommodation with the frequent interactions. Of course the students do things together in their leisure activities, they travel together, they do field trips in every country, and they have teamwork.

So, what we are hoping to do is to take the students out of their comfort zone. So this is from the programme brochure: “You are among a diverse cohort of students in terms of nationality, culture, language, previous international and intercultural experience, which

enhances your cross-cultural learning experience and makes the global element of this degree real.” [Presentation slide 17] So there we really hope to provide a lot to these students. Now what I’m trying to share with you now to conclude, is just a few excerpts from the reflective essays, and the one-on-one meetings with the students to show you what they are experiencing, and how they are dealing with these experiences.

So, you know, you can see a very Austrian perspective on North America. [Presentation slide 18] This was from the first part of the programme. The student, or this student, is fascinated by the different speed of life in North America, but also regrets, somehow, this philosophizing over a glass of beer or wine.

Now, the next student, also Austrian. [Presentation slide 19] This was at the end of the Canada part of the programme when they have all the final exams. “The last weeks have been a little exhausting, especially as I don’t really get what professors expectations are here. I feel as if I did certain things back home the way we’re supposed to do them here, professors would ask me if I’d gone insane. Anyway, with all the exams coming up, I can see even more cultural differences than in the beginning. Some of our Taiwanese friends seem to handle exams relaxed, to some extent they seem like they don’t even care anymore. I guess they just gave up on some subjects. Our Canadian colleagues, on the other hand, seem to be very eager for good grades. I wonder whether they get the pressure from their parents. The Canadian programme costs $25,000, so the parents are probably very eager for them to be successful or if they’re just naturally competitive.”

Now, a comment from a Taiwanese student: “In the beginning I was not sure if I could make it because I didn’t have confidence in myself. Now, as time goes by, I don’t know exactly since when, I already got used to the life here and forgot how I felt in the beginning.

I’m not sure if I have learned a lot from the courses, but I am really sure I have learned a lot from life here. This is my first time I have a flat with my classmates and live so close with them. We do everything together and chat a lot with each other. What’s more, we share our mood with each other, no matter good or bad mood. Therefore, I feel I already rely on this lifestyle.” [Presentation slide 20] Now , this in italics is from a one-on-one meeting with a Canadian student of Chinese descent, in Kaohsiung: “I don’t really know why, I’m Asian, I didn’t really expect to have that much culture shock. It’s not that I didn’t understand the language. I can’t even imagine what it was like for the other Canadians who take the German class and didn’t speak a word of Chinese, how they must have felt overwhelmed, because I at least could get around, speak, ask directions, whatever it was, to live in Kaohsiung. That was fine. But I still felt I was hitting a brick wall sometimes, in not very obvious ways.”[Presentation slide 21] Now, a Canadian: “But I will say that the mingling that I do with the people in the programme is very different, you know, we’re not just talking about movies and music, because we have a shared interest of each other’s cultures, so we talk about differences in each other’s cultures and why they may be like that. It’s really, it’s the kind of friendship that’s not just about having fun. There is some deeper meaning behind that, and that’s the sort of thing you only get when people have shared interests like this.” [Presentation slide 22] An Austrian: “Due to their indirect way of communication, Taiwanese people are often difficult to understand. Only because I have lived with Taiwanese in one house, I’m now able to understand parts of their way to communicate. I learned that I always have to phrase my questions in a way that Taiwanese have the possibility only to disagree without saying no.” [Presentation slide 23] And, a Canadian says: “I really learned not to be cocky”.’ Now that’s at the end of the programme, that was the final interview. “Not to be cocky about what I think I know. You know, when I was younger, I did quite a bit of traveling, so I felt I knew the world a lot. But you really can’t have that attitude when you meet new people. You have to be open, you have to listen to what they say, and also, beyond that, look at the context of the situation.

Look what they’re doing and how they’re acting, because that tells you a lot as well. You know, all of that can be transferred to the business world as well. It really will help you

forge relationships with business partners.” [Presentation slide 24] And there’s one Chinese student who really discovered a lot about herself: “But I think what I learned is really valuable. I know what are my advantages and disadvantages, and I know more clearly about myself. That’s really good things, because before, I really was in the mystery. I didn’t really know what I like. I know this maybe because I do that, I will like that. But at this time I probably know some of my good points, and bad points, and I can make decisions about myself, and then I can know some of my advantages. I know what I learnt is really valuable.” [Presentation slide 25] So when we’re sending our students on study abroad programmes, what is it that we want them to learn, and to experience? It is difficult to judge what the real gain of the study abroad experience is, as it will be different for every individual However, leaving it entirely up to the individual student may be risky, as the experience may also backfire. It’s not easy for universities to decide which approaches are the right ones, and how much intervention on their behalf is appropriate. Now, in this paper I intended to give you an insight into and attempt to measure the outcomes of study abroad programmes, and one example of a programme that tries to provide guidance during the students’ learning process abroad. Certainly there is no proven recipe for the right way, and as educators, we strongly believe in the intrinsic value of study abroad, we can only try to find different approaches. Thank you very much.

Questions from the floor [Audience Question]: Does this paper exist in printed form someplace?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: Not yet but it will.

[Audience Question]: Right, it was very clear, and thank you for sharing this. I think it is very useful showing what we all experience with our students, so great job. I was wondering, you showed some data about students after study period abroad being really prepared to work abroad and the areas of the world. Did they actually do that?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: Yes. [Audience Question]: So it’s not where they prepared but they actually did that?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: A lot of students who have studied abroad have purposely looked for jobs that would take them abroad, so there was more eagerness on their behalf also, and some who did not find such jobs were actually quite disappointed.

[Audience Question]: You mentioned $25,000 for the Canadians. Is there differentiation for the nationalities?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: The programme cost is $25,000 for all students who join the programme no matter where they come from.

[Audience Question]: Do they get a certificate at the end?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: They get a Master’s degree. So the Canadian students still have to do a two month internship after the programme. For the Austrian students, it’s actually the second year of a Master’s programme, and they still have to write their thesis.

And for the Taiwanese students it is also the second year of a Master’s programme, and they also have to write the thesis.

[Audience Question]: So it’s more like a module rather than a whole degree?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: Exactly, now for the Canadians, it’s actually the whole programme, plus the internship, and for the Austrians and Canadians, because we have, in Austria we have three year Bachelor’s degrees, so our Master’s degrees are two years.

[Audience Question]: I also wanted to thank you for a really, really engaging and interesting presentation. But also, in terms of your study of the salary advantages of those students who had spent a period of study abroad, was that really about having spent a period of study abroad, or about their motivations, even before coming to university? Were you able to control for that, or is it just a correlation?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: Now this is why I was mentioning that in multi-variable analysis, you cannot really compare the two samples because there are always some variable that you cannot control for. Such as self-selection or whether the person is outgoing originally, you know, whether those people who decide to sign up for a study abroad programme.

[Audience Question]: So it might signal something, but it might not be the fundamental, if you like, explanatory.

Professor Evelyne Glaser: That’s correct. Even though, you know, with propensity score testing, it shows that, well, these variables are actually not so significant, but, I mean, there is never a guarantee.

[Audience Question]: Just a question about the levels of language skills of the students. Were they people that already had previous knowledge of the language?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: Yes. [Audience Question]: Any sort of cut-off point? I mean, from the period of time when they went to Austria, would they need to be a B1, or, what sort of language levels?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: With regard to English in the Master’s programme I was talking about? No, they have to be a C1 level.

[Audience Question]: In all 3 languages?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: No only in English. Now for the other languages, they can be beginners, absolute beginners.

[Audience Question]: So it’s just to give them a taste of that language?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: Right, exactly.

[Audience Question]: It wasn’t instrumental?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: No, because it would be impossible to find students who are bilingual in that many languages.

[Audience]: I know, there would be nobody.

Professor Evelyne Glaser: Right. But the fact that actually moving to these cultures motivates them a lot and they can try out, even if it’s just basic things that they can learn.

I mean, you have to be very realistic. We have them take the HSK test in Austria, so we actually submit them to official language tests. They have to do a German test, and they manage, they easily manage A1 for the weakest students, and the strongest students actually manage A2. And for HSK, it really varies a lot. It depends very much on the motivation of students to learn. Last year we actually had a student who started with Chinese, and who took HSK 3, which is really a very high level, but this student was just very motivated and did a lot of work on the side also. But that’s always a fact for language learning. You know, you can send students abroad to this extreme location, and some come back and have improved tremendously, and others have barely improved at all.

[Audience Question]: How can we get a copy of the paper when it is eventually out?

Professor Evelyne Glaser: Glaser: I think it’s going to be online.

Opening keynote Introduced by Professor Aldwyn Cooper Chief Executive and Principal of Regent’s University London Rt Hon David Willetts MP Minister for Universities and Science

We are very fortunate I think to get the Rt Hon David Willetts here today (when he arrives). David has had a long-term commitment to politics in general and to education in particular. He has been the MP for the constituency of Havant on the south coast of Britain for more than twenty years.

I always think one of the great dangers when someone becomes a Minister, or a whip, or holds any role in government is that they start to lose the focus on their constituency and their constituency comes up rather short. That has not been the case with David Willetts, he has maintained a tremendous commitment to his constituency throughout his ministerial career.

His ministerial career started really very early. It started in his first parliament not long after 1992 when he took up the constituency post. He has played a whole variety of senior roles in politics that makes him an extraordinarily accomplished and thoughtful politician - everything from paymaster to cabinet office to education in general through now to universities and science. He has been the Minister of State for Universities and Science throughout this coalition government. The government has been in place for about three and a half years.

I think it has been a very positive thing for HE that David has been retained in that post.

I don’t know if any of you are old enough to remember the TV series “Yes Minister” where the Civil Servants more or less controlled everything? Well, what they always said was that as soon as a Minister really starts to understand the brief of the ministry they’re working, it’s time get them moved out before they try to do things and cause trouble. David Willetts has spent a great deal of time working to fully understand the changes that are taking place in HE in the UK and globally. He has challenged the traditional groupings who have tried to force through perhaps outdated methods of education and outdated objectives and he has managed to stay there for the three and a half years and we are very grateful for that.

David has written much on politics generally and he has also written one of the most thought-provoking social commentary books called, “The Pinch - how baby boomers took their children’s future and why they should give it back”. Being a baby boomer perhaps myself I found it incredibly challenging and really very realistic.

Throughout his period as Minister, David has really promoted and supported the diversity of provision of HE. The value that is brought by many different kinds of organisations and of course that has been of great benefit to Regent’s. He believes in making quality and contribution the major deciding factors about the provision of education. He has listened to employers and to the sector as a whole rather than to the subset of all the universities.

I think he has gained a real understanding of the rapidly changing patterns throughout the world and the flows of HE .

He is also responsible for the report that came through the department about putting students at the heart of HE which is what we all believe in very strongly. He understands as well the importance of internationalism - both the economic and soft power benefits of international HE. This has culminated in the last year in the development of the UK international education global growth and prosperity strategy. Most recently he has explained in his latest article in the THE - “Why the cap no longer fits” why removing the student number cap is now a good idea in terms of society.

I would like to invite the Minister, David Willetts to speak now. I believe he will speak for around 15 minutes and then we will have some questions from the floor.

Opening keynote Rt Hon David Willetts MP

Hello, thank you very much indeed Aldwyn for that introduction and I do apologise for running a bit late. It is great to be here. I always enjoy coming to Regent’s University London as we now call you because it really is historically a very significant university and it makes a very important contribution to HE in London and across Britain.

Regent’s is the largest campus based non-state funded charitable higher education institution in Britain. It has been around for a long time but I am particularly pleased that in the last few years it was possible for Regent’s to gain taught degree awarding powers back in July 2012 and then recognising its significance and status as a HE institution that it was awarded University title in March 2013. So it is a great pleasure to be here at this institution and I must say, I would also like to pay tribute to Aldwyn personally in his role in leading thinking in HE in Britain about the diversity in the sector. For me this debate began almost 170 years ago when there was the first attempt to break the Oxbridge monopoly.

The history of HE in England is very unusual. We had two universities early on in the middle ages - Oxford and Cambridge. Then very unusually there was a bit of a gap from 1209 when Cambridge was founded and 1838 when UCL was founded. No universities were created in England for 600 years - that is not true of any other major European country - and during that time, incidentally, Scotland went from no universities to four universities. Oxford and Cambridge had a very powerful hold on the system, not least because they controlled access to posts in the Church of England. And there was a debate that began, particularly in London, about the need for alternative providers. A group of mainly secularists, pressed for another university that wasn’t so closely linked to the Church of England and they created University College London after great controversy in the 1830’s.

Everything you read today as criticisms of alternative providers are the Oxbridge criticisms of UCL in the 1830s. It was denounced, I think by Coleridge, as a mere lecture bazaar. There was particular suspicion because of the idea, which was taken from Scotland, that academic staff should be paid partly by students directly for the lecturing and tutoring that they were provided. Oxford and Cambridge deeply disapproved of this model. Nevertheless UCL arrived on the scene as part of the great sort out of the utilitarian secular reform movement.

Jeremy Bentham one of its authors is still to be seen suitably embalmed in the entrance of UCL. After that there was a competitive response from the tory high-church forces who created King’s College London a few years later. London University then became an umbrella body embracing those types of colleges. In other words the history of the growth of HE in England for over 150 years is the arrival of insurgent new providers challenging a conventional incumbent. I regard Regent’s University London as an exciting part of that great tradition and why I am so pleased to be here today.

The theme here today is transnational education; let me just very briefly touch on that.

It is absolutely right for you to have this as your theme for the conference with your international partners. The way we see it in the British government is that first of all, the way in which I would put it, is that the world is experiencing its “Robbins’ moment”. It is just over 50 years ago, in October 1963, Lionel Robbins, produced his great report in England about the need to increase the number of students because of a combination of factors, notably rising aspiration and also a surge in the number of young people.

The then Conservative government responded with agreeing on an increase in the number of students. I am delighted that almost exactly on the 50th anniversary of that historic document the Chancellor was able to announce in the Autumn Statement that there would be further increases in student numbers as the cap on students is lifted.

That’s the English story. What I notice, going round the world is there are emerging powers that are now having their “Robbins’ moment”. It is very exciting, if you visit these countries and they’ve often got some shared features. First of all they have got a surge in the number of young people, secondly they may well have reached middle income status and are very aware of the so-called “middle income trap”. Their economies could get stuck somewhere behind advanced economies but just ahead of the poorest economies and they are determined to break out of the trap - the so-called “middle income trap”. They recognise that if they can transform the educational opportunities for this surge of young people going through their educational system by a massive increase in the number of them that get HE then that is the best single thing that they can do for their country. It is very exciting if you have these conversations with government ministers in places like Indonesia. Or, I was recently in Kazakhstan, where I met President Nazarbayev. When Kazakhstan became independent country just over 20 years ago he reached this strategic judgement. We have the same conversations in Mexico, Columbia, Nigeria, there is a whole range. And of course we shouldn’t forget the really big countries like India and China who have slightly different demographics. So there is a global hunger for HE and that is an enormous opportunity because they often look to our HE institutions here in the UK for partnership and leadership and help in tackling the quite extraordinary figures in the number of students in HE they need.

In Indonesia for example which I visited with the Prime Minister 18 months ago and which I hope to visit again this year, they want an extra quarter of a million students in HE growing a quarter of a million a year, year after year for at least a decade. In India they are looking for an extra 40 million students over the period of just over a decade – the growth is enormous and they recognise they can’t simply do this indigenously. So that’s the first big trend; this global “Robbins’ moment”.

The second big trend is that even in more prosperous mature economies the forces of globalisation mean that there is an increasing recognition from, for example, employers that a well-qualified young person is likely to have lived and studied and broadened his or her horizons by living and studying in a different country at some stage. One of the regular issues raised with me by groups like the CBI is that they are frustrated that there are not enough English students who have had that experience. So we have also got the forces of globalisation at work in our mature economies. Putting all of that together you can see the enormous need and opportunity here.

Obviously the conventional way in which that has been met is by overseas students coming to study at British Universities. That is fantastic, they are warmly welcome providing of course they are sufficiently qualified and have the English to participate in that study process. There is no cap on the number of legitimate students coming from abroad to study at our HEI. We have over 400,000 overseas students coming into Britain to study. We expect that to grow not least as the scale of the total global market for that kind of education grows. But that is just the start. The theme of your conference today is other ways in which we can meet this international demand on top of that flow of students in simply signing up to an English HEI. I would like to very briefly review what those other types of models are.

There is first of all what I think of, if I may use the parallel, as the kind of “airline alliance model”. Where a network of institutions around the world create partnerships so that as part of studying at one of those institutions you will also have the opportunity to go and study at one of their trusted partners in a course which is known and gives you a qualification in your home country and quite possibly in the country you are visiting.

Aldwyn is the expert, but that seems to be in a way what you do here at Regent’s being part of the education process linked to other universities as well. I am very keen to see that type of network created; there are many English universities that are increasingly participating and trying to create such networks. Regent’s has been ahead of the field in becoming a part of such networks and we very much welcome that.

There is secondly setting up a campus abroad. Some of our universities are particularly well known for this. I would say the most ambitious for their range of campuses abroad are the University of Liverpool and University of Nottingham who have got campuses in China and also Malaysia and elsewhere. That is another way forward and it is great when

overseas countries welcome that. We are ahead, I think of any other country in setting up campuses in China for example. I visited there recently with the Prime Minister. The Chinese are very aware of the enormous contribution that those university campuses make and are keen to see more of them. So you can set up campuses abroad.

Thirdly, you can franchise or validate courses delivered abroad. That is a very valuable way in which English universities can give many more people the opportunity of getting a degree or qualification from their university. Though, it is very important of course, (because we have had one or two unhappy episodes), that it is properly quality controlled.

The university has to recognise they are putting their name, reputation and brand on the line. Those arrangements are not to be entered into lightly.

Then there is the external degree model of which the most conspicuous example is the University of London external degree, where people around the world have the opportunity of sitting for the University of London degree. The University of London doesn’t play any real role in their teaching or education, students turn up and sit the exam and you see photos of hundreds of students in Hong Kong or somewhere sitting the University of London external exam. Then of course if they pass on the well-recognised Higher International Standards then they have got an internationally recognised degree.

You can study for that programme in a whole host of ways. Famously, amongst the many distinguished students they’ve had, Nelson Mandela when imprisoned on Robben Island studied for the University of London external degree.

Then we have the Open University where as well as the degree course there is proper teaching materials for distance learning. So there are a range of ways in which our HE providers deliver transnational education. If you add it all up, the number studying for a UK degree around the world is about the same, or slightly more, than the number that are flying into the UK to get their qualification here. If you do the accrued arithmetic: it’s something over 400,000 coming into Britain to study and on a very generous interpretation including some accountancy qualifications, there is over half a million studying abroad for a British qualification; adding up to over a million students from overseas who aren’t British who are in some way or other each year studying towards a British qualification. That is an amazing figure - that is almost as much as the number of undergraduate students in our universities today.

Where is this going for the future? There are some challenges. I think we are very aware that all this overseas provision has got our HE brand behind it. So it is very important that it is of high quality and the QAA together with the HEI Unit in my department are currently consulting the sector on what is needed to strengthen the quality assurance for TNE and we very much welcome the sector to respond positively to that. We want to make it easier for people around the world to access such courses and we have now got an education UK programme, which is our attempt to export education services. We are now developing a new recruitment service website which will include a UK TNE course search. That is going to go online for Malaysia, Singapore and Hong Kong in the spring of 2014. We are trying to provide better information on a collective basis about those courses.

I think that where we will go next is the arrival of the MOOC. I think MOOCs are an incredibly exciting opportunity. There are sceptics about MOOCs, there are people who think MOOCs really are a significant moment in the development of education. I’m in the latter category, I do think they are significant but I don’t feel people will necessarily solely study through MOOCs but they are another way in which people, young people in particular, will be able to get a first feel for what it would be like to study in a British university like this one or elsewhere in the world.

I think there will be some significant sampling. They will start doing some courses. It will be very important that they get a credit. We will get people literally sitting in Mongolia trying out a maths course from a British University, dabbling in some physics course from an American university, perhaps trying some chemistry from an Australian university. That might then shape the choices they make about going to study abroad.

There are also very powerful analytical and educational values in MOOCs. You learn a lot about how people are studying simply by analysing the data. As you know, the big

organisations that run MOOCs have an incredibly powerful capacity to analyse data. They can literally analyse every key stroke of a student so they know exactly how long it takes students to go through a particular line of questioning, see a common mistake that’s being made and at what point it is being made, to identify what it is in the educational material that they can adjust. I think it has great potential both for spreading access and knowledge of HE as well as analysing student learning. I think that we can expect a future where there’s a greater mix of online learning as well as other perhaps more conventional forms of learning and so called blended learning. I am an optimist about the human hunger around the world for HE and I am an optimistic about the capacity of our great HE institutions in Britain, institutions such as Regent’s University London to help meet that global demand for more education. Thank you very much indeed.

Questions from the floor Sir Cyril Taylor, Richmond University I am Chancellor at Richmond American International University; I wondered if you would kindly clarify, David, the proposal that was issued in September about capping the enrolment of private universities within the UK because it concerns some of the two year institutions. The cap was going to be about enrolment numbers in September 2012. Now Richmond University has invested a huge sum of money in improving its facilities, our enrolment has doubled this September and only half of our EU and British Union students applied for a loan. So what we’re asking is if there is going to be a cap can it be tied to those students applying for a loan and not the total number of students accepted because that would appear to be unreasonable. That one would cap the number of student accepted if half of them weren’t applying for a loan. Thank you very much.

I want to see more alternative providers, it is great that the alternative providers are growing and we are recognising the significance of what they do. Some of them have just grown so rapidly that they have become one of the many expenditure pressures that we face. So there is a limit to the amount of growth in the immediate future we can afford.

I think we have corresponded on this. We are going to have to introduce some kind of control on the rapid growth of numbers, as to how we should do it. There is a paradox here. Often what the alternative providers say to us is please treat us the same way as the conventional providers that have been publically funded for years. Well the publically funded universities have always had caps on numbers that have been set as a cap on the total and we haven’t allowed them to come to us and say “but 10% of our students or whatever don’t claim loans so that doesn’t count towards the cap”. Always for them we have set a cap on the total number of UK and EU students. So it’s quite hard for us to drill down and start a different structure for alternative providers.

Without going into too much detail, there are some where there are designated and nondesignated courses and we could envisage a model where the cap applies to the designated courses rather than the non-designated courses. But we are absolutely up for trying to help institutions like yours Cyril, just like Aldwyn’s, to continue to thrive. I hope in the correspondence we have had, we can reach a satisfactory way forward.

Christine Ennew, University Nottingham, Malaysia Campus Minister, you spoke very eloquently about the benefits of experience abroad for UK students and the impact on their employability. It is a perpetual challenge, I think for all of us in the UK sector to get UK students to take advantage of those opportunities. If you will forgive me for going back to the student loan issue; the UK seems to focus on a policy whereby loans are only given to those studying in UK institutions and one might argue that provides a structural barrier to British students getting international experience. Is there any likelihood that that will be reconsidered?

Well, we are working through a set of very understandable requests, Sir Cyril has written to me about his issue at Richmond, David Greenaway at Nottingham has written to me about this point and I do get what the point he is making. Indeed having visited your Malaysian campus

myself, (I think I was with the Prime Minister) we were very impressed, it is a great campus. I understand the argument that as well as educating people from Malaysia and surrounding areas you also want to make it easier for students to move easily between Nottingham and Malaysia.

We are also considering that approach from David. Again as with Cyril there are just limits of expenditure that affect what we can do in the immediate future. But I do understand the logic of the argument.

Dominic Scott, UK Council for International Student Affairs You mentioned the international growth strategy which I think has paragraphs or sentences about the warmest possible welcome for international students. And in its initial work, I think it has been looking at major projects of the English language. I wonder as when we had the earlier Prime Minister initiative it might be timely to look at the wider quality of the international student experience. Look at that as part of the agenda as one of the key factors because clearly it is not just the classroom, (I am not talking about the visa issues here) I am talking about the wider student experience. If we could get that on the agenda it could be a key part of the strategy.

Thank you for reminding me. Actually, I forgot to give this a plug. This is our strategy and I am very proud of the fact that we have produced, I think, a very significant document which recognises the international education opportunity for Britain and brings together all the data we’ve got and sets it out.

I think you are right, when I visit these countries abroad and speak to my opposite numbers in their governments about what they want to do; many of them are keen to send more students here. They are incredibly positive about our HE. I would say when you look at the negative side of the balance sheet there are some concerns. One of the concerns is that students from overseas need to mix with British students, partly as the enriching of the cultural experience and partly, I have to say, to ensure that their English develops. What we have got in some countries if you look is a kind of clustering of large numbers of students from one country going to one university.

The danger of that is that you have a kind subculture created where they all live in the same student accommodation together or digs together, doing a course together and end up, for example, spending too much of their time speaking their home language to their friends from their home country and not enough speaking English with new friends that they have met in their HEIs. This is a dilemma for our HEIs because one of the things that we pride ourselves on in Britain is that our HEIs understand that you go to university partly to grow as an independent adult. You’re no longer at school and not being micromanaged and we value the independent thinking that we encourage from our students. I think sometimes that can lead to excessive disengagement. It is important to subtly try to ensure mixing with native English speakers, mixing with people from a range of different backgrounds. I would say in terms of the quality experience it is not something we could make a government requirement, I don’t believe in dealing with our autonomous universities in that way. But I think that is certainly a message I pick up from my overseas visit that is a challenge for the sector.

Panel: Governance/Policy Making TNE And Global Citizenship Introduced and chaired by Alison Goddard Editor of HE and Former Education Correspondent for the Economist and Times Higher Dr William Lawton Director OBHE Professor Rebecca Hughes Director of International Education, British Council Daniel Shah Assistant Director, Policy UK HE Unit

Judith Lamie: The eagle eyed amongst you or certainly those that know me, will realise that I am not Alison Goddard I am in fact Judith Lamie the Director of External Relations here and I will be chairing this session. Welcome to the first panel of the conference. This panel will explore our overall topic of TNE but specifically look at policy governance and global citizenship and set I suppose, the tone and the background for the changing shape for international HE. We are going to have three presentations and are very fortunate to have three experts in international HE with us here today. We are going to have about 10minutes for each presentation. While we are doing that can you please make some notes of questions that you would like to ask and what we will do after those three presentations is a Q&A session for the final 20 or 30 minutes. So don’t forget what those questions are, make sure you note them down. So, as I said, we have our three expert panellists and we are going in the running order of the conference programme. We are beginning with Dr Bill Lawton, he is the Director of OBHE and I hope most of you have seen their most recent publication on horizon scanning which I’m sure Bill will refer to shortly.

Dr Bill Lawton Thank you very much Judith. Good morning everyone. I usually say a quick word about the OBHE but we haven’t got much time today so I will give that a miss today and I think most of you will know who we are anyway. One thing I will do is plug our conference on the 28th January in London. It is our third joint MOOCs conference in association with University of London International Programmes and the Leadership foundation. There are still places available but there won’t be for long, so please sign up if you wish to participate, I think registration is via the leadership foundation website. As Judith said this session is TNE and global citizenship and I was thinking about what was intended by that. Global citizenship I think has to represent some sort of ideal because it doesn’t actual exist. As the former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau (probably counted as the most famous Prime Minister) described himself as back in the 1970’s as a “citixen du monde” but it doesn’t exist then and doesn’t exist now there is no such thing as global citizenship and we’re not even close. Although my organisation is called OBHE we are a long way from a borderless world. My wife’s nephew in Delhi was meant to spend Christmas with us in London this year but the UK Border Agency had different ideas about that. Every single time we run a conference in the UK there are people in a number of countries, Iran to India for example who want to come but are unable to obtain the paperwork. So I think borderless is either a bad joke or a worthy aspiration. For the purposes of this conference we will stick with a worthy aspiration angle. Producing graduates who are global citizens is often given if you look on the websites of universities who are doing alliances and partnerships, is given as the rationale for universities who undertake initiatives such as international partnerships and networks. Global citizenship is a short hand for the multiple identities and the skills-sets which are created by the internationalisation of HE and in terms of the vehicles of getting there is international student mobility (as the Minister said) is one and TNE is another vehicle. So they are two direct vehicles for global citizenship.

As Judith said I was going to mention the Horizon Scan that is the cover, [Presentation slide 3] we published it in the autumn. It was published by the International Unit represented

by Dan Shah and the Leadership Foundation, freely available on any of our websites. It, of course, contains a TNE section. It addresses TNE in the context of the overall demand for HE globally. It addresses it as a sort of parallel counter current to international student mobility, with mobility on one hand and TNE on the other.

On overall demand the British Council message in both their 2012 and 2013 “shape of things to come” reports is that it is still increasing but the rate of increase is slowing and is projected to continue to slow. The Council also believes that the demand for qualifications from the main HE exporters like the UK will hold up in the foreseeable future. That’s the case even as the UK’s share of the global market continues gradually to decrease, which is basically not a disaster it is just a consequence of more exporters being in the game. Within the context of overall demand you have the dynamics of international mobility and TNE. We don’t think the growth of international student mobility will keep pace with the growth and overall demand of HE worldwide. That is basically for two reasons; one is the increase of domestic capacity, HE capacity in some countries and China is a very good example of this. The other is the growth of TNE options in many countries including online options. Now there are exceptions to this, India is probably an exception to this as it shows less ability to develop domestic capacity and it has demographic projections you know the numbers are going to keep going up which probably means a lot more Indian students looking for education abroad in the decade to come while there well may be fewer Chinese. Furthermore mobility to traditional exporters like the UK and USA may be challenged by more mobility within regions, intra-regional mobility. Asian governments may want western branch campuses in their territories but they seem to want to fill them with students from their own regions. If you want a case study to watch in this regard it’s the current economic integration project of the ASEAN block which is modelled very much on European integration. It has milestones in 2015 and 2020 in regard to internal labour mobility and regional integration. It might turn out to have negligible impact on student recruitment back here to the UK from those markets but you never know it may depend on what the Indonesian nation decide to do and as the Minister said it is a big and unused market at the moment with the Indonesian university age population is going to keep increasing.

Intraregional mobility or activity I should say figured in our last report on International Branch Campuses which is now just about two years old. We determined at the time there is a lot more south to south activity especially going on for example Indian campuses in Mauritius and Ugandan campuses in Kenya and Tanzania. More recently there has been news and rumours of Malaysian campuses in China, Chinese in Malaysia, Chinese in Egypt, India in Malaysia, India in Ethiopia and the list goes on. With all this intraregional activity it may mean Asian and African markets for traditional exporters like the UK will diminish unless of course they are accessed via TNE but that still means less mobility. In a nutshell it’s hard to say but it may be that there are fewer reasons in the future for students to travel or travel very far. It is also worth keeping in mind that only 2% of HE students in the world have studied in countries other than their own in the last decade and has been quite a consistent 2% figure. So even though there is demand out there it is and only a small proportion of what goes on domestically.

So what about the future of TNE? I think the growth of TNE provision might outstrip the growth of international student mobility. Everyone, (including the Minister towards the end of his talk) whenever they get the chance say there are more international students studying for UK qualifications outside the UK than in it 571,000 versus 435,00 at last count. Those figures are a little bit old now. The British Council website used to say “UK qualifications are now delivered in 223 countries outside the UK” which was very excellent because anyone could get a laugh by pointing out the fact UK TNE was so successful it provided it in more countries than there are actually in the world. I’m sorry, I’m going to stop using that one day but they have actually changed the website to read “UK qualifications are now delivered in 223 countries and territories outside the UK”, so they have adapted. The programme for British Council conference in December said “TNE in UK is the largest international segment with the highest rate of growth”. Certainly UK TNE is growing but whether it is already the largest segment is not clear. As many of you will

know the HESA statistics on TNE are causing nothing but problems, they exaggerate the extent of UK TNE by a huge margin caused by the accounting problem alluded to by the Minister called the Oxford Brookes affect which I am not going to explain because Nigel Healey from Nottingham Trent is here and will probably address this in the next session.

In any case the direction of travel it favours TNE as a long term strategy for universities.

But as Nigel pointed out in a really excellent article last summer, the growth of TNE does not mean that TNE is going to outstrip the incoming international students as revenue for your universities anytime soon, a lot of them are part time they don’t pay as much. His conclusion was that TNE is not the answer to all of our prayers.

That’s not a great slide, it is the second “shape of things to come” report from the British Council, published in September. It is an investigation into the most promising TNE markets. It has some interesting stuff in it. I don’t know if you can see that in the back, that is the summary table of where TNE opportunities lie for UK universities. They arrived at these by looking at three board factors that they called policy environment (including national strategy, quality assurance stuff), market or demand factors and by assessing the maturity level of internationalisation in the host countries. It is interesting; it may be surprising to see two gulf countries in the top categories. I mean they are certainly established in terms of international branch campus business. But as we pointed out in our branch campus report two years ago that kind of activity is shifting to the East and South East Asia. It may be surprising not to see Ghana in the list because it is apparently the seventh largest existing TNE market for UK universities.

If you want to know the likely impact of TNE growth on patterns of international student mobility and recruitment to your universities then you need to have some kind of data on how much overlap there is between the traditional recruiting markets and TNE markets.

Do the TNE cut into the mobility markets like a zero sum game or are we talking about largely different cohorts of students for each kind of pathway? The evidence on this is very sketchy so far, you people may know about stuff that I don’t know about. There is some sketchy evidence from i-graduate student pulse survey. Student pulse is an international survey that looks at the factors that influence prospective international students in their decisions before they even start studying. Perceptions of individual universities and countries this is based on types of study. This chart relates dates back to 2008, so apologies it is old. I-graduate are going to reinstate this mobility versus TNE question. So just under 10,000 students answered the question “what study options are you considering?” I think what it shows is at that point in time prospective Chinese students were by far the most likely to envisage traditional overseas option and that TNE was not a popular option for them. But if you look at the three countries on the right, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan traditional overseas study was an option for half of them or more but even more of them were considering TNE. So what it seems to suggest is that international student mobility versus TNE it is not a zero sum game for them by which I mean the same cohort of students were considering both types of pathways. We may have better evidence of this from our colleague in Crete named Vangelis who was looking at this kind of question on a country by country basis. Unsurprisingly his work which we hope to publish soon suggests that the TNE versus mobility relationship is dependent on the specific characteristics of each country involved on both importing and exporting side.

Do MOOCs belong in a TNE conference? Well the Minister mentioned them and yesterday Marguerite Dennis from Boston talked about MOOCs and TNE here. HESA includes online and distance learning in its TNE stats but you could argue that MOOCs in their original form- free and open are not TNE if your TNE by definition leads to a specific qualification because the original idea of MOOCs is that they don’t. The most exciting thing about the world of MOOCs is the business model experimentation going on such that they are becoming credit bearing and being brought into degree programmes on a course by course basis. There is even a MOOCs Master’s degree on the Udacity platform from Georgia Tech for $6,000 or $7,000 US dollars which is around a quarter of the regular cost. Some of these are going to be representing larger and cheaper versions of normal online degrees which is a form of TNE. Although I think the rate of student mobility may gently decrease, I think it is for the reasons already discussed and I don’t really think MOOCs are going to be a major factor in this. We also don’t think MOOCs will

have a negative impact on existing forms of TNE. There has already been some writing on this, about MOOCs undermining the branch campus model which is a possibility. There is also the argument, and I think the Minister alluded to this, that universities with branch campuses may see MOOCs as a pathway as new recruitment to their courses. I know for a fact that some of the universities see it as marketing an international profile and recruit from there. I think I am going to leave it there, Judith wants me to stop.

Judith Lamie: Our second speaker is Professor Rebecca Hughes. Professor Hughes has got a new role as Director of International Higher Education at the British Council.

Prior to this she was at the University of Sheffield as their first Vice Chancellor for internationalisation and also has extensive experience internationally overseas particularly in Malaysia and China.

Professor Rebecca Hughes Thank you Judith, thank you everybody and I think particularly thank you to Regent’s and Aldwyn for their welcome today and I think this is a really wonderful context to be having this discussion with an innovative new form of university delivery and in the context of their long term partners. I think that is a very interesting demonstration of our diversity of TNE in Britain. I would also like to thank Bill very much for both alluding to the scale of the British Council’s ambition for UK TNE, thank you Bill and also our responsiveness to feedback I thought that was really helpful.

We are embedded in many ways the British Council in TNE as many of you will know both from the sort of mothership or hub in Britain and also in the 110 offices around the world which support the transnational efforts of Britain and also take very seriously TNE as a bilateral effort. If it is something that’s going to happen and succeed it has to happen in terms of a balanced partnership and something that benefits both for the sending and receiving countries. That is at the heart of the philosophy of the way we take things forward as you can see in many diverse ways institutions reflect that in many diverse ways.

I shall say a few words about myself, before I do a canter through my slides. This is not sheer egotism, although it is lovely to talk about myself. I bring I suppose with me three lenses to the processes of TNE at this point in my career. I started very recently at the British Council (1st of December, just before Christmas) it is a fascinating role for me as I move from an institutional perspective in my last role which was as Judith said as first Provost Vice Chancellor International at a Russell Group University and helped that University in its thinking about TNE. After that I worked very closely with Professor Christine Ennew (who asked a question of the Minister) on the development of the Nottingham campuses in China and Malaysia. I suppose I have seen TNE close up and I’m starting at this point to be thinking about where we are with it, we have of course the excellent reports from the OBHE, the work that Biz is doing and the work that the British Council is doing on this. But I am particularly interested in how we can work together to evolve the philosophy. I hold the philosophy that international higher education is a good thing, it’s a public good in a sense and it is a fantastic opportunity for individuals, institutions and for countries. I have caveats about it in the sense that we talk about global citizenship and we talked about the drivers of TNE, the speed of its development and so on. This is heady stuff, it sounds terribly exciting, and it is very exciting but we do have to remember that it is only a small minority of people who are privileged to be participating in this and if we are regarding this as something essential for the development of our capacity to understand one another and our capacity to share the privilege of being able to create knowledge and share scholarly ideas, then I think we have to be looking at what we can be doing to expand that. Not purely in terms of financial drivers but also in terms of the philosophy that (it should be and I know in many cases does) underpin, perhaps, if we look at it as the evolution of TNE to very mature one. I think there is huge opportunity for that in the UK and with our partners.

To do that well you have to be in it for the long-term and the Minister as we know put students at the heart of the system and I fully agree with that in terms of how we should be handling ourselves in relation to international education. To the best of our capacity

it has to be something that we are doing that is moving both ourselves on in terms of our understanding of what international education actually means, what it does to us as academics, as institutions and what responsibilities we have in terms of the student body who are participating in this. So although I think global citizenship is a wonderful banner, I would urge us all to embark on thinking carefully about what we are doing and how we are opening many new windows on the world in doing this. I do think we are also in terms of being privileged to do that should also be thinking in a very nuanced way, a very careful way as to the responsibilities that go with TNE. Of course being part of a large complex organisation I am also going to plug my reports and so on. You will have access to these slides online and I don’t want to spend too long on them as I think it is a great opportunity for us we have this fantastic panel and fantastic audience and I think we can generate a lot of interesting debate and conversation around this. But just for those of you that are not so familiar with the related set of reports that the British Council has done over the last few years on TNE, I shall give you a few snippets on that. I shall perhaps focus particularly on the forthcoming one which we are going to launch at Going Global in Miami as I think it relates directly to our topic here today which is the impact of TNE on the host country. So we have had reference to it in Bill’s report and also from that you will see at the macro level we are making the point that the global good of HE goes hand in hand with the development of other factors in the nations that are involved in it. I am not going to go through this in detail as you are all able to read the reports and find them on our website.

As Bill pointed out, there is going to be a slowing down in this and again I am not going to go into detail because the reports are available to read online. You will see there are some stable lines in there but the demographic are suggesting, overall in the flows of enrolment, the demographics suggest there will be a slowing down [Presentation slide 5]. For those of you who are taking photographs of it, I believe the slides are or will be available online.

The middle study was looking more at trying to develop an opportunity matrix for those of you interested in taking forward TNE. Just to go back to the challenge from Bill about Ghana; we were looking at a balanced portfolio of countries, we looked at 25 countries in this study and we wanted also to be sure that we had countries where we were able to get enough data to make some sensible conclusions. So the same kind of information being looked at in different locations. So this is the second of the reports.

I think this is the slide I am most interested in talking about briefly before moving to my conclusion. What I think is happening with TNE and what we see some evidence for is that were moving towards a much more sophisticated view of what happens in TNE. I think it is very important for us to start from thinking “Why are we doing this?” not “where should we go and do this?” I think we should then move onto “what is it that our partners want us to be doing in this country?” Then I think it is the “where?” The local context where the learning actually takes place that is incredibly important.

David Olsen an ex- academic colleague of mine who worked on literacy and organisational behaviour had a wonderful line that “all learning is local”. So the idea that we are simply taking British education and relocating it in a simple way and delivering it in another part of the world and we are not changed by it and that it has no flexibility to change in that context is actually a very unrealistic model. So we need to be thinking about what is it doing in that country and what is supporting it and what are the risks and benefits that go with that? I’m very interested in it as a tool for capacity building I think there are very interesting conversations to be had there. I think there is a related, very important question about the capacity of systems to develop both indigenous systems of assurance and knowledge. I think there are very interesting questions about the capacity of the academic community to support the development of new young academic who can function in these different quite hybrid environments which I suspect will inevitably be a combination of online learning, some MOOCs some fly-in faculty and so on. Very different concepts for teaching and learning and very challenging for some students but also challenging for faculty so we need to think how we can grow the academic community to actually deliver high quality TNE in these settings.

Why does it matter? Well I think we all know that if you dig a little bit behind the idea of global citizenship and the fact that it must just be happening, of course British students in particular are very reluctant to go abroad and like myself are very bad at learning languages. This is reflected in the mirror held up to us and you can get similar information from many sources by the CBI with their concerns about the capacity of intercultural skills and language of UK students [Presentation slide 9]. So we should be thinking how do we bridge that gap from the high level dramatic statements about global citizenship to the barriers and the problems that we have, which is perhaps the reluctance of students to engage in it, reference there to perhaps very large cultural monolingual grouping there, so are you actually getting the benefits you could get from the mobility if you are just in a very large group doing the same subject. Lots and lots of questions there I think as to how we collectively as institutions engaged in supporting TNE can actually really make it make that difference for ourselves and for the students involved in it.

This I think is my final slide, [Presentation slide 10] we have a new website the Study Work Create website which is encouraging the outward mobility opportunities from the British Council being a large cultural organisation, looking not only at study opportunities but also opportunities for people to go and participate in cultural ways as well. We will be, as I say, finishing this piece of work on the impact of TNE in host countries in time for us to be talking about it for those who are coming to Miami for Going Global and I look forward to carrying on the conversation there.

Judith Lamie: Our final presenter today is Daniel Shah hew is the Assistants Director at the UK HE Intentional Unit in charge of policy and prior to this Dan worked at the Russell Group on European and immigration and international competitiveness.

Daniel Shah Thank you very much Judith, thank you for arranging the sunshine as promised. Thank you very much to Aldwyn and Regent’s University London for bringing us together and to Bill and Rebecca for giving such a comprehensive overview. So I will confine myself to some very brief comments about the policy context for TNE, highlight some of the salient features that come out of the research that has been so eloquently sketched for us and try and share some ideas about how they might relate to global citizenship and hopefully spark some interesting questions.

I should probably do my own due diligence and say a tiny bit about where were coming from. The UK HE International Unit is the sector body that is charged with driving opportunities across the whole range of internationalisation for UK HE institutions. So in representing the sector we influence policies, we deliver programmes, we identify opportunities and communicate them to the sector and engage with international partners. So my approach is very much from the point of view of the sector as well as that of macro policy makers which I think David Willetts sketched out this morning. So international higher education is increasing in salience for these policy makers if we want to understand where they come from, both in terms of the UK where we are starting from an opportunity of great strength.

The UK HE sector is arguably second in the world at least in terms of international students it recruits, second in the world in terms of the quality of our research outputs and as a success story, in leading transnational education even if it’s hard to count if we’re first second or third. It is also a priority for a number of emerging economies who are choosing to invest the dividends of growth in HE research and innovation both domestically and linking into international environments. That policy salience translates into support, for example, the Minister highlighted the governments industrial strategy; international education has been chosen as one of eleven areas for the government to focus on primarily to drive growth, joining those more predictable areas such as aerospace or advance manufacturing. The government has convened an international education council to take this forward and the International Unit represents the sector on there. You can see why this is important for the UK as education is probably the world’s second largest trade up sector if you include public provision but it also can translate

into support for the sector itself. So we work very closely with UKTI education and we are very lucky to host HE Global an integrated advice and guidance service that brings together in one site all the sources of support working with partners from the British Council, UKTI, foreign office and the Department for Business Innovation and skills.

The policy landscape also can mean support often in the form of incentives to build capacity in host nations keen to connect themselves to global HE and to drive forward the quality as well as the scale of their own provision. But it is also important that the premia which I think is accorded to UK qualifications and education which is reflected in the wages of graduates when they return home and in the numbers wanting to take these qualifications is recognised in the formal qualification recognition and in the regulatory systems of the host countries. And I think that makes a huge difference between those countries which have high demand but were not in the top two tiers of market opportunities shown in Rebecca’s slide.

But I think there is also an interest from the UK as a home or source country in quality assurance. I think we have collective interest as a sector in the reputation that we have (rightly deserved I believe) for quality. Even the perception, mistakenly that this was not the case could cause damage to the whole sector and that’s why the International Unit with the QAA is consulting the sector on what could strengthen quality assurance in TNE. It’s an open consultation in both senses that we would be very keen to hear views from the sector especially from those of you here today and also open in the sense it is a 12 week consultation which only opened just before Christmas. So please do share your views.

The one other point I would like to make about policy is what it means for institutions. It effects the link between the home and host vision and mission. UK HEI are going to aim to provide the mission and the content that fits with their social visions. They are created as institutions primarily that share or that generate and transmit new knowledge but they also have to, in order to make their TNE ventures a success, fit with the needs and the demands of their host countries. That can be shaped by the legal frameworks and regulations imposed as operating conditions but also by the more practical requirements to partner conditions of finance and the way in which they choose to govern themselves.

I think governance is going to be quite important to how our universities ensure that the TNE delivery, delivers their purposes as well as the host.

Bill and Rebecca highlighted a wide range of sources of information and also what we don’t yet know about TNE. I will just pick out a few which I think are important in the policy context. One is that this is very diverse in the UK sector around about 75% of UK HEI engage in TNE of some kind but of course a very wide range of modalities. I think it is part of our strength of the sector that it is very diverse and David Willetts’ talked this morning about Regent’s being one of those contributing to the greater diversity of the UK Sector.

The numbers are very large although there is the big caveat about the ACCA accountancy qualifications. Nevertheless there is strong potential for growth the demography and demographics of the wider world mean there are going to be opportunities outside the UK which may well grow faster than the rate at which students are actually able to come to the UK. The modes of delivery are not just diverse but the majority of delivery is through partnerships, again Regent’s is one example but there is a wide range of universities including some which I know are speaking this afternoon. It’s important to stress that the overseas branch campuses numerically are quite a small number of those that turn up on the HESA data although they are extremely high profile and unlike many of the other students they are much more likely to be full time. Many of the others are part time students and this creates some of the challenges about providing the parity of provision that you would aspire to have in the UK not only that the students who are doing TNE may be different from the ones that choose or be able to come here but also wouldn’t need to fit in some respects in the local context.

The UK has an advantage in the provision in English which we really can’t claim any credit for. However, I also think we have a first mover advantage, not least in having started TNE arguably over 150 years ago. I think it is worth highlighting that policy on the global scale is highly differentiated by the different markets. As Bill pointed out overseas branch

campuses are quite established in some gulf centres in the Middle East and increasingly moving towards East Asia. I think how they operate in South Asia is going to be very much in the hands of the policy makers themselves and increasingly that may not just be at national level it may be at state level for example within India or it may be at regional level for example with increasing developments around ASEAN. It is worth bearing in mind not only that regional actors can be relevant to us in the UK, so the EU is increasingly interested in what it would call European Education in the world, so outside of the EU. But also that the UK is host as well as a home country for TNE, including institutions that are here in London.

I think it is worth mentioning, very quickly, that income generation is unlikely to be the primary motive, it is going to take a very long time for institutions. It is part of the point of TNE to be able to deliver the UK quality HE experience at a lower cost to the consumer which is why there are often very different consumers to those that would be fully mobile.

But the transnational provision will fit within an institutions wider strategy. It will build its reputation as a global player in the UK; it will build a brand reputation in important growing markets as well as relationships with students with businesses and with other academic partners both in research and in teaching and learning. It is in those relationships understanding and trust which need to be long term which need to be there for mutual understanding and the long haul but can deliver much wider benefits than those that are going to be counted in the simple balance sheets that we can get aggregate data for at the moment out of HESA. I want to try and quickly connect this to global citizenship and hopefully tee up some questions which I very much look forward to. I think the benefits have been very well rehearsed and we will learn more about them at Going Global. But I think it is worth highlighting that global citizenship could be a complex if not even contested term and the question to ask is for whom? Is it the global citizens who are benefiting? So we know that students gain in terms of employability, in terms of wage premia from quality HE, they are connected to international ideas, international networks have a more global perspective.

Is there a normative sense in which students are more likely to become global citizens because they benefitted from TNE? We know that those who have been to HE are more likely to vote, more likely to volunteer, more likely to be tolerant. I don’t think we have concrete evidence that this applies to TNE yet. By analogy, does global citizenship apply to countries-for the receiving countries? Yes they benefit in terms of capacity building. The major provision of HE is not going to be through TNE in some of these massive growth markets. But the presence of transnational partners who are globally connected whether it is through these airline alliance partnerships or through the mobility of students is going to integrate their own HE systems into the international market, it is going to improve the absorptive capacity of their domestic HE systems. In a sense, very established UK institutions (Regent’s is over 100 years old now) can be an insurgent in a new country which could drive increases in innovation or in quality.

There is also a sense in which there may be global citizenship in the normative sense developed within HE communities in host countries through working in partnership with those that have an academic culture of free and open enquiry, of rigour, of if you like propriety and also in creating out of that enquiry entrepreneurial graduates, those who are more accustomed to having to find out the answers themselves rather than rope learning.

Could it be that there is also a contribution to the global citizenship of the academic community employed in our home institutions by creating opportunities for them to spend time working in other cultures in other environments. And for the students in the UK to gain outward mobility experience either to work or to study for example at the branch for someone who is going to spend most of their time in the city of Nottingham themselves. In the same way that citizenship as a normal concept applied to a resident of city or country implies rights and responsibilities. Is there some normative element on the responsibilities for host countries in enjoying these benefits that they do create regulatory systems that allow quality TNE to flourish that look after the interest of their students but still allow the benefits of the UK HE system which is presumably what they desire in the first place.

For the UK and others (Australia, US, Canada, ascending countries) increasingly southern partners are ascending countries. Yes there are benefits in terms of income, benefits in terms of soft power but there are potentially massive benefits and arguably responsibilities as good neighbours, if not citizens in a global context. In building sustainable international development, in contributing to improving the livelihoods of people in less developed countries through HE and research and innovation and global collaboration perhaps they will achieve the greatest influence by sharing knowledge by being good neighbours.

Lastly, is there a sense by analogy with corporate citizenship that applies to universities, to HEI themselves? I think it is a truism that UK HEI are global enterprises in their own right but they are also global enterprises like I said with a social mission. For most UK HEI, their purpose is to share and create knowledge. I would be interested in people’s views when we come to questions whether there is a normative sense of global citizenship that applies here.

That we are as a sector and institutions are global citizens if we carry that mission globally.

So if we look after our students, if we provide and can demonstrate that we provide quality HE, if we can really build partnerships and not even be perceived let alone only actually be a colonial presence in TNE in setting up a physical footprint. Yes that may mean doing some due diligence in our choice of partners but it’s those partnerships that will build the long term relationships which will drive our entire HE international strategies, not just TNE. Is there a sense in delivering these benefits including international developments increasingly in a wider number of countries that the university sector might be a better global citizen, if it succeeds and if policy makers empower it to succeed? We have produced a couple of publications which I hope might be helpful they are all on our website. I shouldn’t lose the opportunity to plug the Horizon Scan report that Bill wrote for us as well as the excellent material the British Council has produced and also some more practical technical guides IU have produced and are all on our website. Thank you very much.

Questions from the floor [Audience question]The Minister started off by talking about how TNE needs to be student focussed. You have talked a great deal about that. My experience has been that we often forget about faculty. I find lack of faculty internationalisation and globalisation to be very much a mitigating factor for delivering a truly global content to our students. I haven’t heard anything this morning (Rebecca briefly mentioned some research capacity) about internationalisation and globalisation at the faculty level?

Rebecca Hughes: Yes I did allude to it briefly and it wasn’t so much on the research side when I was talking about academics. Perhaps it’s a false friend in terms of US English and British English, I meant faculty. When I’m talking about one of the biggest issues I think for developing successful high quality TNE that is the quality of the faculty and the quantity of the faculty because when you look at the growth numbers and you do the maths you start thinking “gosh, how many sociology professors or whatever are we going to need, to be delivering if we don’t change the mode of doing things?” I think that is one risk. The second risk, and perhaps a more hidden risk because it is not so much about the maths but something more qualitative, is about how well prepared any faculty members are for the demands of multicultural blended learning delivered in ways that we probably can’t yet imagine in terms of how we meet the demands of these students in 5-10 years’ time.

I think that is a hidden problem and I would be very interested to hear what other people are doing to help with that.

Daniel Shah: Very briefly, I would highlight the UK academia is highly internationalised in its faculty in other respects. So I think 47% (nearly half) of all academic research publications have an international co-author and is continuing to rise. Around 24% of academic staff in the UK are from outside the UK which is actually higher than the proportion of students studying in the UK that come from outside which is about 16%. In terms of TNE in particular, I think you’re right, it is not as internationalised from the UK side at least but there is a number of challenges that we probably have to differentiate. Some of them are going to be about the domestic regulatory regimes and HE systems in the host countries.

If for example, it is much harder for overseas faculty based in a country campus or working in partnership to access research funding there, it makes it harder to get academics (most

of whom who want to be both teaching and research active) to go out over there.

I think it is partly to do with building up the cohort and also the awareness of the cohort of the academic peers that they would be working alongside if transnational education is building up capacity in a country. I think there is also challenges to universities and I think we have got speakers from a couple of universities later on this morning who can probably talk about how they have managed that in their particular TNE models.

Judith Lamie- Thank you Dan. That is something we can explore later in the breakout sessions. Another question?

Paul Randolph, Course Leader mediation Skills Course Regent’s University London We have had increasing of number of students flying in from far flung places such as Brazil, India, Sri Lanka, South Africa and Russia. As a result of that we are taking our course abroad, we have got a course in Singapore later this year. One of the questions I am invariably asked both by the students who are coming here to take the course and by the people with whom I am discussing possibly taking the course abroad. Is there any possibility of assistance in funding? I now click the forward button and put that question to the panel.

Bill Lawton- I don’t know the answer in the UK context specifically. But one of the things we did discuss in our Horizon Scan report was the possibility of asking the question of which jurisdiction is going to be the earliest to recognise new types of qualifications that might not necessarily be degree pathways and to put up some public money for that. When you listen to the UK Minister we had here this morning, he actually in principle or in theory he is very much in favour of new ways of going forward in the public sector. I realise I am kind of skirting around your question a little bit but I do not know the answer.

Sir Cyril Taylor, Chairman, American Institute for Foreign Study (AIFS): Don’t you think there are things in Britain we can learn from the American system? The credit transfer system in the US and the regional accrediting bodies ensures a good standard of education even within the two years at community colleges. Students can then transfer from the foothills in San Jose to UC Berkeley- so that’s an issue.

The Vice Chancellor of one University was recently telling me that 25% of his recent graduates still do not have jobs and the reason is there is not enough focus in our universities on technologically useful subjects. There is currently a shortage of 100,000 IT workers in the country, isn’t that something we should be addressing?

The final point is at Richmond we have a very good internship programme where students work without salary, learning how to do the job, but the UK Border Agency say even though they are not being paid they can only work half the time they have to study the other half.

Now is that right?

Professor Rebecca Hughes: I was hoping to get through this panel without anybody mentioning visas too much. Genuinely, I am not going to tackle the visa question. I think there are so many interrelated issues around what’s been going on with our visas recently that clearly we are all focusing so much on it that with almost every change that happens we are very nervous about the impact of it. There are the two subgroups of the internationalisation committee that Willetts has alluded to with the new strategy there. One of them is looking at barriers to export of education generally and might be talking about some of the things we have been talking about here today. There is a whole separate working group looking at the visa issue so I think it is being taken quite seriously and a good representation of that, of many, many different small and large providers on that. So I am going to duck that one.

Of the other points you make, I am very interested in what you say when you start comparing educational system, system to system. There is a very interesting Think Tank in America, NCHEMS Think Tank, that does work on that system level work. I wouldn’t like

to say, perhaps Dan would like to talk about the pros and cons of academic autonomy and institution autonomy which I think is a huge strength of the UK. But there are also pros and cons to that. So perhaps I shall just duck that and hand that one over to Dan. Daniel Shah- I think you are quite right the relationship between HE systems in different countries doesn’t just affect TNE it also affects mobility. The US credit system would not be the same as many HE systems in a large number of other countries. We are part of the Bologna system process so we have a 3 cycle degree; we have ECTS credits which are supposed to facilitate mobility within the UK HE area. I do think it is a really interesting point that we have talked about international mobility. I am not a domestic policy leader so I should probably be cautious about what I say domestically apart from to say there are other kinds of mobility that matter as well; both between institutions and between other forms of education and kinds of education in terms of improving the fluidity of access in a socially just mass HE system. Also between HE and industry public and third sectors in terms of employability and in terms of social benefit. There is a very complicated array of schemes in place to support that, maybe we could go over that in the coffee break.

I wanted to quickly say something about the employability of graduates. While obviously graduate unemployment is always going to be a concern you are still much less likely to be unemployed in the UK if you are a graduate than if you weren’t. It remains the case across most of the data I have seen from the OECD that HE is a good net investment in terms of both private and public returns. And I don’t think we should push too far on relating the subject of the degree to the employability skills. I think there are lots of skills that are going to be important to students. Especially as they have increasingly portfolio careers, increasingly international careers which can be learnt from a number of subjects including non-technical ones. Such as the ability to work in global teams, having been exposed to those peers or the ability to communicate clearly or the ability to analyse evidence and solve problems which I don’t think are restrictive to the stem subjects although of course it is vitally important for the success of all those subjects in the UK that we remain open and are seen to be open in terms of our immigration policy to all of those that want to study here.

I think it is particularly welcomed that the Minster took the time today to stress yet again that there isn’t a cap on the number of legitimate international students who can come to study here. There also isn’t a limit on the number who can work here in graduate jobs after they have graduated. I do agree there are some details around internships but it is my understanding that in the holidays they can work 40 hours a week.

Judith Lamie: Thank you Dan. Well our time is up unfortunately, it’s just gone 11’o clock the sun is out and it is only going to be out until about 11:15 for the photo, so can you join me in a final thank you to the panel and I will see you all outside.

Panel: TNE Higher Education Institutions’ Perspective Introduced and chaired by Professor Toni Hilton Dean of Business and Management Faculty, Regent’s University London Professor Christine Ennew Pro Vice Chancellor and Provost, University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus Professor Nigel Healey Pro Vice Chancellor (International) Nottingham Trent University Professor Alex Hughes Pro Vice Chancellor External, University of Kent Brett Berquist Executive Director, Office of Study Abroad Michigan State University

Professor Toni Hilton: Hello, welcome back from coffee. I am just going to make a brief introduction to this session which is the HEI perspective (Institution perspective) of TNE. About 20 or 30 years ago, a key theme running throughout western business was offshoring which you will know is the transferring of manufacturing from the high cost home market to a low cost developing market where labour costs were considerably cheaper. The services sector followed particularly financial services and I think most of us will be familiar with those offshore call centres. However the current trend is back shoring, bringing customer service centres and manufacturing back to the home market.

Experience demonstrated that offshoring is more complex and expensive than it seemed at first and in practice it became a much less attractive option or at least one where new knowledge, skills and resources needed to be developed. It is harder to manage operations at a distance, global logistics firms were born and customer empathy and cultural appreciation programmes (for better or worse) were required.

And of course the other big impact was that labour costs in the local markets rose.

Now I am not suggesting that the trend is all one way to back shoring but the idea is that there is a much more complex market out there and I think in many respects that is reflected by the global HE market as well.

In that, about 20 years ago China and other developing markets were doing their own off-shoring and their students came to the UK and the US. Indeed at this stage it was their brightest and their best, now China and others have invested heavily into capability and capacity development. Now, not only do they seek to keep their best students, but many have become major global competitors that teach in English and whose quality, credibility and influence grows daily. China and other markets are effectively back shoring. To compete we need to go offshore to their markets now and on their terms. These are no longer the under developed markets that they were and in many cases they are managed quite overtly by governments who seek to build their economies through planned and strategic investment in HE. So while TNE represents opportunities for us, there is a need to manage the complexity and the turbulence in those markets very carefully.

I am delighted therefore to be chairing this panel of very illustrious experts who are going to help us through some of those challenges and certainly raise some of them and give us the opportunity to discuss them. We are actually siting in the order of presentation so I shall first call upon Professor Nigel Healey.

Professor Nigel Healey, Provost Vice Chancellor for International at Nottingham Trent University Thank you very much Toni and thank you for the invitation to be part of your conference.

We have worked as a panel to try and coordinate, so that I am going to begin with an overview then we are kind of going to zoom in from general to specific by looking at case studies from 3 different universities. While we coordinated very closely when I actually saw the conference programme I almost died, seeing that Daniel Shah, Bill Lawton and Rebecca Hughes were up beforehand I thought they would probably take all my thunder and I’d have nothing left to say. However they were kind enough not to do that and leave me a few openings. I am also aware that we have people in the audience from other parts of the world, particularly the US where some of the terminology around TNE is less familiar so I might dwell on that when we start off.

We were lucky enough to have the keynote by the Minister this morning, he is well known for his support of international HE generally and of TNE or offshore education particularly.

This is a quote from a speech he gave previously. He certainly sees great opportunities for British universities in this domain. What I want to do is look at how big this market currently is and what the prospects of growth are and in that sense really flesh out some of the things Bill Lawton and Daniel Shah both talked about.

When we talk about TNE, what we mean is essentially where the university or degree awarding body is somewhere else other than the country in which the learner is located.

There are various formal definitions, you will have these slides later and will be there if you find that useful.[Presentation slide 3] David Willetts used phrases today like ‘validating’ and ‘franchising’, all of these kinds of things which may not be familiar to you.

Some of you may know the GATS terminology for International Trade and Services, it distinguishes the various ways you can sell services to foreign consumers and they have these modes- modes 1, 2, 3 and 4. [Presentation slide 4] It is a different way of thinking about what are the different options for TNE. One is programme mobility- it could be the programme that’s mobile so you sell your degree because it is online or distance learning to a foreign consumer. The second mode is what we conventionally call export education- the students have to come to the university, this is not TNE. Then we have got commercial presence- this is where really you provide your education through a physical location, a commercial location, whether that’s a franchise partner or whether that’s an offshore campus. The last is the so called presence of natural persons- which sounds very soviet, this is what you call in many industries as fly in and fly out. Many universities operate with small exec Ed centres in other countries or may be rented rooms in a hotel and send the faculty there to do MBA teaching for a few days for example. So this is one way of thinking about the different varieties of TNE. One of the problems and Bill’s organisation OBHE (Observatory for Borderless Higher Education) is something I am almost checking every day to see if there is something new because there are very few people who are systematically studying what is happening in TNE. Most countries don’t record data on it. Some host countries record data on the students in their country enrolled with foreign providers. They can only do that though when the foreign provider is physically there they obviously don’t capture distance learning because there is no way to capture that. The UK and Australia are a little bit different; both countries require that universities report overseas enrolments. But as we will see in a second they are very partial and can be potentially misleading.

So if we look at the UK, there is an organisation called HESA- Higher Education Statistics Agency. What it does, is says to universities tell us how many students you have registered offshore and every year we have to send in a return. What this return shows is that the number of students studying wholly offshore (which is the blue bar) has rapidly outgrown the number of students enrolled on campuses here (the red line).

[Presentation slide 6] So the red bar is international students i.e. non UK domiciled students registered here and the blue bar is the international students studying offshore.

Although there has been some recent hysterical rather breathless headlines about how big this has now become, actually it’s the case that since 2008 we have had more

students offshore than onshore. This was a headline from the Guardian recently “surge in students studying offshore”. [Presentation slide 7] The data; now I won’t bore you with the data because you can see the numbers, they look very significant about more than half a million students studying wholly offshore.

[Presentation slide 8] They are classified in different ways so offshore campus actually those numbers are relatively small. By listening to Christine Ennew today from Nottingham, you are really listening to someone who is responsible for half of this (or more than half of this) because Nottingham has two campuses, Liverpool has one in China and Heriot- Watt University has a big one in Dubai and that is the bulk of that. It is a handful of universities.

Distance learning is quite significant. Then we have got overseas partner institutions- if we just focus on that, that’s the one that has been explosively growing. When you look at it, it almost looks implausible as we went from 29,000 one year to a 197,000 the next.

[Presentation slide 9]That is extraordinary. Several of our speakers touched on this, it’s the so- called Oxford Brookes affect. One university has a deal with an accounting body, so that when you enrol in Part 3 of this online accounting course you are automatically registered with Oxford Brookes and on completion of the accounting qualification you have got ten years to submit a dissertation to upgrade to a degree. What that means is, (you can see how this growth goes) every year more students enrol on the accounting qualification so that the number of students registered with Oxford Brookes increases and for the next ten years that’s going to gradually increase. [Presentation slide 10] This does mean that we have a big distortion in the statistics which we are all quite exasperated about which is that half the numbers are actually coming from this effect.

The other caveat that Bill also foreshadowed is that when we talk about TNE, yes it is growing, yes it is significant but in money terms it is really much less important.

[Presentation slide 11] Most of our international students here are full time, 85% are full time and paying fees in the order of 16,000 US dollars. Most TNE students are part time, we don’t know for sure because numbers are based on headcount but what we do know is all Oxford Brookes students are part time which is about half the numbers, and all the distance learning is part time so that’s another quarter. Many of these courses are very part time because you can take study holidays you can stop for several years and then just re-enter. An example as I’ve mentioned is the Oxford Brookes 10years to complete the dissertation. When I was at Leicester University we had a distance learning MBA and we allowed student up to 8 years to complete. At any one time we only had 3,000 or 4,000 students but less than half were active, most of them were taking breaks.

I think it is much less important. An example is one of the biggest offshore providers is Staffordshire University. They have about 15,000 students offshore and about 22,000 students onshore. The income from the onshore students is £105million and income from offshore is £2million. So the number of students is almost the same for offshore and onshore but the income stream is less than 2%.

So just to kind of set us up for the rest of this. I am very interested in thinking about where this is all going we have sort of defused the hyperbola but it is still a very important sector, where is it all going? I always come at these things as an economist, you know demand side, supply side put them together and what do you get? On the demand side I think we pretty well understand what’s going on here that what is driving the demand for TNE is essentially the demand for HE that can’t be satisfied domestically by the local sector. So all of the things equal, the demand will grow with income growth, (higher incomes) HE is a superior good people want more of it and the population in the 18-22 age group. It will decrease to the extent that the capacity of HE sector grows. [Presentation slide 12] When I started teaching many of my international students were from Hong Kong and Singapore, this was in the mid 80’s and 1990’s. That market has pretty much dried up now.

Hong Kong and Singapore have some of the best universities in the world; you only have to look at the world rankings of the National University of Singapore or Nanjing University of Technology as an example of this.

I have tended to think about this and the British Council has done some excellent research in this area as a kind of scales. [Presentation slide 13] Broadly speaking, the faster your population growth in the 18-22 bracket or the faster GDP growth you depress the bar and

push up the demand for TNE. The faster that the domestic HE capacity grows the more that will supress it and that is exactly what you see. So what you get is a pattern of demand for TNE changing overtime in different national markets. In China, the number of 18-22 year old students is dropping and their domestic HE capacity has dramatically expanded; it has increased three fold in ten years. So that market is changing and other markets are starting to become stronger growth.

To finish, one of the things I was very interested in is something much less well understood which the supply side is. We assume that if the demand is there that people rush in to fill that demand. But I have worked in universities my whole life and you just have to look at this picture, do these look like entrepreneurial, go getters that are rushing to meet unfilled demand? [Presentation slide 14] So a little project I set myself was to do a qualitative study and go and actually interview a number of senior decision makers in a rafter of different universities and just get a handle on what the supply side response was likely to be. On the plus side there are a lot of people, many of which are in this room and I’d like to count myself as one of them, that are champions of internationalism, internationalisation and international HE. A number of them emphasised the positive dimensions to this, (and I think Bill raised this) does transnational reach into a new market or does it simply cannibalise your existing market? I think on balance most people on the supply side think you open up a new market. You are able go into a new market and reach students who either lack the income or for cultural reasons don’t want to come to the UK or home country and you can service them in country, and because you are offering it at a lower cost you can do so to a much larger group. A number of universities are seeing TNE as a kind of funnel, a way of attracting students who maybe do some part of the qualification offshore and then come on these agreements where they do the remainder in the UK. Certainly for some of the leading universities in the UK they see this as very much about building an international brand. One of Chris and I’s friend at Nottingham said over a cup of coffee, being from Nottingham University we are in a small east midlands town we don’t have a premier football league club, nobody has ever heard of us but the Malaysia and China campuses have put Nottingham on the map and being from another university in Nottingham and we benefit from that reflected glory. I think generally there was a sense among university staff that I spoke to that they see the government as particularly supportive at the moment which hasn’t always been the case. So there was some very strong positives. [Presentation slide 15] However, there was a lot of risk aversion and negativity. Talking to a lot of people there is a very high degree of risk aversion amongst British universities. Of course here today we are not in a state university; we are in a private not-for profit University today so this may create opportunities for institutions like Regent’s that can’t be seized and other kinds of institutions. There is a lot of concern over reputation and brand management. There have been some big failed international branch campuses. Famously University of New South Wales opened a campus in Singapore in 2008. It was only open for one semester, it failed to attract enough students and the incoming Vice Chancellor decided to close it. They lost nearly 50million dollars on that one venture because they had made commitments and contracts they couldn’t break, even though they were in rented accommodation. They took a real cold shower on that one.

There is an issue that many of these transnational activities are not scalable, they sort of rely on faculty that are enthusiastic but most aren’t. So these are real quotes, people see TNE as a “pain in the arse” which is a British term for something you would rather not do. [Presentation slide 16] I worked at a university once where we had a campus in Colombo. I think we had about 600 or 700 students there, everybody liked to go to Colombo- we had a five star hotel on the beach, it was absolutely fantastic. Then the partner in Colombo said “we’ve bought some land, we have got a 50 hectare site, we’re going to build a science park and increase the size of this campus to 6,000 students” and everyone responded with “oh my god, we are not going, we are not playing”. There was no way we had the capacity to manage a campus of that scale, while it was 600 or 700 it was someone’s hobby but it gets very difficult and many academics have the pressure of publish or perish. By the time they have got tenure or equivalent they have then got families and going abroad when you have got families is very difficult. Having been a PVC International at two institutions, I am reminded constantly of this fact by my family every time I

try and go abroad. The feeling as well that this stuff is not sustainable, you do it for a while but then once the capacity in that market builds up you are no longer needed so you have invested something that you cannot continue.

There are a couple of other things I wanted to mention briefly. I think everybody understands this now but I don’t believe this was the case a little while ago. I did a simple qualitative survey using Survey Monkey and sent it out to several hundred people. Almost everyone said the primary motive for TNE was money and these were senior members of universities but when you actually got into the qualitative stuff everyone said “that’s rubbish, there is no money in it, it’s not about money you would never do it for the money”. I think that is an interesting observation. There is a pilot report that Jane Knight did recently on TNE, she refers to one campus that has been running for fourteen years that had yet to break even. It is very expensive business to do it properly and there are all sorts of reasons difficulties in trying to repatriate profit and so on. [Presentation slide 17] A final one I think that has caused some universities to come a cropper, there is not just disinterest or lack of interest by staff in staff being engaged with TNE for a number of senior staff there is active resistance- they do not think we should be doing this. There were several senior British Professors who said to me “this is not what a British University should be doing, it’s detracting management time and resources from our core mission which is teaching and research”. I have certainly had conversations with American Business School Deans who have looked at me like I am from the moon when you say you are setting up a venture in Malaysia or China, “well what are you doing that for? How do you square that with your mission?” So I think there is some internal resistance.

So setting up this session we are just going to look at some practical examples, some case studies of how real universities have done this. In terms of the big picture clearly it’s pretty difficult to make judgements about TNE because the data is not good. From the basis of the data we have got it is a large and growing market but the data overstate it and certainly the financial significance I think is tended to be overstated. If we think about the future growth I think what you are going to find is different markets growing rather differently.

A number of universities will, I think be relatively cautious about the speed in which they engage with this. [Presentation slide 18] We are now going to hear from one of my colleagues who has broken that mould.

The Development of International Campuses: Some Reflections on the Nottingham Experience

By Christine Ennew (To be published by Commonwealth Education Commission) Students have always been travelled in search of the best study opportunities; researchers have always collaborated across national borders, but until fairly recently, higher education institutions have been stubbornly national – whether limited by the demands of domestic regulation or by protectionist approaches in potential destinations. For a small number of private, “for-profit” universities, the idea of operating campuses in different geographic locations had always been an integral part of the underlying business model – a process of growing by getting closer to new and attractive markets. And for some public and not-forprofit institutions there has always been a logic in establishing a physical presence overseas as a base to support outward student mobility. These initiatives aside, Universities, have for the most, remained fundamentally geographically bound. But, the past 20 years or so have seen almost seismic shifts in context, in policy and regulation, and in attitudes and behaviour. Now, the idea of institutional mobility is no longer seen as a being a bold, abnormal, risky or threatening choice and has become a realistic strategic option for a range of higher education providers.

The late 1990s saw a change in the nature and scale of institutional mobility as a growing number of mainstream private and public (or publicly funded) universities sought to

establish teaching and research activity outside of their home country in response to both an identified opportunity and active encouragement from host countries. The following decade saw this sort of approach becoming increasingly common and by 2012, the Observatory for Borderless Higher Education was able to report over 200 branch campuses in operation and a further 37 expected to start in 2012 and 2013.

My own University – the University of Nottingham – was one of the pioneers in this higher education revolution. We were driven by a range of different influences – what I would typically describe as pull factors, push factors and enablers. There were clear pull factors, which made the idea of an international campus particularly attractive to the University.

Nottingham had a long tradition of welcoming highly qualified international students, but there were and are only so many outwardly mobile students (OECD figures would suggest that fewer than 5% of students are able to travel overseas for their education and forecasts suggest that this percentage is unlikely to increase dramatically). The implication was that there existed a large pool of talented students, who could not come to Nottingham, so perhaps Nottingham should seek to get closer to them? A primary consideration for the University was the awareness that having an international campus would allow us to work with a larger pool of talented students and indeed, talented staff. If a University’s ability to deliver its mission and vision is dependent on the quality of its staff and its students (and ultimately, its alumni), then operating internationally and working with a wider talent pool would help Nottingham to enhance its performance in relation to both teaching and research. In addition, an international campus would also provide some unique and valuable learning opportunities for UK based students and staff, whether through mobility opportunities or simply through exposure to, and the opportunity to learn from, new and different perspectives. And, although it was probably never explicitly stated, I think we always recognised that an innovative development such as an international campus could have a really positive impact on the University’s reputation, globally.

Alongside these pull factors, there were also a range of influences which helped to “push” the university towards the establishment of an international base. Within the UK, the opportunities for growth in student numbers were becoming more limited – partly because of changes in the funding environment and partly because of changing demographics. And in terms of competition, as other countries became more active in terms of international student recruitment (including starting to deliver teaching in the English language), it became increasingly clear that UK institutions would need to be innovative if they wished to continue to attract high quality students and staff.

These pull and push factors directed the University to look at the option of developing an international campus, but the existence of an attractive opportunity does not guarantee success. Other institutions had already attempted to establish overseas ventures – most notably the ill-fated venture of some 20 US Universities to Japan in the late 1980’s. A third ingredient was needed and that was what I would describe as a series of enablers. These were crucial in terms of implementation. Internally, strong leadership and clear vision played a key role; governance was robust but supportive and the University was financially sound. Externally, a range of factors directed Nottingham to target its interest to Malaysia.

A number of countries were looking to position themselves as educational hubs (including UAE, Qatar and Singapore). Malaysia had formulated a bold ambition to be a major HE destination by 2020 and saw international university campuses as the key to delivery.

Malaysian students had been coming to study at Nottingham since the late 1940s and there were many alumni in prominent positions in public and corporate life; their support, advice and encouragement was to play a major role in convincing Nottingham that Malaysia was the right destination and in convincing Malaysia that Nottingham was the right sort of institution to attract.

As with so many new strategic developments, making the decision is only half of the battle; implementation remains a major challenge. The Nottingham approach was to ensure that the international campus was consistent with the home one – equivalent in function as well as in standards and quality. What this meant in practice was that the Malaysian campus (and subsequently the campus in China) had to be full and integral parts of the University of Nottingham – alongside the quality and standards associated with the teaching, priority was

also accorded to the development of the broader student experience and to the creation of a culture and environment to support research excellence. In short, the campuses that Nottingham was to develop in Malaysia and subsequently in China were not just teaching outposts (they were not just “branches”) they were functionally equivalent campuses.

To deliver this vision required that the University work in partnership – its international campuses were in effect, private Universities in their particular jurisdictions and the regulations at the time of establishment required that the University had a joint venture partner. In Malaysia, the University started with 2 partners – Boustead Holdings Berhad and YTL Corporation (although Boustead subsequently became the majority partner in the JV). As business partners, these two entities undertook to support the operational side of the development of the campus in Malaysia, but the Joint Venture Agreement ( JVA) was very clear that academic responsibility resided solely with the University of Nottingham.

The operational challenge for the University related to delivery – and specifically how to deliver the University of Nottingham educational and student experience at arms-length from its UK base. In structural terms, the University chose to operate a “one University” model and this meant that academic schools had a multi campus structure – there is only one Business School at Nottingham – it just happens to have a base in 3 different countries. This approach ensured that there was clear academic ownership of the degree programmes and the associated quality assurance processes. Similarly close relationships were developed for professional services to ensure that policies and processes were shared across locations. And from an HR perspective, both of Nottingham’s international campuses relied on the leadership of senior academics seconded from the UK campus working alongside locally recruited staff. These secondees had (and have) a key role to play in linking the international campuses to each other and linking back to the UK campus.

A major issue in taking this approach relates to the balance between standardisation and adaptation – how much should be identical across campuses and how much should be adapted to local context. Nottingham had to remain true to its core educational values (perhaps what marketers might call its brand values) and it had to ensure that resources and systems were in place to deliver. These values are not just restricted to the content of what is taught but also to the style of teaching and the broader experience and facilities that surround that teaching. This matters for two reasons. Pragmatically, an international campus can only really work if students (and their parents and indeed other key stakeholders) can be confident that they are receiving and education and a qualification that is comparable in quality and standards to that delivered in the institution’s home country. Morally, education is of such importance to individuals and to societies that those institutions who provide it must accept a responsibility to ensure that what the offer is right in terms quality and standards. But, it would also be wrong to ignore the need to adapt to local legal and cultural contexts. The social side of life on-campus, the ways in which programmes are marketed and engagement with society are all susceptible to, and indeed, require adaption to fit with the country in which the campus is located.

In getting the right balance between standardisation and adaptation, seconded staff play a key role as the institution’s “culture carriers”. They bring with them an understanding of the Nottingham way of doing things, an understanding of policy and practice at the home institution. And in turn, they have to develop an understanding of the local context and transmit that to the home institution. Initially cross campus links depended heavily on these individuals and the senior managers at the UK campuses. It soon became apparent that this two way flow of knowledge had to be augmented by the development of high levels of engagement and interaction between staff across campuses at all levels. Regular staff visits in both directions increasingly became the norm as did frequent interactions through technology-based communication channels. The development of relationships between key individuals at each campus was further embedded through the implementation of a committee structure in which all relevant University decision making bodies functioned on a multi-campus basis with meetings held through video conferencing.

The vision to create functionally equivalent campuses depended on clear commitment at senior levels within the University and active engagement at all levels within the institution.

It is a vision which we continue to work towards. But in both Malaysia and China, progress has been substantial. And in Malaysia, the University of Nottingham’s Malaysia campus is home to some 5000 students across 17 academic schools and departments, studying on over 100 academic programmes from Foundation level through to PhDs. Research income over the past three years has exceeded RM20m and the University, in partnership with the Ministry of Agriculture has recently established a major centre for research on underutilised crops, with funding of over RM10m.

Growth of student numbers - UNMC

Professor Alex Hughes Pro Vice Chancellor External, University of Kent Hello everyone. This session is all about TNE. I’d like to talk today about an internationalisation project that is related to that area, directly and indirectly, is very dear to my heart, and offers I hope a case study in putting internationalisation theory purposefully into practice. We have named it the Hong Kong and China Portal Project, and it embraces a number of areas and activities, including TNE, international student mobility, student experience, student support, academic collaboration and fundraising. It’s chiefly the first two about which I want to speak in this forum, although all are important elements of the project.

A few words to begin with, though, about Internationalisation at Kent. At the University, as at the majority of the institutions represented here, Internationalisation is a primary strategic focus. Furthermore, in the student sphere, our Internationalisation and Employability strategies are strongly allied. Language learning and opportunities for work or study placements abroad are key facets of both. Both are geared to enabling our students to think globally, and operate successfully in a competitive, fast-moving global economy.

Both are responsive to the requirements of employers, national and international.

Within our Internationalisation Strategy, priority geographical areas include Europe, North America, and China and Hong Kong. Latin America is a new focus, and our student mobility destinations are even more widely spread. With regard to Hong Kong and China, we have developed our Hong Kong and China Portal Project. One of the key objectives of this project – if not the only one - is to give Kent students experience of study or work in mainland China and Hong Kong, enabling them to hone transferable, graduate-level skills such as intercultural awareness, communicative competence, problem-solving and self reliance and to prepare for the world of professional employment. In the past, student mobility at Kent was largely confined to Europe, and to programmes with a language

element. We were determined to make the student mobility experience more global, and arguably more challenging, opening it up to larger numbers of students, on programmes that, traditionally, did not have a study or work abroad element. Within that development, Hong Kong and mainland China, and our Portal Project, have played a key role.

So what is the Portal Project, and how, more specifically, does it relate to the internationalisation of the Kent student experience? Academically, it includes a suite of Kent undergraduate and postgraduate programmes, across Social Sciences, Humanities and Sciences, that afford our students the opportunity for outward mobility experiences in China and Hong Kong. The majority of these programmes started life in the last five years, a period in which the Portal project was also formalised (in 2010). They include Law with a year in China (Chongqing, Shanghai or Beijing) or Hong Kong, Computing with a year long work placement in Hong Kong (via City University), and a Masters programme at our Brussels School of International Studies that features an exchange option at China Foreign Affairs University, Beijing. Such programmes are supported by language learning provision at Kent (Mandarin, though not Cantonese). They sit alongside our more standard mobility programmes, and are strongly oriented to the development of a global outlook in the students enrolled on them. Students are encouraged (as with all our internationalisation opportunities) to record and reflect on the skills the programmes inculcate during the international experience they entail. Student feedback on time spent studying or working in Hong Kong and the PRC has been extremely positive. Clearly, our partner institutions are key to that, and our relationships with the institutions which receive our students and send us theirs are close and carefully developed. As you can see from my slides, those relationships take in quite a range of significant institutions both here in Hong Kong and in the mainland, and we hugely appreciate working with them all.

Student numbers on these China and Hong Kong based study abroad programmes are growing apace at Kent: we began by sending a mere handful of students to City University HK and to SWUPL in 2007-8, and now have just shy of 40 students participating in mobility programmes or activities involving HK and China. As we all know, there are a variety of barriers to outgoing international student mobility, and one of them, in the UK, is certainly financial. Students can be reluctant to take on the extra cost occasioned by a year abroad, especially if that year abroad is somewhere a long way from home. Hence, as we developed the fundraising arm of our Portal Project, we were keen to ensure that we sought out support geared to helping Kent students participate in its outward mobility scheme. Happily, the generosity of our donors, who are mostly from or resident in the region, has enabled us to create not only scholarships for students coming to us from Hong Kong and the mainland, but also for outgoing exchange students too. This is vital to the ongoing success of the outward mobility strand of the project, and we need to ensure that we continue to generate philanthropic giving to support it.

UK universities routinely receive significant numbers of students from Hong Kong and China: UK student mobility to the region is far less usual. Our Portal Project embraces of course student recruitment (inward student mobility) from Hong Kong and the mainland but is no less concerned with outward mobility to the region. And that outward mobility brings with it an unparalleled set of learning opportunities for our students, linguistic, cultural, experiential. Two final year Computing students from Kent who had returned last year from a work placement year enabled by City University spoke recently about their experiences at our university Internationalisation Forum: their very heart-warming presentation gave us ample confirmation of the merit of the project, in terms of the personal development it enables for our students.

The Portal Project was developed at the university by me, and by colleagues in our International and alumni teams, working with colleagues in academic schools, most especially our school of International Studies in Brussels. It formally came into being in 2010, though was in hand before that. It would be fair to say that it is more embedded in some areas of Kent than others, and one of our tasks is to make it more internally pertinent across the university, as we continue to develop it across its first five year term and thereafter.

The concept of the Portal, including as it does both inward and outward student mobility between the university and the region, academic collaborations, alumni relations activity, and

fundraising, as well as recent work on placement development, has proved a successful way of coordinating and rendering even more purposeful a raft of internationalisation activities in which the university is involved in Hong Kong and the mainland. It relies upon the unstinting support and generosity of alumni and friends of the university, in Hong Kong and the mainland too, who have helped and are helping us in all sorts of ways, as we take the Portal Project forward into its 3rd year. I am very grateful to them, and am looking forward to our next Portal event in April, led by our Vice Chancellor, which will bring together alumni, current Kent exchange students in HK and China, students coming to Kent next session, and colleagues and friends from partner institutions and organisations.

Brett Berquist Executive Director, Office of Study Abroad, Michigan State University It’s an honour to join such an esteemed panel on this topic. I’m very happy to be with you today particularly as one of my colleagues didn’t make it out of the polar vortex to come to the more temperate shores of Albion. He grew up near Ann Arbor, Michigan, where a small town called ‘Hell’ recently attracted a special BBC reporter. I’ll let you guess the headline. Yes it was about the weather.

We’ve heard today about how transnational education is thriving and projected to continue doing so, as the minister pointed out, off-shore study for UK degrees by international students now exceeds on-shore. Australia, another major player in this space, has over 30% of its international students in degree programmes overseas. We’ve also had two insightful case studies from UK institutions operating in Asia. I believe that leaves me, then, as the designated Yank on the panel and I will do my best to offer the US perspective. But I must confess that this is strongly influenced by the Australian sector. At last year’s conference, I shamelessly plugged the chapter on cross-border delivery that I co-authored with Peter Burgess, a leader in TNE down under. The AIEA/SAGE handbook on internationalization was hot off the press at the time and I was keen to read some of the other chapters on the flight over. This year, I decided not to lug any big books along, particularly after I found out you could actually find our entire chapter published online.

I’m going to focus my remarks today on the US perspective, motivators and drawbacks, and the potential for TNE as part of a comprehensive internationalization strategy.

This year’s conference theme is Transnational Education and many people in the audience are very comfortable with this jargon and the definitions used within the UK HE strategy.

The jargon is less common on the other side of the pond and I feel it’s useful to make sure we are talking about the same thing, or as my Australian colleagues might say – “calling a spade an f’ing shovel.”

Our chapter in the handbook opens with Jane Knight’s 2006 definition for cross border education as “higher education that takes place in situations where the teacher, student, programme, institution/provider or course materials cross national jurisdictional borders.”

In many ways, we can use TNE to encompass almost all international learning mobility.

Cross border education has evolved in different ways and forms across the globe. The OECD (2004) suggests that in contrast to the US, which continues to be seen as a magnet for international students, student mobility has been largely policy driven in Europe and demand driven in the Asia Pacific region. Transnational higher education programming or institution mobility on the other hand, has evolved through initiatives that have been largely driven at the micro level by educational institutions themselves and by policies implemented by receiving countries.

Knight raised the terminology issues in 1999. In my introduction to a session here last year on double and joint degrees by my esteemed colleague Jesús García de Madariaga, from la Complutense de Madrid, I offered clarification on the US use of these terms. I talked about franchising, branch campuses, dual, joint, and consecutive degrees, twinning, articulation agreements, and the pejorative use of the term ‘two-fer’, i.e. the sentiment that a dual or joint degree should ethically take more time than just one degree. TNE is not a commonly used term in our sector in the US. Also, in Australia, TNE is not used in an all-encompassing way for learning mobility. The examples provided in today’s panel have

ranged from student mobility, in the example from Kent, to full-scale institutional mobility, with Nottingham’s Malaysia campus. For the purposes of my remarks, I’m going to use TNE in the more Australian context, excluding outward mobility from the home campus (study abroad), and focusing primarily on activity where part or all of a degree programme is delivered to an international audience at a location outside the awarding institution’s home country. Study abroad is a well-established force in higher education in the US with approximately 14% of US graduates having studied abroad. Michigan State University has been among the top institutions in the US for over a decade in this area. But most US universities, in my opinion, have not fully explored the potential benefit of TNE in the toolkit of comprehensive internationalisation.

What are the driving forces behind TNE? Why are institutions doing this?

Larsen and Vincent-Lancrin in 2004 identified 4 main motivators: mutual understanding, skilled migration, revenue generation, and capacity building. In the U.S. mutual understanding and capacity building have driven many cross-border projects. Many governments have also used this approach to accelerate educational capacity for their citizens. TNE markets continue to thrive where qualified student demand exceeds government-funded seats in higher education. With this as the primary force in the 1980s, by the 1990s, TNE began to be seen, in some circles, as one component of a comprehensive internationalisation strategy. Such projects can jump-start or strengthen a larger agenda for academic research and exchange cooperation. How many of you have several agreements on your books that garner almost no significant interest on your campus? The collaboration to design or adapt curriculum or delivery can involve a broader audience and significantly raise the visibility of the partnership. Mutual understanding has been a cornerstone in the US ‘educational diplomacy’ strategy since the Cold War. The area that we traditionally shied away from, at least publicly, was the revenue stream, to the amusement of our Australian friends, who don’t need multiple terms for a shovel. With the sustained disinvestment in education by almost every state with the resulting transition for higher education from a public service to a private good, the revenue stream has become an important contribution to balancing increasingly challenging budgets. Small-scale TNE in the form of sophisticated articulation agreements can offer a competitive advantage by decreasing the anxiety around the credit transfer process for students who start their studies in their home country, often for financial reasons. For large-scale institutional mobility, TNE can greatly enhance visibility and strengthen brand positioning in key markets.

So if TNE can build on the traditional goals of mutual understanding and capacity building, can enhance and strengthen key strategic partnerships, and enhance a university’s brand and increase revenue, why aren’t more US institutions rushing into the fray? First of all, we don’t even have accurate data on the level of activity. In a serious study of the landscape in 2006, I identified only 50 US tertiary institutions offering about 200 transnational programmes. Macro-level mobility data is available through the OECD but our practitioner reporting system, Open Doors, administered by the Institute for International Education, does not venture a toe in this complex space. Higher Education is increasingly a datadriven enterprise and the scarcity in this domain does not encourage senior administrators to envisage a serious cost/benefit analysis.

Secondly, while our market share has been eroding slowly but steadily, most of our major universities rely on the perceived superiority of the U.S. higher education system and our research rankings and don’t see the need to invest in strategies which, if managed well, could significantly diversify international recruitment channels and minimise the inevitable swing in the mobility markets. When it comes to articulation agreements which require recognition of previous work completed overseas, the inevitable attitude of “they couldn’t possibly teach our subject there as well as we do here” often kicks in.

Thirdly, the stories of the rush to Japan in the 1980s and the subsequent withdrawal of all but a handful of players, remains in the minds of senior administrators. Local or national government promises of financial support, academic freedom, etc. are only as good as the resources available to that government. Significant changes in this area

can quickly bring home how much many cultures consider a contract to be simply a general guideline to a relationship.

Also, the potential for brand damage is real and the negative stories find sustained media coverage in the US market. We’ve all heard of the failures. In a country that prides itself on a culture that encourages entrepreneurial failure on the path to success, we have an inversely low tolerance for this in the academy. A quick scan of the Chronicle, Inside Higher Ed, etc. will show the prominence of a negative mind-set that emphasises the dangers and failure stories over the successful TNE programmes. I gave some examples of this at last year’s conference but regretted my lack of political correctness later when I saw the video posted to Regent’s website. After working in France for over a decade, I enjoy dropping my guard a little when back in Europe. I’m treading carefully today.

Finally, the most serious issue for TNE expansion in the US sector is the problem of quality assurance. While new degree programmes delivered off-shore in most cases require the approval of the US institutions’ regional accrediting body, the sector has not developed a strong set of guidelines the way Australia and the UK have, leaving each institution to reinvent the proverbial wheel, which may or may not be effective. Branch campuses are prone to a period of initial excitement, which may see several senior faculty on-site to launch programmes and ensure the connection back to the mother ship. Once the novelty wears off, the same sites often struggle to nurture and maintain that connection and support from the home campus. Quality assurance protocols have been developed in other markets. More understanding of these approaches in the US sector would help senior administrators in weighing the pros and cons of this approach.

Our chapter in the SAGE handbook on internationalisation contains the requisite data updates, tables, a basic initial vetting framework, etc. I can provide the reference if you’re interested or just google Peter Burgess and Brett Berquist. In my comments today, I’ve tried to show that I believe TNE is a force to be reckoned with that will only continue to grow. Indeed, even in the area of study abroad, which I deliberately excluded from the parameters of my remarks today, we recently predicted in a panel on “Mobility 2.0” that students will increasingly select their educational experiences like a series of tools they want to acquire for their future career. This may include study abroad, off-shore degree study, moving among multiple institutions. The market trends are very clear. See the most recent British Council reports and the graphs tell a clear story. Australia and the UK have obvious government support to expand this important export market. US HEI’s can learn from these approaches and should explicitly consider the potential role of TNE in their overall internationalisation strategy. To do this, as a sector, we need to develop a more widely shared terminology, a shared data set, and broadly based quality assurance protocols.

References Berquist, B., & Fuller, C. (2006). Development of transnational education programs from a U.S. perspective. Paper presented at the Australian International Education Conference, Perth, Australia. Burgess, P. & Berquist, B. (2012) Cross-border projects, programs and providers. in The SAGE Handbook of International Higher Education. (Deardorff, Adams, Heyl, DeWit, Eds.) SAGE. www.sagepub.com/upm-data/49297_ch_18 Knight, J. 1999. Internationalisation of higher education. In H. de Wit & J. Knight (Eds.), Quality and internationalisation in higher education Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Knight, J. 2006, Higher Education Crossing Borders: A Guide to the Implications of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) for Cross-border Education, Report prepared for the Commonwealth of Learning and UNESCO. See: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0014/001473/147363E.pdf Koban, D., Potts, D., & Berquist, B. (2013). Mobility 2.0: the future of student mobility. Workshop presented at the Australian International Education Conference, Canberra, Australia.

OECD POLICY BRIEF August 2004, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Internationalisation of Higher Education OECD/World Bank, 2007, Cross-border Tertiary Education – a way towards capacity development, Paris. (p14). ISBN-978-92-64-03363-4 © OECD AND IBRD/THE WORLD BANK 2007 See: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/35/8/39169515.pdf UNESCO/Council of Europe 2001 Code of Good Practice in the Provision of Transnational Education, Lisbon Recognition Convention Committee, Rīga. See: http:// www.coe.int/t/dg4/highereducation/recognition/Codeofgoodpractice_EN.asp UNESCO/OECD 2005 Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Education. Paris. See http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/27/51/35779480.pdf UNESCO 2006, UNESCO-APQN toolkit: Regulating the quality of cross-border education. Bangkok: UNESCO Bangkok, 2006. See: http://www2.unescobkk.org/elib/ publications/087/APQN_Toolkit.pdf Vincent-Lancrin, S., and Larsen, K. (2004). Internationalisation and trade in higher education: opportunities and challenges, Paris, OECD. World Bank 2007 Cross-Border Tertiary Education) ISBN-978-92-64-03363-4 (OECD AND IBRD/THE WORLD BANK edited by Stephan Vincent-Lancrin (OECD).

Panel: TNE and employability Introduced by Cornelia Meyer Honoury Fellow Regents University London Dr Julia Goga-Cooke CCO Gconsultancy, Lexie Sims Director, Resourcing Europe Intercontinental Hotels Group Jana Pione Recruitment Relations Manager, Gartner, Inc Manuela Doutel-Haghighi Professional Development Manager, IBM Global services

Cornelia Meyer: So allow me to introduce my panellists here, I will not give you the big CVs because you have them in these lovely booklets so in the interest of going right into their substance I will give their name and affiliations. First we have Dr Julia GogaCooke, Chief Creative Officer of GConsultancy, then we have Jana Pione, Recruitment Relationship Manager for Gartner Incorporated, then we have Lexie Sims who runs the resourcing for Europe, for Intercontinental Hotel Group, and I think we all have stayed and enjoyed our stay at Intercontinental Hotels. And then we have last, but not at all least, the lady who could not reach us today, who has phenomenal insights Manuela Doutel-Haghighi, Professional Development Manager at IBM Global Service.

Dr Julia Goga-Cooke: Thank you very much it’s a pleasure to be here today and I will start it from a very personal perspective, a very personal story. I’m Albanian, if anyone doesn’t know where Albania is, it’s somewhere near Greece and Italy in Europe but very few people have been there still, and until the 90s, Albania was the most isolate country in the world I would say. So the first time that I went abroad was when I went to Stockholm University as part of my PHD in linguistics. One of the stories that have stayed with me was when I was in a class just to observe and the teacher, teaching English asked the students, “what is the best place to live, is the town or the countryside?” All the kids said the countryside, and then she turned to me and said “Julia what do you think?” I grew up to think countryside is a place for peasants that are uneducated, everybody that wanted to be somebody had to leave the countryside and go to the town, why would I want to live in the countryside. So my first experience in being a student abroad was challenging the assumptions and beliefs that I had and this stayed very, very strongly with me as a story. But the other thing when I was there, and this is first time that I was a student, I not only met “Sweeds” there at Stockholm University, for the first time in my life I met Sri Lankans, I met people from Argentina from Peru, and coming into contact with different cultures with different beliefs, it was a way of learning things which I had never known.

So if I think back, I just want to encapsulate that what that study abroad did for me. I think in three levels, in the intellectual level; of course when you go to a different university in a different country you learn new things all the time, not only from the programme you are enrolled in but you learn things also from the place where you are, you learn things all the time from the people that you meet, and also from the different activities that you participate in and this is very much on the intellectual level. But it also got to me in the type of the social level, and when I think back now on the type of the connections that I made there, the type of friendships that we forged, and how we (of course Facebook was not at the time available) so we lost some connections but we have reconnected.

And probably I will talk a bit more about the power of those networks and I see that in my study (I’m a student at the moment by the way) at this time at MIT, trying to study collaborative innovative networks because innovation is my field, and trying to create and analyse and see the power of these networks. There was a very recent survey at Stanford University which really was beautiful with what the power of networks is, it came out that about 40,000 businesses trace back as students to Stanford, which in terms of revenues goes to trillions of dollars. And I thought wow, do make enough of the alumnae that we

have or as people in university in academia, how do we foster the type of entrepreneurial and ecosystem formation for the students in order that they continue afterwards. And the third one of course was the emotional education. And when I say emotional it’s because when you are abroad you are able to tap into your very deep feelings and beliefs when you are able to start to see your own country from a different perspective and try and get that conflict. I think it’s a very healthy conflict and how you hold it in your hands or in your heart, what matters, what doesn’t, what’s good, what’s not. I remember one of my friends, a Sri Lankan guy, he would eat very properly every time we would go out to restaurants, and when we would come back to the halls, and the only way he would eat is with his fingers, except if it was soup. And we would say: “Why are you doing that?” And he would say, “Well I’m proper outside, but I’m still a Sri Lankan, I still want to do that” And I was used to you know having to be proper (using your fork and knife) everywhere when you are with other people apart from your family, so you know, and I thought that was a very deep lesson in terms of how do we preserve our own identity while we soak-up from everyone else that we meet when we are abroad?

So that’s the story and I could talk more from the employer’s point of view you know, from the research. I have been co-leading a research with Professor Lynda Gratton from London Business School, where I saw myself as the connector between academia and businesses, and in the last 4 years we brought together 80 global corporations to research the future of work and what we saw in the diagnostic that we did. What the companies are looking for in terms of competencies that are future proofed are; innovation, which is very much up there and not very well developed, complex collaboration which has to be between diversity, cultures, ages, all the ecosystems that are created and are useful for that and also how you get the whole sense-making-skills in order to use them for the new changes that are heating us every day and we can do nothing about them; be them in technology, be them in globalization or be them a sociatical trend or in the carbon and resources area. So these skills, I think exactly are the skills that you learn without going abroad, by making sense of thing, by connecting with different cultures and by the diversity of the opinions that you bring and developing an innovator’s mind-set.

Cornelia Meyer: Thank you very much, that was very, very powerful. I was especially overblown when we had a conversation before in conference in December and you said, you know when I look at these alumni networks some of them have the GDP of a mid-size economy, and that’s something that we are not really thinking about, and is a really good way to start looking at these networks. I think that the American universities are much further ahead in doing so than us here in Europe, and even in Asia. But we will talk about that during the interactive conversation. So the next person to speak is Jana Pione.

Jana Pione: Thank you Cornelia. So I work as a Recruitment Relationship Manager at Gartner. Today I would like to focus on what makes students employable from Gartner’s perspective. We recently hired three outstanding students from European Business School which is part of Regent’s University London and they joined us as SNB Account Managers, in our SNB sales division based here in London. To help you understand why they were employable for Gartner I will briefly explain what I do. So in two sentences we are a global Think Tank of 900+ of researchers and analysts within the IT field. Those researchers and analysts are world class in what they do, and they work with CIOs, CFOs, COOs, or other top decision makers daily, they provide them with actionable impartial and objective insights to help them make decisions. So just to sum this up we are a decision making, global research advisory company with focus on IT. So we are a high growth company, we have very ambitious revenue growth goals as well as people growth goals, and that’s where I come in and where Regent’ University London helped us as well. So we researched, as a research company what makes us successful, and we came up with a trade space to hire model, which I would like to speak about.

We also of course hire based on experience, but that would not be as relevant to a student prospective. The students we hired, they all possessed a global persona, or some personality traits that are needed anywhere in Gartner. We have a global presence in 85 countries. I will go through them one by one, and if you have any questions about that we can take them later in the panel discussion.

Simply drive, intellect, executive presence, and Gartner cultural fit. I’ll focus on drive and intellect first because they build up the executive presence and Gartner cultural fit as well.

The interesting outcome of the research is what makes people top in terms of drive and intellect is the education. All the people we hired, at some point had TNE experience, and they would come from courses or universities that were known, or known to excel in something. So there was a high standard and benchmark in the level of education. These people tend to outperform people we hired that perhaps have had lower results in their degree, or if they hadn’t had specific exposure to conceptual thinking that universities enable to students. So when we link back to drive, one of the immediate qualities is top standards.

The students that we hired, all knew what they wanted to achieve from the TNE, so they chose EBSL for a reason, and that reason linked with their career goal. They also all have very strong goal setting and goal execution in capabilities that they reflected on in not only what they wanted from life and their career, but they also put together a plan and executed on that. Part of their experience in EBSL or other places where they studied was to get exposure to internships, working in placement or entrepreneurial projects and awards. They aimed to gain that award and to get the best recognition that they could get and also to get the best experience in order to build up their business acumen. That links to the type of drive to find, but also from the carrying prospective, we don’t have any specific products to sell, and we are based on people and people’s knowledge. It’s really important for us to know what drives our people and in the interview process we go very deep into understanding those personal goals, and how it links to those professional aspirations, and what they would achieve on the job. Of course based on that we can see whether it matches with the job opportunity, with the environmental of Gartner and the career progression that we enable, locally, or globally, we have also an environment that links back to these driven individuals. It’s very much recognition focussed, professional or personal development, and everyone has an individual development plan, and everyone is also thinking in a very goal oriented way which is a very typical business type of approach anyway, so it’s quite natural. If we hire someone, we want to make sure that that personal sense of purpose, and personal aspiration would link with the job, and it is also part of the interview process.

Another quality that I would like to call out here on drive is the TNE, simply because experiencing a different country outside of your comfort zone in a new language, and different competitiveness as well with the colleagues or the students they meet means they need to prove themselves, and success doesn’t come easy and we absolutely understand this.

We want to know examples through the interview process how students may have set ambitious goals at university, curriculum focused or extra curriculum as well and how perhaps they faced challenges. They may have failed but they picked themselves up, they refocused and they again drove to achieve in their goals or exceeded their goals. So resilience is another very important trait at Gartner because it is a very complex environment. When I look briefly at intellect, we know what type of intellect works for Gartner but there are of course different kinds of intellect and there is no right or wrong. We have studied what type of intellect connects with the drive and there is a perfect combination for top performance.

Curiosity is the main quality that we look for. The TNE and for example the EBSL style that the students attended and got exposed to is very much curiosity based. That encourages consultative communication style as well as of course it also encourages emotional intelligence. Apart from the verbal part of intellect where you look at curiosity, conceptual thinking or quick decision making and the ability to think on your feet we also make sure that we look at the majority of students on the emotional intelligence side and that ability to understand people. Again this links back to the natural communication style which is curiosity based, awarding assumptions- its perfect fit for a very intangible concept based environment of Gartner and the communication style in Gartner as well. On the TNE side, if the environment and the classes or the internship encourages this sort of communication and they can give us examples of what they have done and of the type of behaviour we are looking for (and we of course know this through the interview process) if we hire them they would easily fit in at Gartner. That links back to the final two traits- executive presence and Gartner fit. Practically what I have just said on the consultative communication style that could be a summary of what we consider executive presence.

We didn’t expect the students we hired to sell to CIO’s or CEO’s . But the people we hired what they do as part of their job, they speak with CEO’S of companies of sub 750 million US dollars typically 250-750million US dollars turnover so they are very high positioned individuals. They want high credibility and they want partnership and business insight. Putting students into those roles could be daunting but the people we have hired have ambitious goals and also had exposure through their internships which built up their credibility and the communication styles that fitted with the CEO and CIO’s of these companies want. So that brought up their executive presence really nicely.

Gartner cultural fit, just to sum it up and link it back to what Julia said, is cultural awareness.

We are a global company, everyone works in a global team. So we have people from APAK, Singapore, Korea, South Africa, as well as Russia and Scandinavian countries, Dakh etc. Our people need to be made aware of differences in communication styles, needs and again emotional intelligence kicks in here. The TNE helps them with the exposure to different nationalities and enables them to gain experiences that they can give examples of in the interview process.

Finally referrals, the best way to hire is via referrals. So establishing a network outside, even abroad, on a friendly level and then perhaps the careers department at the university can explain how to utilise that network later on and do some workshops on that as well which Regent’s University London does very well. It helps them with a higher chance of interview and of course getting hired. And employers love it, we have a target of having at least 50% of our people hired through referrals. Right now we have about 36% and we are driving towards that 50%.

Cornelia Meyer: Thank you very much, and now if there is anything that is truly global it is your company and if it there is anything that brings high quality standards to anywhere in the world it must be Intercontinental Hotels (IHG). So we are very interested to hear what it takes for you to hire people into your high achieving international corporation.

Lexie Sims-Thank you very much. I was a student here about ten years ago and received my Master’s in International Relations. Although I learnt a lot form my professors I learnt a lot more in some ways from the students around me in the class because it was such an international student body. I learnt how others see their country and it was very important for me to understand how they saw my country. That was very eye opening to me as well, even though I travelled over 30 different countries and I have been working in three other countries than my own. The student body at Regent’s University London was excellent and mirrored back to me their thoughts around my country. But I am here from the employer perspective and in the business world today there are no borders or barriers. Technology has come along removing our borders and what we are looking for as an employer is seeking people who are internationally and globally curious, they’re curious about the market place and what is going on in other parts of the world.

We are looking for people who have gone out of their way to find opportunities that will widen their cultural view as well as who are willing to work in a multicultural, multidisciplined team because in today’s business it is all about collaborative working and partnerships. So I am probably going to echo some of the things that have been said before from the previous panellist.

In the 90’s there was a phrase that was coined “think globally but act locally”. But now there is a new term and it’s called “Glocal” and those are individuals that have a global aspiration but they have local experience. And in the past four years I have recruited for two very different companies; one is IHG where I am currently leading the recruitment process for Europe. We have 4,500 hotels in over 100 countries and working through franchises, we have over 400,000 employees. I also worked for a much smaller company called Jack Wills with 69 locations in 6 counties and it had about 2,500 employees. But because of its online presence it was also looked at as being a global company. In leading the recruitment process for both companies I look for the same things in employees which you think would be quite different because of the size but we’re actually looking for individuals who are global, who are international, and have that mind-set.

Those skills sets are, first, we talked about brand; now everything is about brand. When you think about IHG you may not think it is a branding company, you think about hotels but IHG is actually a brand organisation. So we have what we call the “brand hearted recruitment” and it is all around understanding the brand and understanding the cultural field for the organisation. We are looking for, of course, people who have the technical abilities in their chosen field. But first of all (we are just starting our graduate programme, we started advertising that this week) we ask for global mobility, and just as important as having the technical abilities we are looking for a global mind set with a passion for the brand and a passion for customers.

In the hotel business as well as in the retail business you have to have a passion for your customers, know who your customers are. Potential employees have to know their strengths, have to know the development areas and again have to know how it is going to fit within the cultural organisation of the companies that they are interviewing for.

Individuals need a cultural empathy and that is the ability to work across cultures and work with mixed generations which is very important. We had a meeting yesterday and a lot of employees were asked to come and sit at a round table with our Chief Executive and he mentioned a term I had not heard before that is “technological immigrant”. Saying that individuals who are over a certain age (he said around 50) are immigrants around technology since they were not born with computers and mobile phones and apps and iPad’s and iPod’s. So the younger generation who are going to work with individuals who may not be as savvy around technology (although a lot of people over 50 are) may not understand there are different ways of working.

It is also very important to be able to work with them in a team, to have partnership, along with yesterday I asked the question to the CEO “What is the most important skill-set you are looking for in new employees?” And he said, first, analytical skills but then the ability to work with partnership and work across teams.

Individuals have to be quite commercial as they need to know what is going on in their market place, they need to know what is going on in the world, they need to have the commercial acumen, why did the board make this decision around our business service offering. They really need to understand commercially what is going on. Really good communication skills and that is broken down into the ability to listen, the ability to question and then the ability to present back their thoughts, the ability to learn. There was a survey of Chief Executive’s in fortune 500 companies and 79% said that they feel the most important thing is that a person has a global mind-set and is culturally aware, that was even more important than having the highest degree standard because even in the technology world CEO’s believes there are a lot of skills they can teach the hard-core skills, they really are looking for the soft-core skills as well.

They (the employees) must be interactive; they must have critical, thinking abilities to solve our problems and then, what is very important in companies now -because it is an employer’s market at the moment. Companies want to know why you want to work for them, so there is the commitment and the motivation. And I found it quite interesting , I joined IHG about four months ago and even after the recruitment process, when I would go to meet individuals because I was told “we are a relationship business” to succeed in IHG you have to form the relationships; and individuals would ask me “why did you join this organization?” and I thought “that’s a question I answered during in the interview process and now that I am here this is not the question I would expect to be asked”. But individuals want to know why did you join our organization, why did you choose us, why did you choose our brand and how are you going to fit with that brand, so that goes back to the brand-hearted recruitment we do at IHG. Cornelia Meyer: “Thank you very much. So let me just add one or two points. I myself have worked for UBS, for Citi Group, GE, BP and for Kimberly Clark, so I have really worked for these big, big international organisations, and what I have seen is that there are still various ways of running a big international organization. If I look at GE, we wanted people who were global however we had a very strong culture. So no matter where you came from, if you went in to our four core values (the four E’s) you were part of it, you

breathed it, you lived GE. I always told people that I recruited “look, you have to be willing to work anywhere, but if you’re in it for work life balance forget it, we are very good at work, work balance.” And when I came to BP that was for the me the biggest culture shock because there was a culture but it was more happy with the ambiguity and living with the ambiguity (and in that sense at the time UBS was still very Swiss), so you still had this global aspiration but whichever company you joined there is a corporate culture. It’s like you go into the border of a country and you have to live with that corporate culture.

And I think both of you said, “one of the most important things for us is those brand values” and I can only subscribe to that.

Now I will ask you the first set of questions before I open it up and it becomes a little bit more interactive here. The first set of questions is: I understand the GDP of countries and the alumni organisations having such big networks, also financial networks, but what can European or non US universities do better, to become better at cultivating those alumni networks because if I look at Harvard and MIT they have great networks. If I look especially in the continent of Europe they are trying.

The second one is: you all want to hire these driven people and that’s good, and you want personally goal orientated people but in the end they need to be able to collaborate and cooperate, how do you triangulate that and how does TNE come in to make them to be better collaborators?

And the third one (which is probably the biggest one) is: how important is this new technology in terms of making the world a truly more global work place but also a more local work place? because also a lot of things can be done in one space and then be transmitted around the world. So how does the technological interconnectivity affect the way you recruit?

Lexie Sims: I think I want to start with the question about alumni, I studied in the US as well as studying here and I think the most important thing is continuing communication.

But also it is value and I’m not saying monetary value. Alumni have to understand there is a value in staying connected and staying connected with the networking group and it’s either the opportunity to be able to speak to experts in certain fields or gain information. But something also you said around referrals, we find the same there is all sorts of studies that says referrals and people that are referred end up being more long term employees, and employees that the organisation gained the most value from.

It also provides an opportunity outside of your profession. For instance for me, I’ve loved staying in touch with Regent’s University London because I have been given opportunities to come back to the university and sometimes to do things outside of my comfort zone , like speaking to a large group of people! So, I think this is very important that universities understand you have to stay in touch and you have to communicate in different ways and in ways people expect and I am also doing this within IHG. We want to bring back people who used to work for our organisation and that perhaps left because we didn’t have the right opportunity for them etc but we are really looking into how we tap into people that have worked for us and we are looking at universities and how they keep in touch with people who are alumni.

Jana Pione: I’d like also to look into the alumni as what Lexie is saying really resonates with Gartner so we can see a trend in all the companies nowadays hiring. So, referral programme very much links to the utilisation of alumni’s and how companies (I can speak on behalf of Gartner but I think Lexie nodded to that as well) utilise this. We proactively work with our associates to make them aware what the internal opportunities are and what we are hiring for, so they can go and post on LinkedIn what we are looking for and they can also tap into their alumni and simply send the message. So in fact a lot of the introduction to the university cooperation we had was via the students, also the Regent’s University London via these referral activities. It came from a Norwegian SNB Account Manager who recently graduated from Regent’s and he said “Hey I know Julian Charles, why don’t you meet with him and look at more regular cooperation to increase finding great candidates via new channels as well.”

Another point I’d like to pick up here is the triangulation of goal drivers and collaboration.

It’s a brilliant point, it is also part of the Gartner trade space model, and the collaboration would sit under “Gartner culture”. Top performer- you can’t collaborate with people who won’t succeed in Gartner, it is just impossible and again I would say nowadays within the global environment it would be a common trait. So, the cultural awareness but also people’s ability to, of what we call “be coachable”, the ability to seek feedback, reflect and what they have done how they’ve done it and improve is extremely important. And we have this word “coachability”. When we hire, we always test for the “coachability”. So if people don’t ask for feedback in the interview process that’s already a little red flag. We encourage them, we provide them with feedback and then we see how they react to it but we also genuinely want to make sure that they understand us and if they pick up on it and say “what do you think about me?” It’s another great way to see they actually are accepting of the feedback they have been given. And of course in the actual development in the company “coachability” leads to promotions and to internal progression plans which also have a formal programme for.

Cornelia Meyer: Thank you very much. And I think you have volunteered to talk to us about the importance of the new technologically linked world and how that applies to TNE. Julia Goga-Cooke: Well, I am sure most of the people in this room are members of LinkedIn or Facebook and in the morning we all see those messages when you are connected to 600 people which connects you to a 1million people, congratulations!

And what does that mean? How meaningful is that? So when we talk about alumni connections or alumni networks, how can we as universities, where these people come, make these groups meaningful networks that will help them in their life, after they leave university? But also come back to the university with all the experience that they can give to the students that are there and could bring revenues to the university? One of the things that we see today is, you will never finish studying in your life, for the people that are born in 2000 in the western world most of them will live until 100; this is one the biggest achievements of the human race these days. So, is it enough that you go to university and just learn one subject and go to employment as it used to be before and then retire? It’s not, you will learn for life. So how is technology facilitating that? In lots of ways and the MOOCs are one way, but also all the face to face technology connection trends that we are seeing these days they are becoming very powerful. While people were very eager to join social networks online, the trend that we see today is that people want to have meet-ups. And these meet-ups are so easy to organise, wherever you are in the world. How can we foster that type of mind-set? That you have ten people in Singapore that studied here that create a meet up there and then the meet-up can link to the google hangout with another location. We are doing these things in the framework of universities.

Lexie Sims: I would like to add that becoming a recruiter with the IHG I was asked to have a Facebook page and Twitter and I said no to both. And I was told I needed to set one up if I was going to be the lead person in recruiting for the IHG because we do Tweet and, we publicise things on Facebook about the culture of our organisation but also all our job vacancies. So it is becoming more and more important that people are linked up on social media.

Cornelia Meyer: Thank you. We have the most knowledgeable audience you can possibly have for a conversation like this, may I ask for your questions, please.

[Audience Question]: Not every student has the money or the resources to go abroad, and their educators have the responsibility of equal opportunities for students. Can some of the qualities that you are talking about be created without a student going abroad and how would you do that?

Julia Goga- Cooke: I can go back to my experience because this summer I participated in a D- School Education where I went to refresh my skills on design thinking, which I had learnt here in London at Central Saint Martins.

There were 4,000- 5,000 people from all over the world that for 4 weeks worked together to learn about design thinking, to practise and to utilise new skills. We didn’t pay anything and we worked in groups which were of four to five people- little learning squads that we created. One was in America, one was in Korea, one was in London (which was my group) and one was in Finland. We intensively worked for five weeks together through google hangouts, through all the collaborative technology tools that are available today like doing brainstorms online via Stormboard or mindmapping through Coggle. So all these tools that now are available, they are for free and students can have access without paying anything. I don’t know if you remember, in one of the sessions last year, they set up a very big competition, and this was a panel where Bill Gates was a panellist and there was a girl, 13 years old from Pakistan. She had entered in this mathematics competition from her country and she was the winner at the end and she had competed with a lot of students.

When they found out how old she was and who she was, everybody went like “WOW!” This is the beauty of it, there are ways these days for lots of us who don’t have the money to now go and access education that is free and there are lots of opportunities.

Judith Ackroyd, Dean of HASS, Regent’s University London: You have all talked about things you are looking for. You talk in terms of soft skills that the employer needs to develop as hard skills, describing the EBSL students’ appropriateness; you choose them according to their curiosity, their ambitions. Now none of you have talked about specific subject knowledge or understanding and more specifically degrees. What I’d really like your thoughts on is how do we better communicate that to young people when choosing their degree, who have the sense that, maybe a business or a management degree has something over a philosophy degree or a history degree? All of you have been talking about human beings emerging and a good higher education. In my mind whatever the subject is it can developing those partnerships, those enquiries and an international thinking too. So I would be really delighted to hear how you people, the employer think we can better educate those students who are choosing, to understand the full ranges available?

Jana Pione: I have to say that the career (Careers and Business Relations) team here, at Regent’s University London must have done a great job because there is an opportunity to go for career coaching as well. And from what I picked up from the organisation with Julian Charles is that they really try to lead it with the strengths of the individuals, even if they, for example, come from different backgrounds. They may have some strands on the quality side that connected them to a different career. So one of the hires we made, he had a supply chain background, he had never sold before and he wanted to continue on the supply chain. He also wanted to stay here in London so his goal and his personal aspirations were slightly different from his background in that perhaps he would not have been so qualified to pick up the supply chain type of position here in London because of the previous experiences needed in the industry. So Julian (Charles) had a conversation with him and explore if sales could be an area for him because he had the type of strong curiosity and conceptual thinking as well as the ability to learn things really fast. So if you can pick up on concepts and qualify them with your curiosity and you can apply them as well. The learning agility and the “coachability” and that’s enough for us. Lexie mentioned training programmes and we have tremendous training programmes because we realise that what we want from people you can’t get outside in the actual market, we need to help them understand Gartner, and train on the jobs so we don’t require previous experience.

Lexie Sims: I think you are talking to two different audiences; you are talking to parents and to students. Parents want the best for their children, they want them to study a degree where they are going to have the most employability and let’s be honest to earn the highest salary. So you really are dealing with two different audiences. For me it is around helping individuals understand a career. My undergraduate degree was in Journalism, my first master’s degree was in HR and my last Master’s was in International Relations and I am now doing recruitment. So you have to look at the career, not just your first job, but what you want as a career. If you have the soft skills, the transferable skills, that’s what helps you to get the career that you want. If you come from America where everything is like “what’s the next step?” You join your high school and get accepted for a university, you study for your master’s programme- it’s always “what’s the next step?” What I really enjoyed coming to the UK was that I felt the education system looks at the whole person, looks at what

you want to do as part of a long term plan and this is what you have to also speak about.

And I know it is hard talking with someone who is 21 or 25 and they just want to get out into the marketplace. But what you want to do for your career is looking at skills that can be transferable for different functions within the organisation and that’s a journey you have to take the students on but also you have to take their parents on as well.

Julia Goga-Cooke: I see there is a very big mismatch between job design (description) and what comes out there. I don’t have the view that talent is scarce, I think there is a lot of talent out there but what you put in a job design to recruit and what the graduate looks for, it is two completely different things. And what people understand of the job design, for example the recruiter will then expect him (the employee) to also do all the social networking, all the tweeting, all the marketing even though he hasn’t learnt them.

It’s like “you are a designer, you should do that, you design everything.” So there is a clear lack of understanding. I think we still haven’t created the spaces where we work together understanding each other whether it be that form academia, from students themselves, that have to put some more amount of work to get some more things apart from the formal education that they are having, tapping into what other friends are learning in different subjects. If you go to university how can we create these open spaces inside the universities where students from all different faculties can go and work together on the same project and can learn skills from other subjects, so bringing together people from finance degree with people from design and so on.

Cornelia Meyer: I would like to give a little push back. The soft skills are surely very important but if you work for places like GE where you need to produce aircraft engines you need engineers and they need to know what to do, they need to be able to understand metrology otherwise our planes will fall out of the sky. If you work for BP you need engineers, somebody needs to get the stuff out of the ground into a refinery and from the well head to the burner tip. So we still need the hard skills, and if you are working in a bank or if you want to work as an economist it may be good if you had some economics. I worked in finance, in government, in engineer’s company, I work in FMCG’s and, as you said, I have got other skill sets but in the end I always had to rely, especially in the engineering world on these people with the deep knowledge to make sure that the oil came out of ground into a refinery or that the aircraft got constructed and people would stay in the air rather than falling down to the ground. So I would say, the soft skills are very, very important, all the collaborations very, very important, but please don’t forget the hard skills.

[Audience Question]: Jana you mentioned strong goals and achievement as evidence of drive. We have been talking about MOOCs here, I would like to hear from a member of the panel whether you would consider MOOCs when recruiting?

[Audience Question]: You are looking for people who are curious and it would be very interesting to know a bit more about that, what you mean by curiosity?

[Audience Question]: My question is related to what Juliet was talking about previously, about all the characteristics you were mentioning linking to cultural feel because topic today is TNE, I think it would be very interesting if you could give us examples of your recent hires and how they demonstrated to have, say, passion through the international student experience and mobility?

Lexie Sims: I will start with the question about curiosity and for me it is around asking questions, again just because it is so recent (it was yesterday) that we had the round table meeting with our Chief Executive and he said that the directors are always going to get nicknames. You never know what your nickname will be but in the business, people give you nicknames, and his nickname was “the director of questions”. So it is about asking questions and you may think that it is the wrong question but that question will lead to something else. Don’t be afraid to ask that question, and not being afraid to understand if you have the end product going back to look at “why did we make this decision? What was this decision making process? How did we get here?”

For instance, around brand hearted recruitment for the hotels we ask people to send a video about why they feel they are right for the brand and I can always tell who has

done their research, who has been curious about what we do. Being curious about our branding and what the differences are between a Crown Plaza and a Holiday Inn from. You can see this in the videos they send because it means they have asked questions, they have perhaps talked to our customers and gone to different hotels.

They can explain that difference and once you are in the business don’t stop asking those questions. Try to always give the best information to people and be able to say “yes, we decided on this but we thought about that.” Ensuring that you are curious about coming up with different ideas and different ways of working.

Jana Pione: Same, I would echo many of Lexie’s comments, the concept here is very similar, if not the same. I’ll answer the question adapted to Gartner’s environment though.

We would put curiosity into a concept of what we call clock-speed, which is practically how our people work with information, how they are able to understand what they should be asking about. So what information they need to seek, once they get answers, can they listen, absorb what the answers are saying back and probe further. For example for sales or research, we are looking specifically for probing curiosity, so take the subject from initial level, second level below surface, question on the answer to qualify the level, and that is specifically for sales and researches, for example.

There would be different type of curiosities as well and then once they get to the outcome, what do they do to give the information and how would they link it back to the person you are speaking to, to whom they are giving this information. So, in an interview scenario it would break down in 3 parts: prep –maybe the internal curiosity, I do my research, I need to ask about this this and this, and maybe do some internal thinking as well; then the actual action in the interview, you can have prepped curiosity but you can’t cheat on natural curiosity as well so as you go on the conversation flow there would be some new topics and unexpected things and people have to adapt to it fast, getting used to action questioning. And that is something we measure in the interview process, we have got 4 stages, and we see through the stages the consistency of that, and also on the job – it actually is all challenging, including for me. I am always kept on the top of my toes with my own questioning, the way I have to ask questions to my colleagues or with my superiors as well, and how do I prep and how I listen to them.

Julia Goga-Cooke: I will just be very brief because the other two guests spoke a lot about that, I will try to reply to your question about MOOCs. I love them, I think they are very useful, and the reason why I think they are very useful for the university (I know there has been a lot of debate about MOOCs) to get a revenue down because people were not going to pay to go to the university.

I think there is not enough research at the moment because this is a new phenomenon, but if you think of it in the sense you are reaching out to the worldwide talent, that when they get the satisfaction about participating in a MOOC it results in them being a follower.

So you are building a following crowd and some of them definitely will come to you for a specific kind of course. You are building a contingency through the MOOC that is also spreading the world about you; they become your marketing arms as well so use them. I love them, I think it’s a good idea.

In reference to your question about curiosity: Well, I would like to link it to the experience of studying abroad; one of the keys is to have the mind-set of an innovator, a traveller and having the curiosity. When you go to a university even if it is just in one other country it makes a difference because you will meet people from another 20 countries, you may as well have travelled in these 20 countries. For example my nephew has come to England and he has met people from China, Argentina and they are cooking evening meals from each of their different countries. For him it’s like a travelogue, so that’s very useful.

The other question from Nina, I strongly believe that you need to do what you love and that goes also to the lady there that asked what subject students choose to learn. If my passion is to become a teacher I want to go and learn how to become a teacher. But what I see these days, because we are going to live a long life and because we can’t retire- we just can’t afford it anymore, we are not going to have pensions, so we need to create serial

masteries. I graduated as a teacher in English and then I became a journalist so I had to be trained at BBC, then I became an innovation manager through the training I underwent and now I am in design thinking and collaborative network. So I have had to add to my portfolio of skills and learning throughout my life in order not to get bored (doing the same thing for life thinking as we used to think 20 years before ) but also because this is the market today.

Cornelia Meyer: Thank you very much this is such an insightful and excellent panel, let me just give the four key points that I heard out of this conversation: 1. The work place increasingly needs innovation. So there is the soft skills and the attitude, the characteristics, it’s the curiosity and innovation. As you said you need to have the mindset of a traveller so this is where TNE comes in. It proves people who have the TNE have a proven track record of being curious because they went to these other places.

We had a consultative approach today, a collaborative approach so you showed that you (panel) have been able to work with other cultures. Resilience is important if you go and study abroad. I remember when I went to study in Japan for my PhD (not an easy thing) you learn to become resilient. You referred to the serial mastery because as your career develops you need to learn different things, so again TNE helps you to have that open mind set, so in that sense it is very important.

My little pushback is that we still need engineers, we still people that have that mind-set but we also need people who actually have studied one subject in great detail in order to deliver some of the goods we all depend on and some of the services we all depend on.

2. The power of networks, which obviously helps with TNE and we should start to think of the network, let’s say, of alumni organisations (a) as something that connects you globally, (b) also some of them have the GDP, if you add up all the income from small to medium size countries, that’s certainly good, and increasingly companies, as Jana pointed out, try to develop those networks, the alumni network for themselves.

3. Cultural empathy and passion for being global, especially in this new global world, it’s very important. That’s again where students with TNE have a leg up.

4. Because of the online presence that we have nowadays , the way in which we can link, we can even actually after we go back to our countries, stay connected and also our goods and services will have a much broader reach-out so again it is important that people understand what’s happening in other cultures and in other countries.

Transnational education and Employability Manuela Doutel-Haghighi, January 2014 Being open to other cultures, being those historical, sociological or business cultures, is an imperative in terms of both employability and successful outcome in the workplace.

The point about “transnational experiences”, as I like to call them, of which education is one aspect, is not so much the ability to communicate in another language, but it’s the possibility of discovering Others. Others way of speaking, listening, working, thinking, enjoying, living etc Now why is this important for an Employer? Because in today’s global economy, be it local or beyond national borders, one’s clients come from a variety of backgrounds and any enterprise must be ready and adapted to them. One point I have observed having lived and worked in three continents is that both Europeans and North Americans often lack this sense of diversity which is key to successfully conduct business anywhere in the world.

Reading books about Latin America, Africa or Asia is no longer sufficient to be successful in those markets, one must embrace the culture with all it has to offer and without the classic prejudice.

Any client has a gender, a past, a culture, habits, perceptions, wishes, biases, and so many other ways of thinking and buying that it becomes an imperative for any organisation to have employees who can adapt quickly and with an open mind to the clients.

And when I say employees, I am not just referring to front office employees but equally to back office, because in most organisations, the client is at the centre of everything we do, so front office employees need the tools to engage with clients and equally back office employees need the tools to enable the front office to operate in a customer centric way.

Talking of back office, with a global movement to outsource and sometimes offshore, and now even re-shore, it is clear that the transnational element is present in all these transactions; so once again having that open-mindness is a must to successfully conducting these operations.

Now what do most Employers look for in Graduates? Apart from a degree from a University, the following elements are usually looked for: curiosity, adaptability, passion for the business, innovation, communication, ability to build relationships, leadership, teamwork and social skills amongst others. Although certain subjects require specific education (law, medicine, engineering etc), all require the skills mentioned above in a workforce in order to make an organisation function effectively. Put yourself in the shoes of an employer and ask yourself: I can teach you a lot of things, but do I want you in my team? Can you and I work in the same team? Will you add value to us?

Transnational education is key because the majority of these skills is easily acquired once one starts travelling and experiencing other cultures, both academically and socially.

I know that a great part of my personal career success and the opportunities that opened to myself was the fact I had studied and worked in France, Iran, Portugal, Norway, USA and South Africa. When I went to do my MBA in the USA, I did it above all because I wanted to understand the North American way of conducting business which then became very useful compared to my peers when I joined my current employer. Equally, I was selected amongst many others peers, some far more experienced “technically� than myself, to develop the outsourcing business in South Africa as part of the expansion into Emerging Economies, because of my transnational education and life experience. The locals even thought I was originally South African!

So, my advice to any Graduate is to jump at the first opportunity to study and /or abroad, because this will give them life skills that will be useful for any interview but also any future career opportunities.

Panel: student perspective on TNE Introduced and chaired by Professor Chris Marlin Pro Vice Chancellor, University of Sussex Torquil Wheatley Director Citi Investment Solutions Philip Ozouf Treasury and Resources Minister, Government of Jersey Freddie Ossberg Managing Director and Founder of Raconteur Media

Professor Chris Marlin: Welcome. I am Chris Marlin and I am Pro Vice- Chancellor at the University of Sussex, and we have here I think a very interesting topic and an interesting panel. Let’s talk a little bit about the topic first, because it will help to introduce the panellists and to talk in a way that’s relevant to the topic. The topic is about transnational education and about a student perspective on transnational education (TNE). We have a few not students, but former students, so in many ways is much more affective I think.

I always think that student evaluation of teaching, an education shouldn’t be done at the time, but rather several years later because that’s when you really know whether what you have been told was of some value or not. And I think that today we have some people who had a chance to demonstrate, to understand, and to experience how the education affected what they ended up doing.

When it comes to TNE, we can spend a lot of time, we can spend the whole session talking about what it means and the different flavours of what TNE is or is not, but I am not going to do any of that. I am going to use a very general definition, and if there are peers in the audience who want to argue, they can argue with me later. But essentially I think that what we should talk about is an international element to education, so I would like to start taking that as a starting point. There are various ways in which education, our education in particular, can have an international element. It might have an international element because students travel somewhere, and that one of the common forms, so study abroad, or placement abroad, leaving your home country and getting the experience of another country, preferably for an extensive period like six months or something like that, maybe a year. That particular kind of experience is really valuable.

There are other ways which you can get international experience, one is you might do your whole degree in a different country, you might come from one country and go to another country, and that’s foreign TNE. You might stay in your home country but been able to be educated by people from another country and although there are many oversees campuses from universities and other organisations, that essentially are invaded with host countries, so students that come from host countries can get an international experience in that way. But for my students, the international experience like that, is where they study through a contact with other students who come from other countries and I think that’s also very valuable. So all our universities within the UK for example now have reasonable numbers of international students, and the benefit of that is to create an international feel around campuses with discussions that go on with tutorial groups and other classroom situations, in fact our classrooms take on an international flavour.

At my own university, one of the things that I find quite interesting is that in which social events have changed by having an international population with a reasonable number of international students, particularly those that relate to culture of that international student group. A good example at Sussex is a quite lively celebration with Indian subcontinent students every year, and what I really like seeing is that some UK students joining in that process and learning some different dances and doing some other things that they wouldn’t normally do and learning another culture, and for me this is brilliant. That is what it’s all about

and that is the kind of thing that students need. I always say to my students that there really isn’t a job that you can get now as a graduate in which you don’t need to know about the rest of the world and in many, many cases you benefit from knowing about the rest of the world.

It’s some considerate data, in many sense is about having an assumption about the rest of the world and about what sort of assumption that you can make on other people having that in mind, so that you don’t make that sort of assumption, but you learn from other cultures as you need to. Those people here who know me, I sort of weave in personal things from time to time- my nephew got an international business degree from the university of technology in Sydney and he had a study abroad component that has changed his life. I mean he now does all kind of things, he is very, very successful and I can see that that experience really changed his prospectus in terms of what he was going to do. But also my two children; one daughter in particular was influenced by the fact that she was born in one country (United States of America), lived mostly in another country (Australia), and lived from time to time in other countries within Scotland and within the UK. And all of that changed them, enormously in terms of vistas and way that they look at the rest of the world, and what they see about themselves and what they might end up doing, and I am not going to go on and on about how successful or otherwise, but I think that a lot of that is down to international experience, and that’s a generalizable thing.

I talked to a lot of people about international things, and it’s interesting how many people I talked to, when I talked for a while, how they can look back through their lives and find the point when it changed for them, and it’s often a peer of international content of some sort, frequently studying abroad or something like that. A concentrated period that opened up the kind of possibilities that they never thought of before and ended up changing their lives and so in that kind of context, I want to take TNE and sort of title the section in all those different ways in which you might have international or transnational components, rather than focusing on some particular performance which are not so relevant with today’s discussions.

What I am going to do now is to get each of the panellists to introduce themselves in advance in a way that could highlight the international aspects if you like, the international ingredients in them and how that changed their lives, and how what they do now has been facilitated by that. So, I think that if you have a student perspective in the sense of graduate’s perspective on this topic that would be fairly valuable to look at. I do want to make this interactive so I am not expecting a long introduction, but I want to get to a point where we get participation and I know that the other panel want that too. Ok let’s start the farthest side of the table, with Sofia. Sofia will introduce herself, she is a journalist and in particular a television journalist so she has had a number of changes in her career with an interesting background, but I will ask her to talk a little bit about that rather than me paraphrasing.

Sofia Petkar: So I attended the British American College (BACL now known as RACL) as it was back in 2002, and graduated from here in 2005, and with a degree in Media Communication and Management with Marketing. I went on to work for an American company called CNBC Europe as a broadcast journalist and producer and after I went to Sky news where I spent seven years and I have just made the transition to financial news at Bloomberg TV, and all very, very international channels. I come from a very mixed family as well, so we have Indian, Arab, Portuguese and European heritage, we call ourselves the benison family.

Freddie Ossberg: Well, my name is Freddy Ossberg and I graduated from the European Business School (EBSL) in 2005, with a degree of International Business and Management, then I spent one year in Madrid studying business in Spanish. I am originally from Sweden, I moved to London in 2000, 13 years ago, and despite London and Madrid I lived in Hong Kong, and now I have a publishing company and marketing agency here in London called Racounter, and that’s about it. I speak four, five languages ok, as a result of that.

Phillip Ozouf: My name is Philip Ozouf, I am from Jersey, I graduated from EBSL in 1993.

I did French and German for my two languages, I spent the normal period of time that you spend studying at EBS in Frankfurt, and the school in Paris, I did incoming trainings with a

German bank and a French property agency, state agency and also KPMG where I helped set up a network of events, and a new network of offices that KPMG have listed in Europe.

I got on to a graduate training programme with a company called Cargill, (I wouldn’t have gotten into that training programme if I hadn’t differentiated myself with languages) which was sort of the premium graduating programme but I got on because I spoke languages.

I worked for Cargill all over the word, especially here in the UK, and I spent lots of time in Africa, about three or four months a year for six or seven years in Africa, travelled the world India, I spent time in Geneva, and all sort of things.

Then I took a different turn, I returned to Jersey, for very different reasons, and I stood on a by- election and then on an election and I got elected to the Jersey parliament as a young 29 year old, and on my first day in that parliament I was given some effectively ministerial responsibilities. I have been a politician now for around 15 years. I discharged the functions of economic development Minister for Jersey, effectively Planning Minister, and for the last five years, I’ve been the Finance Minister. So, being a Finance Minister in a global crisis when you’re a Financial Centre has been an interesting situation, though I would say that my grounding at EBSL has hopefully given me the skills to be a reasonable servant of Jersey and a good Finance Minister.

Torquil Wheatley: My name is Torquil Wheatley, I graduated here back in 1991 where I promptly moved to Paris to work at JP Morgan, trading currency’s for them, then moved back to London in the mid-90’s where I worked for Citibank briefly. I then worked for Deutsche Bank for 11 years and had a brief interim spell with a dot-com, which as I was explaining to the panel beforehand, was way ahead of the rest of the pack, in that it went bust before anyone else did. I then moved onto Deutsche Bank and then in mid-2011 had to set up a hedge-fund which was possibly the most spectacularly awful timing known to man. I was then asked to run a Fund-of-Funds (FOF) and then about a year ago, was asked to come and run the currency investment group at Citibank in London.

Chris Marlin: Now I think what we’ll do next - I’ll ask one question to provoke the panel a bit more about the relevance of TNE, but then I’d like you to prepare yourself to be asking questions as well. My question is around the idea of recession and economic downtown.

In those kinds of environments, what tends to happen is that students tend to become more conservative. It’s interesting, they tend to stay with the pack – I remember talking to a Dean of Engineering in a Japanese University who described how the engineering students in Japan, at a certain point when the whole of the employment market basically closed up for a year or two - they all stopped taking risks, they didn’t go on study abroad or any of that stuff anymore. They just stayed with the pack, tried to get the best possible result they could with all the other students, and not differentiate themselves in any way.

What I would like to ask the panel is that in the current situation and what we’ve been facing for a while – and when you get older, you can give advice to young people - they don’t always appreciate it, but I’d like to know what their advice would be to current students about the importance of TNE and the international component of education and to what extent, they should take that kind of risk? And already, we’ve had a bit of a debate – something Philip said about how in the first stage of your career, you try to get on the first rung of the ladder and so forth. But I’d be interested in their views of how important this is because there’s always a trade-off. It’s interesting in my own University, we get groups of students, particularly the law students who are a bit reluctant sometimes to take a risk, because, as you probably know, out of all the law students who graduate, not everyone goes on to practice law, and getting into that small proportion is quite a competitive, so again, they don’t always like to take risks, and to go to another university, another country, and getting some of their grades from another country, is a risk because you might feel more comfortable that you can do well within your own system.

So, I’d be interested to know what the panellists think about that question, and what kind of advice you might give to current students about the importance of this, and to what extent they ought to take a risk, where it looks like a big risk, and it’s a big step to take that kind of experience?

Torquil Wheatley: I’ll just briefly talk about my experience, when I was here and how that impacted the rest of my career. At EBSL, I think the transnational experience, or the TNE really came in two forms. Yes, you spent a year away, but your classmates typically came from a fairly diverse background, both on a nationality and cultural background as well. So, in many ways the sort of transnational experience really began at home effectively. And if I think about it, it can probably best be summed up if I think about Day 1 here, which I think Nick Bowen will remember, and the final day, on the end of Day 4. And I always think of Day 1 – it was a bit like one of those stilted teenage school dances where you have the girls at one end, and the boys at one end, and everyone stays in their own group, and eventually everyone sort of moves together. It was a bit like natural groups forming on day one of the English, the Italians, the Dutch, the French – I’m sure you all remember – it probably still happens now but I must say I’m sure many things have changed in the intervening years – this was 20 something years ago. What was interesting is that by the end of Day 4, those barriers were far less defined, you could almost say that they weren’t there anymore. Effectively, we had learnt a new language, it’s not an audible language, but it was very much a way to communicate with individuals that you probably shared no cultural reference points with.

What I mean by that is that if you think about the amount of conversations that are based around the TV you grew up with, the music you listened to and traditions. You’re having to effectively integrate and interact with people you effectively don’t have those natural cultural reference points with. And what was interesting is that by the end, you were blind to the differences, but you were very sensitive to them at the same time if that makes sense. You were aware of them and able to be somewhat empathetic.

Now, how did this happen – how did we go from Day 1 in these effectively country national groups, changing to this overall melting pot mix you had at the end of Day 4? I think there were two primary reasons behind that. I think firstly, what they did is within 100 people they divided everyone up into 5 or 6 groups, I seem to remember and each one of those groups had to have a cultural or national diversity mix imposed upon it. You were then given tasks to perform, and were judged not individually, but on how that group had performed. And what did that do? That forced you to get on, that forced you to try to get the best out of each other within that group within any one time, and I thought it was a fascinating exercise, because it prepared you very well in many ways for the year abroad. I think that year abroad was possibly the largest culture shock you could effectively get, because in years one and two, everyone who’s coming here and who you’re studying with, is effectively the foreigner. But then the whole situation in year three is turned on its head, where you are effectively the foreigner and you’re forced really to work, live and learn in a somewhat alien environment. And you’ve got to learn how to do things that we somewhat take for granted, and you’ve got to learn those things in a foreign country, all of which is different like setting up a bank account, doing your washing. All these things you effectively have to learn to do in a very different culture, and I think we all came back (I’d be interested to hear of people’s experiences) fundamentally changed, but significantly more effective. And I mentioned this word, empathy earlier, and empathic, and be able to fundamentally understand the problems that people are facing if they’re a foreigner interacting in your native environment is very important.

The second part really is that’s the experience and that’s the history – but is it a useful skill or luxury. Yes, it’s a luxury but I think going forward it is a necessity as well, and I think that question needs to be unfortunately answered with another question which is effectively; does the increasing ease we’re seeing of international education and globalisation mean that your future job is going to be more or less likely to have an international or transnational element to it? I think that the answer is completely obvious. Of course, you can learn those skills, during the first years of your job, and interacting with people, but I think as Philip alluded to earlier, I cannot stress enough the advantage of already having developed that language, that muscle, that ability to interact with people who aren’t from the same background, environment, culture or nationality as yourself. It does give you a significant career advantage over your peers, of that I am 100% convinced.

But another advantage to all this, is the flexibility that it gives you as an individual, as a professional. So take my experience- I graduated in 1991, and the job market was abysmal, the economy had fallen off a cliff. The M&S had closed down their graduate programme

or commuted it the following year. The same thing was going on with all the banks. The economy was falling down, all the marketing firms were closing down, but that wasn’t happening on the continent. So to me it seemed entirely natural to up sticks, to go to Paris, and get a job there. All my friends and family thought it was ridiculous and didn’t make any sense, but for me, it was just entirely natural. I knew how to operate in that environment, there were a significant number of opportunities out there that simply didn’t exist in the UK and I knew that I was able to really benefit from that extra optionality on my career.

I stayed in Paris for six years, and I think that that international theme to my career has really continued to this day. I was just writing it down this afternoon, but over the last year, I’ve been in France, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Hungary, Switzerland, the US, Australia, Singapore, Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Dubai, Qatar. I have probably forgotten a few but I would probably say that without a question of doubt, the transnational experience has completely defined my career and what I wanted to do with it, and what I’ve been able to achieve. It’s probably unsurprising therefore that I would commend this experience to absolutely anyone. Thank you.

Philip Ozouf: Well, Torquil’s learned his presentation skills at EBSL pretty well, and he’s done a good job of persuading , but we did learn that – we did actually learn to have to have to stand up in front of a group of individuals and persuade them- and you’re doing pretty well. I remember you from when we were students, and you were good then, but actually he’s improved if I may say.

But the fact is, the really serious point is, when I was a student here the European Union wasn’t called the European Union, it was called the European Community. The single market was being created, and whatever the interesting debate that’s going on in the UK about Britain’s place in Europe or otherwise, there is an absolute, unshakeable destiny in Britain trading more. I was very pleased to hear that David Willetts, the Universities’ Minister was addressing your conference yesterday. I think that’s a really powerful statement that he came here to Regent’s University London because the conservatives talk about the global race. The global race is about a world which is increasingly globalised (I probably don’t need to say that to anybody in the room) but the trade flows between Europe, between North America and Europe, between Latin America and North America, between China and the whole of Africa to the North, the world is becoming a world where there’s increasing trade. That is the way that you lift people out. My political views are that trade will lift millions of people out of poverty, and improve the lives of people around the world and trade does that. In order to facilitate that trade, you need people to service that trade flow, and to serve (I live in political world) but whether or not it’s being a politician, a diplomat. I spend lots of my time travelling around the world arguing the case for Jersey in that regard, but if you work for a not-for-profit organisation, if you work for a charity, or most importantly, you work for a commercial endeavour, you need to have the skills and be able to operate. And what EBS did for me is that it accelerated my knowledge. It’s exactly what Torquil said, I was able immediately, within one or two years of graduating, to be sent anywhere, Switzerland Germany, India, wherever - I had no fear about doing that. I wasn’t worried about living anywhere else.

I’m a passionate linguist, I come from an island which is pretty well only British/English speaking, we have our French roots. I was brought up to some degree speaking French, a language gives you a different window on the world, and when you learn it, you appreciate it, you speak it and you live it. When you’ve lived in another place, when you’ve worked there, the key element, the differentiator, the game changer for me being at EBSL was the fact that I not only did economics (like Torquil). I didn’t want to do Moliere, I wanted to actually study economics in French, and that’s what I did. That experience was absolutely unique for me. But also the in-company training, working in a German bank in newlycreated Eastern Europe, that put me on an accelerator that differentiated me. I not only enjoyed it but it put me in a completely different position and what I would say to graduates today is that the competition isn’t just graduates in the UK, you’ve got a billion competitors for a job, and actually you need to equip yourself in every way you can; differentiate yourself, get different experiences. It’s changed my life being at EBS, I’ve got a French godson, actually an EBSL student here (very proud of that) but his father is one of my best friends. My other best friend lives in Germany that I met as student here. I have

a perspective, and I have an international world, whether it’s going on holiday, whether it’s meeting them skiing, it’s changed my world. I am not English/British-centric, and that’s been a fantastic experience for me, and that’s what EBSL, that’s what a TNE did, and it has hopefully made me a more productive servant of society.

Freddie Ossberg: Well, I found myself sort of mentally ticking off every good point I could think of listening to Torquil and Philip, but I think that I don’t want to leave Sofia last, so it’s better maybe that you start.

Sofia Petkar: Oh no, please age before beauty.

Freddie Ossberg: Ok, do you want me to go back to the question of risk because they’ve covered the positive elements of having an international element and the exposure to cultures? It’s actually really interesting what Torquil said about day 1, and actually out of interest, my day 1 was September 11. I remember that very, very vividly as we all gathered, a group of international people who had never met each other, in front of a television in the library. I mean it was a tragic day for many reasons, but if there was one positive way of looking at it, is that there were these strangers from everywhere in the world, kind of met each other during such a historic event as such. But if I go back to risk and I’m not the best person, maybe someone like Torquil who’s worked in global organisations would be able to comment further on it, because I started my own company two years after graduating from EBSL. I’ve never worked in truly global companies, but I can imagine that having languages like Philip was pointing out, but also this exposure to being able to get ahead and understand people regardless of their nationality, and use that as your social competence, and competitive advantage that I can walk in with people from Russia or the Jewish community, and so on and kind of have some prior knowledge, as to how the jargon or how the culture works. I can imagine that being a huge benefit, in global organisations.

You immediately stand out and perhaps get ahead as a result and I suppose in that sense it’s worth the risk.

Chris Marlin: What about the context in which you do work and the international company that you’re running. What about the international context, and that kind of thing that you get out of it. Is that beneficial when you are running your own company?

Freddie Ossberg: I would say so, I actually thought about it on the way here. About half of the people who work in my company come from outside of the UK and came to London and the UK to work. I don’t know whether that’s promotional of the fantastic multicultural sort of centre of London, as opposed to TNE, but I suppose what you learn from TNE applies in how you understand people from Brazil for example, or the Indian community, or the Scandinavians- for other people to understand me. We speak very bluntly, we have a different sense of humour and so on, and vice versa, I suppose, so yes, it does help.

Sophie Petkar: I, unlike my fellow panellists, I haven’t worked in another country, and I haven’t lived in another country, so for me, my entire experience of an international community has been my life at Regent’s University London. I was 17 when I came to Regent’s, I went to a typical English school, I grew up in an area of London where we were one of maybe two or three Asian families, so predominantly my life had very little access outside of my family to an international environment. Although I was very well-travelled as my parents used to take me away to different countries. So for me, the transnational element of my life has always been my education. Where the other guys have probably lived abroad or worked aboard, my international environment started with my friendships that were made at Regent’s.

When you come to an environment like this, especially being very, very young, those are your forming years, the years when your mind is moulded. I made many, many friends during my time at Regent’s. Every one of them now lives abroad which is quite sad when you want to plan a night out, and you’re looking through your diary and you’re wondering if they’ll ever come back and visit you. But it’s also made for some very exciting experiences both in the workplace and outside. When I graduated from Regent’s after 4 months, I

joined CNBC and based in London. I think there were a total of about 5 British people in my department of broadcast. Everyone else was from abroad, you have to understand how people work. The European mentality in the workplace is totally different to British mentality. For example timekeeping is not everyone’s strongest point, but because you’ve been in an environment where you’ve studied with them, you’ve interacted, you’ve built individual relationships with people, and you understand them. Those skills transfer into your daily life. You know you’re working with an Italian, he may be late but he doesn’t mean it. You’re British, you’ve been there 5 minutes early and you’re wondering what you’ve done to offend this person, why they’re late? But it’s these little things, these attitudes to work, attitudes to friendships, attitude to families, all these little things that you pick up in an educational environment, they do come back and they are very, very useful.

You’ve got someone who’s worked in Finance, someone who’s a Businessman, someone who’s a Politician. I am a Journalist and I meet people of different nationalities just to get through my work day. Then I moved to Sky news meaning I was not only in an environment where I was with international people but I was dealing with international news. My life revolved around what was happening outside of my front door, and outside of our shores. If I didn’t understand, if I didn’t grow up in a TNE, I would not have survived as long as I have done in news. Again, it’s not just a mentality thing it’s how cultures perceive things. Something that we might look at sitting in Britain and say “that’s very strange, what’s happening in that country?” But I’ve got friends in that country, it’s not strange to them. You learn how to be polite, you come across many things in different cultures that we don’t understand. You’ve come to Regent’s, you’ve met people in your class, you’ve learnt what their family is like and you take an interest in other people. I take an interest in other people. I’m very chatty by nature, as a few people in the audience know. I found that having a transnational education gave me a head start on personal relationships. And that’s how I’ve built my work relationships. People who I work with are my friends, they’re my colleagues and they are people I learn from.

Hopefully I’m teaching them something as well because I’ve brought a lot to the table. I’d highly recommend, I always recommend to people, if you have a chance to study in an international environment, go for it. You’ll learn something. Either you’ll learn something about yourself that you are not capable of living abroad, or working abroad, or you’ll realise that that’s the life that you want. I travel a lot round the world, I travel to India quite often, in fact twice a year, minimum, I go, not because I have family there but because I like the culture. I have friends that I met during my time at Regent’s who still live there, you go and visit, you go and engross yourself in their culture, their colourfulness. I go to Hong Kong, I have a Cousin living there, and it’s fun. For me my education taught me that life is full of new opportunities, and it can be a lot of fun. So, for me, that’s where the benefit of transnational education comes in.

Panellists were saying that they’ve worked in companies, they’ve moved abroad- good, great. But for me, I’ve lived all my life in London. People come here they look at it like the centre of the world, it’s like a melting pot of everyone’s cultures- great, learn something from them, take something away, maybe they’re taking something away from us, because we’ve become an open-minded as a society. So I’d definitely, definitely encourage transnational education. It won’t just help you in your career, it won’t just help you in your interpersonal relationships it will make you a different person. I spent many years at Regent’s (four years by the time I graduated) and I actually wept on my last day because I was saying good bye to a lot of people that I’d grown to love. I didn’t know that certain countries even existed like Eritrea but ended up making a lovely friend from there. Now, 8 years on, we’re still sharing each other’s lives; she’s happily married, got two lovely children. If I hadn’t come here, taken that plunge into this international environment I would have missed out on all these amazing people that I’ve got to know. So business wise, great, TNE gets you really far in business. But I wouldn’t have been a journalist, I wouldn’t have been a better journalist if I hadn’t have come to this environment, but I think I’m a better person for it as well. So a little bit different aspect to what the other panellists are saying, but that’s my two cents worth.

Chris Marlin: Thank you Sofia that’s terrific. And thank you to the other panellists for what they had to say, I think it’s given us a lot to think about. So, now it’s time for

the audience to participate. I’d like to ask if there’s anyone who’d like to kick off with a comment or a question, something you’d like to provoke the panel with?

Q: Andy Masheter: My name’s Andy Masheter - I’m a Trustee and a Board member at Regent’s, and in a former-life a pro-Vice Chancellor. More relevant to the panel though, I was Director for the UK Council for International Student Affairs, so all of my life has been about transnational and international education. What we’ve just heard from the four of you has been a really interesting justification of everything that lots of us have been working towards. Basically, what I wanted to put to you, is what can we do here at Regent’s differently and better, that can really build on that, and really make it possible for everyone to go out and really get the most out of TNE? Phillip Ozouf: I’ll give some observations. I think when I look back at my time at EBSL the thing that differentiated me, apart from the issue of languages (doing economics and psychology, in business administration, in two other languages) was my experience of in-company training. I don’t quite know how that works today? It was very, very difficult at the time, I wrote hundreds of letters to try and get some in-company training. I was very lucky, in fact, another student that I studied with, his father helped me get into a German bank because my German was not particularly good. But I think developing partnerships with businesses in order to give internships is I think key. Its jolly hard work, you don’t get as much holiday as normal students, but actually I had a whale of a time. I spent a summer in Hamburg, I spent time in Eastern Europe, I spent time living in France, and indeed London as well, and that gave me, without any doubt, a boost in my CV. I got on to a Graduate training programme that my academic results would not normally have got me in, my application would have been put in the bin. I don’t know how it works today? In my life today, I always take two interns during my summer period. It’s hard work having a student and spending time with them, but I feel an obligation, the people who did it for me I want to do it for them. So I don’t quite know how that works but you need a network of businesses that are going to give students a real opportunity, not just photocopying, but a real job and a real insight. That’s absolutely vital.

I think also the other thing is this point that a number of us have made, it’s the experience of studying alongside other people. If you go to an English university (and nothing against English Universities) or a French university 90% of the students are going to be English/ British and actually what my education gave was that melting pot of Dutch, Italians, German, French and more widely drawn. Don’t lose that, that’s the vital part of it and actually you’re providing something to the UK economy as well. If I was the Chancellor in the UK I would say that there’s some economic benefit from what you’re doing here, and you’re providing some skilled workers for this global race because inevitably they’ll stay here.

Chris Marlin: Any other thoughts from the panel before we go back to the audience?

Freddie Ossberg: Can I just clarify on the audience – the majority of the audience is from partnership organisations of Regent’s based abroad?

Chris Marlin: Colleges, Universities and Schools, yes.

Freddie Ossberg: The only thing the University could do is just to make sure that those visiting students really get the same experience that the four of us got being here (at Regent’s), that is integrated. And we made friends all over the world and learnt the national cultures. I know from my own experience, studying in Spain that not for me personally, but for the majority of the visiting students, it was hard to get into the groups and community at the university I went to. So that would be the thing maybe to make sure, that it’s not just integrated in a corner of what goes on at the university, but they’re fully integrated, and fully immersed into the whole experience. I’m not sure how to do it, but that would probably be my recommendation to the question.

Torquil Wheatley: I think it’s the provision of opportunities to actually have those meetings. As I mentioned, those plenary sessions, those groups, where everyone’s divided up into multinational groups was a fabulous way to kick start and break the ice. You had

no other option but to work with each other. I absolutely agree with Phillip, I think that the internships were absolute knock-out. They were so completely crucial to providing, not a fully-formed individual at the end of the university experience, but a much better, rounded individual than any other universities were actually providing at the time.

Philip Ozouf: That was prepared for the world of work. Skilled, that were actually capable, and actually it was tested out. I didn’t want to work for a bank. I realised that I loved my experience in a bank, but that I knew that wasn’t what I wanted to do, at that particular time in my life.

Torquil Wheatley: You just decided to go and run a country.

Phillip Ozouf: That would be rather overstating it if I may say so.

Sofia Petkar: Can I just quickly say, I know you’ve had a lot of visiting students coming into Regent’s but while I was at BACL, as it was back then, being the British student, so I lived here and I studied here; I would have liked the opportunity to be offered to go abroad, and maybe do a swap. So that one student comes here, and I take their place over there. I think that would have been quite nice. I’m not sure whether the British/American College actually offered it but it was never offered to me personally. I would have loved that chance, if I could come back and do my time at Regent’s again, I would probably have put in a request myself to say is it possible when students are maybe coming from the States, Russia or Germany, could I possibly swap places with them? And maybe have a semester with them with their culture, with their university, because like the others were saying, when students were coming here initially, for maybe just one semester, they tended to clique together. Maybe if they knew that we were swapping places with them they would try and integrate with our friends, and know people that we’ve made contacts with. Or even if it was the following semesters, that we then follow them back and see how their university works. I think that’s the only thing I’d say, is may be offer the students that are based in London permanently, the opportunity at other schools to go abroad. I know at EBSL it is part of your course to have to go. People studying at Webster, and the BritishAmerican College, they didn’t have that option. If you wanted to go anywhere, you were going in the summer.

Chris Marlin: Any other questions?

Elisa Nardi: My name is Elisa Nardi, I’m also a Trustee of the Board, and former Chief People Officer for Virgin Media. I don’t know if you had the chance to listen to the debate this morning but we had a number of employers with us this morning talking about the things that they’re looking for in tomorrow’s future global leaders. They talked about a lot of character strokes and traits of individuals, and sitting listening to you, you strike me in some ways as being very different individuals, and yet I also wonder whether there aren’t things about your personality and character that first of all encouraged you to want to come to a university where you can study in the way that you have studied, and be open to that international perspective. But also is it something that is innate within you, your character traits that have allowed you to be very open to this, and if that is the case- is it something that you feel others through education can be encouraged to develop, or actually is it just something you’ve just got to have? So, I think the question is what kind of character do you have as individuals that give you this openness to this international perspective, but also do you think through education this is something that can be developed if you don’t have it?

Sofia Petkar: As I mentioned I was really young when I came to Regent’s I was at that age where you can mould an individual’s mind and their personality a little bit more. But I think you kind of have to be interested in wanting to learn about other people. If the first experience I had of an international environment had been the workplace, I’m honest to say it would have been a culture shock to me. It would have been hard for me to integrate myself within a workplace. So I think when you’re asking what sort of personality you need to come to a school like this. You need to be someone who’s either willing to open up, or has already had a slight experience with an international culture, and you want to build on

it. People who are very, very closed- minded would find it hard unless they met someone who was willing to tap in, and invest a little bit of time in teaching this person. But I think as an individual, you have to have it in you, to want to meet other people, to want to integrate. You can’t be completely shut off on entering this environment. But the fact that people choose a school like this means that you’ve already taken that first step.

The fact that when you apply to come to Regent’s you’ve already read what it’s like, you’ve read the reviews. There are people on Facebook, twitter (I’m very social media active) and I do genuinely read comments of people saying “I’m thinking of applying to Regent’s”, and you will see comments, I think it’s on our alumni page, of other students and alumni jumping in and saying “I had a great semester there!” It is word of mouth encouragement, but it’s also the fact that these people have come looking for information, so they’ve already taken the step. And I think that’s the kind of personality you have to have -someone who has a bit of get-up-and go, and will try to find out if this is the right school. Not just going, “my friends are all going to King’s College” great, good for them, but is that really where you want to go? Are you a sheep, do you really want to follow the flock? A lot of my friends went off to traditional English universities; some went to Cambridge, some went to Oxford, and when they ask me “why do you want to go to this international school? I say “because I want to meet people, I don’t just want to study, I want to work on myself as a person”, and that’s why I chose Regent’s. I think you have to have that kind of personality in which you want to expand your horizons and look for opportunities in life. So, a little bit of get-up-and-go does help in my opinion.

Torquil Wheatley: I’m just trying to think whether it’s something that we had before we joined, or whether it’s something we developed here. I mean if I think about it, listening to the panellists, the common things that come out are empathy, sensitivity, an ability to be, of course, modesty and shyness, but I think an ability to take the plunge and take the risk. But I think one of the things I find about myself is constantly trying to fight back initial preconceptions and judgements of people, because it doesn’t stop, the world does not stop surprising you. Especially as you get older, there’s a vast temptation to sort of start becoming more stuck in your ways, but all you have to do is go somewhere where you are completely out of your comfort zone. I was talking earlier about feeling like an alien in France or Spain. Well, the world has changed a lot now, if you look at a student makeup, I’m sure there are many Russians/Indians/Chinese, many more than there were making up part of the university populous 20 or 20 something years ago. But if you want a complete culture shock then go to somewhere like Japan where every single culture reference point you have is thrown out the window. For example, you go into a meeting room and you’re presenting to three guys- two of which are quite junior and noting away, and then there’s an older guy at the back, who’s half asleep, and probably drooling. And you come out and you think that went abysmally and your Japanese colleagues say “no, it actually went really well”. And you say “who was that guy at the back? “oh, he’s the guy who runs the bank”it’s all these things. You wouldn’t basically put these stereotypes, you would brush it off and assume the opposite unless you were willing to be surprised and I think that’s one of the key things- just an openness to new ideas and new people. I think that’s probably the main one that I can think of.

Freddie Ossberg: Yeah, I also think the best people who can answer that question, whether it is an innate talent that students bring with them, or if it is something that is culturally developed because of their experience would be someone such as Dr Nick Bowen who’s been here for a long time. He has seen people right at the start through to when they leave, and who perhaps can see whether they develop any similar traits.

Torquil Wheatley: Dr Nick Bowen is one of our old professors.

Phillip Ozouf: Well, I saw Nick Bowen on my first day when I came for an interview [TW: He hasn’t changed a bit] No, but I would actually like to take the opportunity of thanking Nick, and for the staff who gave me the opportunities that I would never have had in my life. If you talk about the character issues, I think your character is formed through your education, your skills, your ability to be able to communicate, how you communicate and your empathy with other people. And I think the thing that I learnt at EBSL was the ability

to change “when the facts change”. What you realise, and what I realise in my political life is that the world is changing to an ever faster pace whether that’s technology; the fax machine was the thing that existed here. Internet/email didn’t exist when I was a student here and I remember in my IT classes having it described to me, and I didn’t actually believe how it would work. Now the jump from mainframe to desktop, to desktop to laptop, to laptop to ipad and every jump has taken half the jump of the previous one. And anyone who thinks that that velocity of change is going to slow down, it isn’t.

As we’re seeing, I think it was the technology fair last week in the US (SP: Las Vegas) is unbelievable and you need to equip young people with an ability to deal in a fast changing world. I’ve been a politician for 15 years. I think this is being broadcast, so I hope the people of Jersey are not going to hear what I’m about to say but I’m not going to be a politician for the whole of my life. I intend not be a politician in 10 years’ time. That’s an easy enough thing to say, as there’s an election this year but I will go on to do something else. And I fully expect to go on to do something which is transnational. I’d love to go and work for the World Bank or IMF. I’d love to go and do something that actually plays back to those skills that I learnt when I was at EBSL and I think it’s the ability to absorb, the ability to learn, interact and communicate. A university degree is not just about learning the words in a book, and being able to recite them in an essay, you actually have to learn how to learn, you have to learn how to change and how to deal in that world. And I hope that’s what EBSL stood for and is continuing to give people.

Chris Marlin: Any one from the audience got anything further they’d like to raise?

Dr Nick Bowen, Regent’s University London: Having been mentioned a couple of times, can I just answer the question posed whether you actually need to have that predisposition to be open. I would have said that after 20 odd years, that there was a proportion who were that way inclined, who were intrinsically international when they came here, but quite a significant proportion and I would have said possibly about a quarter to a third, who came here for other means, and not quite sure why they ended up at Regent’s, but then found it was to their liking. So, I think it operated for both sets of people; those who have a predisposition to internationalism, and those people, who come here for all sorts of other reasons, but then actually it was something that they like, and was giving them the advantages we’ve discussed.

Chris Marlin: A very good comment. My own answer to the question is that I think there are characteristics that predispose people to do this kind of thing. One thing I’ll be doing in a week or two’s time at Sussex, is welcoming the next batch of international students who come to the university. Often, at this time of year, they’re on exchange, and one of the things I say to them each time, is how much I admire them. It’s a really big step to get out of your comfort zone, and to go to another country, particular if it doesn’t speak the same language you’ve been speaking most of your life, and so I do admire them. I also indicate to them that if they can’t do it on their own, they should seek help and be clear about when they do need some assistance. But mostly I do admire them, and I think there are certain students who have characteristics, which means they can take that kind of step and they’re probably many others who would find it too difficult really.

Elisa Nardi, Trustee, Regent’s University London: Sorry for hogging the questions, but I’ve just got a burning question that’s playing on my mind. Three of you have certainly said one of the benefits you’ve felt around your career is the fact that you’ve travelled abroad and worked internationally. And, it’s a question about technology. So, technology gets mentioned everywhere now, it’s been mentioned on the panel today, and I think we’re moving to a future where at some stage, you’ll probably be able to print a 3-D version of yourself that can go to meetings at the same time. You know technology is moving at such a rapid rate and I’m really intrigued what your thoughts are about how technology might create an environment where you don’t need to physically move and physically go to another country, because technology is becoming so good. For example video/telephone conferencing is now so different from video conferencing in the 1970s to the 1990s. And I just wonder if this changes what you need to know and learn culturally? Or whether you actually think, it doesn’t really change it, it’s just that the medium is different and it’s through technology instead of face-to-face?

Torquil Wheatley: I have no view, but my 3D double would like to say that I think at the end of the day, there are marginal differences between what everyone is providing, especially in Finance. But I believe across a number of industries, it is more or less the same. What differentiates everything is relationship trust- being able to trust that individual.

You can get some of that from telephoning, from Skype, from video conferencing, but there is nothing, (it’s again, it’s a very cultural thing) like meeting that person. I mean there are so many cultures, in so many countries that will not do any business with you until they have met you. It’s as simple as that, until they have shaken your hand. I think that again, it’s (technology) a tool, but it’s never going to replace that visit, that handshake, that physical form and that relationship formed. The more I see it, the more I see that getting good business done is about good relationships.

Sofia Petkar: It’s very similar as to when you take the plunge into maybe online dating.

You may exchange emails, you may talk on the phone, but it’s nothing until the two people have met. So, it’s the same when talking in terms of an education – having an online class, or a virtual classroom - brilliant, all good and lovely, and maybe your professor is sitting in Germany and you’re sitting in New York, and you’re having an online relationship with your classmates. Everything is done virtually, but where the benefit comes is from sitting down with these people, learning about them as human beings, and I think that’s where the benefit of the classroom comes in. That’s what I think that technology’s fantastic as a medium of initial contact but I think after that point, you do need physical presence.

Phillip Ozouf: I completely agree. I’m a Treasury Minister; I cut budgets for government departments, and spend money on other things, hopefully on education. Today, I’ve been looking at the paper for the creation of a bi-lingual school in Jersey for French and British.

Maybe I wouldn’t have done that if I hadn’t have come to EBS, but hopefully we’re going to deliver one for Jersey and working with the French Ambassador here. There’s going to be even more contact with people around the world and businesses and organisations, we’re a small island in Jersey, but effectively our economic model is based upon trade.

And trade is about people, and I can’t be the Finance Minister of Jersey simply by sitting in Jersey. I have to go and meet counter-parts, I have to go to the global places where other Finance Ministers are, and to talk to our potential investors in Jersey etc. Of course, Skype, FaceTime, all of these issues can help, but actually FaceTime is far better when you have actually met the person. And so, you’re never going to get away from a world about people moving, you’re still going to need to move. I’ll give you one thing though, I wish google translate was available when I was at EBSL- there was nothing. I hopefully can still speak French and German ok, but I certainly can’t write it, but what I can do now, is get my mobile and my iPad out and speak in French and the spelling is taken care of for me. But I can only do it, because I’ve got the baseline knowledge. So actually technology can improve your productivity, but we’re still going to be moving around, and there’s still going to be competition between centres, and London, and as far as Regent’s role is in serving London, and as the UK’s global race position – the more international students that can come here. That’s what we’ve been talking about, you don’t get an international experience by watching, by basically being in Shanghai and having a videoconference with a lecturer being here, you need to be here and be able to touch it, feel it, be it, experience, it, and that’s going to continue, but there’s just going to be masses more of it.

Chris Marlin: Thank you, now I think we’re going to move into breakout groups at this stage, but before we do that, I’d like you to join me in thanking the panel. I don’t think we could have had a better advertisement than we have in these four people of what this kind of education can give you in terms of perspective, and we’ve heard some wonderful things of the advantages of the sorts of things we’ve been talking about. So, please join me in thanking the panel.

Closing Keynote Sir Drummond Bone, FRSE, FRSA Master of Balliol College, Oxford

Professor Aldwyn Cooper: It’s always difficult to drag people back into the hall for the last session on the last day, people are usually talking to each other too much- exactly rightly, but I am glad to see so many of you are here.

We are very fortunate to have Sir Drummond Bone as our closing keynote speaker. There a few people in Britain, neither who have had a more varied career in higher education, nor who have made so many contributions in so many ways. By background Drummond is a specialist on the romantic works of the poet Byron. Following his Master’s degree at Glasgow he won an exhibition to Balliol at Oxford where he is now the master. On leaving Oxford he lectured on English and comparative literature and eventually moved onto professorial title at Glasgow University in 1995 and in the same year became the Vice Principal. In 2000 he left Glasgow and became Principal of Royal Holloway which is of course the institution that merged with Bedford College who were here on this site beforehand. He then spent two years and 10months exactly I think you said Drummond, at Royal Holloway before becoming Vice Chancellor of the University of Liverpool. During his tenure there he also served as President of Universities UK from 2005 to 2007. Also relevant very much to this conference, he pioneered public private partnerships and supporting online MBA programmes.

Drummond has retained his interest in the romantic poets and still lectures in the field and edits key journals. It’s perhaps because of this on top of all his other experience and skills that yesterday he was nominated by David Willetts to be the preferred candidate to be the Chair of the Arts and Humanities Research Council – yet another job for you Drummond. Although he was head of the University of Liverpool he did continue to teach an undergraduate class on Byron. He was also Chairman of the Liverpool Culture Company directing the cities preparations to be the European capital of culture in 2008.

At the time in the press he was described as being “a bigger mover and shaker in Liverpool than the Beatles had ever been” which I think he found mildly embarrassing.

He retired from Liverpool in 2008 and from October 2011 became Master of Balliol College, Oxford an eminent position. However, Drummond’s interest has not been limited solely to the academic field alone nor simply to HE politics. He has always sought to engage with both the local communities and businesses in the areas where he has been based and also to develop a great deal in terms of international links and to promote TNE. He is a member of the CBI Science and Innovation Committee and was Chair of the Northern Ways Industry and Innovation group. When he wants a little light relief from all these other jobs Drummond maintains an interest in fast cars as do many of the students here. His preferred model, as with many of the students here is a Maserati. He holds a motor racing license and I highly recommend having a look at the piece on YouTube of Drummond driving round a track in a Maserati, it is short but wonderful. In addition to his current role at Balliol, Drummond advises many areas of education. He is Chairman of the iGraduate group that focuses on international higher education facts. He is also chair of the Observatory on Borderless Higher Education (OBHE). We couldn’t have a more relevant and experienced speaker to give our closing keynote address. Drummond.

Sir Drummond Bone: Thank you very much Aldwyn or at least thank you for most of it. I should say if you do look at the YouTube clip it lasts precisely 14seconds so blink and you will miss it. Thank you very much for inviting me here to give this closing speech and my apologies for sort of parachuting myself in to the end of conference, I really do dislike doing that. I have done it twice recently so if any of you were at the other conference where I did this , I am not just making this up that I don’t like doing it, I really don’t like doing it.

What I want to do this evening is to talk about collaboration and talk about collaboration in the context of the changing environment in the UK but also the changing environment internationally and in general. There is some kind of random thoughts that I have been turning over, partly in the wake of the report, the Horizon Scan report that the OBHE published last September. If there are some take home messages here, I think there are probably three and they will weave their way through what I am going to say and I hope emerge again at the end.

The first thing is that collaborations have to be properly managed. They don’t just happen and they don’t just continue to happen unless it is at least one person’s day job to make sure that they do. So that’s take home message number one. Secondly one should always try to maximise the leverage from a collaboration. A collaboration may start with one institution for a particular reason whether it is teaching one course or whether its an online programme. One should really try maximising that so that if it starts off at teaching it ends up at research and if it starts at research it ends up at teaching. If it includes technology transfer, it may indeed include learning from each other and how one relates to business, or how one looks after its students through welfare systems etc etc. So maximise collaboration is take home message two.

The third one is a slightly more complicated one but goes back to the management in a way it is to make sure that you understand how your collaborator manages the collaboration and is implanted in their own institution. Sometimes people tend to think that the way in which another institution works is exactly the same as the way your institution works. For example that it is appropriate let’s, say for one international office to speak to another international office. It sounds logical but it may actually not be the case, because universities are organised in very, very different ways. Understanding how your collaboration plugs into that institution and perhaps particularly into the way that institution manages its internal funding arrangements is also very important. A lot of time can be wasted if you do not actually understand how another institution takes funding decisions.

A few years ago in 2008 I was asked by the previous government to do a report on internationalisation for the next 10-15years and one of the things that I tried to stress in that report is that I believe collaboration was the way forward. So building indeed as most of you in this room have by definition done, is building long-term relationships of partnership rather than relying on one year recruitment or one project on the research side of things. Well, I am very happy to say that that has now become almost a truism and the recent Horizon Scan report that the OBHE did pointed out that on all fields and whether you are talking about the UK, USA or China collaboration was seen as the way forward.

When I was at the University of Liverpool, Aldwyn’s mentioned that, we had a positive policy of collaboration, again managed collaboration. One of the reasons why I wanted to do that at Liverpool was to persuade the institution that actually confident institutions collaborate. It is institutions which are not certain of their own identity and indeed perhaps not certain of their own worth which get nervous about collaboration. So I think institutions that are happy to collaborate are healthy institutions. We started (again Aldwyn has mentioned this) an online collaboration with a for-profit provider which in those days was seen as a bit risky for a 19th century English institution in the Russell Group, but that collaboration went very well. Again, following that principle of maximising the leverage we moved from an online collaboration to a joint physical presence in China. So that kind of collaboration goes back, also at Liverpool it has been mentioned the Northern Way our government initiative to try and put the three northern regions of the UK together to get them to collaborate. As part of that we founded a group of universities called N8- there is 8 universities and they are in the North so N8-it seemed kind of catchy at the time.

That has gone very well and that was based actually on business interaction, so the idea that if you are trying to build a new business platform it is going to be multidisciplinary and not every university will have every skill but perhaps the 8 of us working together could actually put together major business platforms. We chose four themes, they were pretty obvious ones: electronic printing, energy, carbon capture and the creative industries. That has overtime worked pretty well.

Obviously collaboration goes back quite a long way. One has to remember and I think sometimes in the UK it is difficult to remember this, that it is the research lead universities which are most used to collaboration. Because collaboration happens at a research level naturally but what of course doesn’t happen or didn’t happen traditionally is these research collaborations would be run at an institution level, they were run at a project level or departmental level. Par contra it has actually been by contrast the research lead universities have been slower to actually take up other kinds of collaborations. And that may be partly because traditionally they have a very decentralised structure, that goes back to my point about understanding your partner universities’ structure. I have been at the University of Oxford three years and I have no idea how it is structured yet. I often say it is democracy run mad. Anyway I will leave that there. The point is that all the research based universities understand research collaboration. It has actually been the for-profit sectors and new universities which have been leading on other kinds of collaboration.

I just wanted to pick up on the relationship between collaboration and what’s being called the disaggregation of the traditional universities. This idea that there will continue to be homogeneous vertically integrated institutions doing everything seems to be under a bit of challenge or a bit of questioning at the moment. Again, quoting from Ernst & Young in Australia they say “the dominant university model: a broad based teaching and research institution supported by a large asset base and a large predominantly in-house back office will prove unviable in all but a few cases in the next 15-20 years. There will be 15-20 independent global brands and the rest will be playing for the silver medal”. Well I don’t think that is true but it does point to something I think; the idea of a single institution doing everything. Now traditionally when somebody says that about a university they think you mean doing all the disciplines but it does also mean doing everything else. So I suppose most obviously in the UK we have seen disaggregation in terms of universities accommodation, in terms of their catering services. The universities no longer often provide these they are farmed out to the private sector. But this is just a toe in the water, I think, as it has turned out a mere first stop on the way. For many universities year zero courses, language based courses have now also been outsourced. As I said in Liverpool, we at least had a partnership relationship for our online provision. So multiple campuses of course again nearly always with some kind of private partner.

So if MOOCs of course obviously go the way they might, I understand our Minister had been rather bullish about MOOCs earlier in the conference. He is usually quite bullish about MOOCs so I could have guessed at that, had I not been told. They might be further and radical disaggregation of university businesses into course providers on the one hand, course deliverers on the other, (Coursera as it were as opposed to Harvard) examining bodies. We have already seen of course some universities, indeed one of the ones that I used to head up becoming the examining body for a for-profit institution. Such new business partnerships existing alongside more traditional vertically integrated institutions, that I certainly think is possible. Even so far as MOOCs are concerned only at the margins and more slowly than the daily press and perhaps than our government would have us believe. In all of these cases where the institution is disaggregating becoming not a vertically integrated institution you will have a network of collaborators who are actually providing that service which was traditionally provided by a single institution.

Now the key to this seems to me to be not the regulatory environment, some people I think, think that it is the regulatory environment that will either facilitate this sort of thing or stop it. I don’t think that is the case as it puts too much weight or power on the regulatory environment. I think the key to all of this is going to be the way in which employers, in fact view this kind of development long term. There is after all no fundamental reason why a degree of 3, 4 or 5 years is the best way to educate people for work or for life for that matter. The length of the package is in a sense arbitrary, it is tradition but if that is what the employers want then that is what will remain. The experience of the bologna reforms recently actually suggests that employers are fairly conservative. Interestingly enough a few years ago the Scottish universities made a concerted effort to re-promote their 3 year general degree that is as opposed to their 4 year specialist degree. They did that because employers, amongst them John Brown interestingly enough, said that we don’t want 20 first class chemists what we want is 100

world class generalists. However, the Chief Executives never told their HR departments that this is actually what the employers wanted and it became increasingly difficult to find employment for those people on those generalists degree. There is inertia on the employer’s side and it will be interesting to see just how radical disaggregation will be accepted by employers.

When we are talking about market forces driving this kind of disaggregation it is just as well to remember the kind of market we are talking about certainly in the UK and most countries with the possible exception of the United States. It is a funny sort of market place. At the most basic level a student buys an education but not a degree or qualification.

A distinction which is sometimes less than clear but is absolutely crucial; the qualification is not bought the qualification is granted and is only contingently part of the contract, or should be. Obviously there are grey areas there but it nevertheless is not a straight forward kind of market. Of course with many courses at many universities’ there is no amount of money will buy you even the education because the institutions select and do not in the normal sense sell. Aldwyn was brash enough to mention my petrol head affliction. There are of course some cars you cannot buy for love nor money as well so that actually works in the market place as well. You can only buy the latest Ferrari for example, if you have been a Ferrari customer for x numbers of years, but by in large that is not what we think of as being a market is it. There is no direct perception of value either, at least in the UK for home students since the purchase does not pay upfront.

I hear that the Minister was under some pressure for having taken the numbers cap off UG students. But I have a pet theory about this it comes in three different varieties .The first one is the cynical view in which the government realises we are in the middle of a serious demographic drop so the risk of taking the cap off numbers is actually really pretty low anyway at the moment . The second is that it is nevertheless a good thing because by upping the margins it may actually widen access into areas where the UK universities have not been so successful as penetrating. Then thirdly, there is the issue of funding and the UK Russell group are obviously very nervous about the fact that money will be moved from research to cater for the numbers in teaching. I don’t think that will happen, not for many, many years and this government will be long gone and it will be someone elses problem.

So that’s what I would have been thinking, I probably wouldn’t have said it but would have been thinking had I been here yesterday.

There is of course in the UK more of a market there is a market at PG level. The only problem here is that there are no customers because no one can afford to do it. There is a market for overseas students. Although again I think there is considerable difficulty in actually understanding the way in which that market functions. One of the commonest mistakes is to fail to understand that the cost of place of delivery is what really matters not the cost of tuition itself. There is enormous difference between the level of fee that is charged to the expense of living in a highly expensive western country for a start.

All of this that I have been hinting at already is one thing in institutions which are homogenous and centrally managed but another thing for those of us that live in institutions which are internally devolved and in some ways already disaggregated. It used to be that the only people who could take pricing decisions outside the central authority in universities were perhaps the international offices but now that has spread to (in some institutions) almost every single department with varying levels of sophistication underlying these decisions of market demand and crucially of real costs. So understanding the level of disaggregation can be queasy and even in some cases I think a legally grey area. At Oxford for example teaching and research are virtually divided between the university and the colleges (I am simplifying a little bit). So that the university looks after the research and the colleges are responsible for the teaching. UG students are admitted to the colleges on the teaching side of things but the fees are paid to the university, the money is then redistributed from the university to the colleges. Well the college is responsible for their education and the course will have separate contracts as well as separate contracts for accommodation and food some of which may, as I have already said, be outsourced. You don’t need to follow that as it is inch by inch but you get a sense of the complexity of the financial situation. It is very, very important that when you are working with another

institution to understand these complexities otherwise you can believe you are having an agreement with an institution you are actually have an agreement with one part of it that you don’t fully understand. To keep track of money flows are not the work of a moment.

Let me turn to internationalisation specifically and what might happen. Well we know obviously that demand for HE will grow. I hope we know it is not always for the obvious demographic reasons. Just to give you one example, I don’t know if there are people from China here, but the average HE age cohort (18-24 cohort as traditionally defined by the OECD) is going to fall between 40 and 50% between 2010 and 2030 and I didn’t misspeak, it is going to fall between 40 and 50% between 2010 and 2030. We are also looking at one or two other countries where there are varying degrees of demographic drop like Japan and Germany for example. There is also going to be a drop in the UK which I have already mentioned, although it does swing up again in 2020 and dramatically swings up by 2030.

Again if people are looking at places to collaborate its worth bearing these statistics in mind.

Of course there are plenty of other players Brazil, Indonesia, Philippines, Nigeria and Turkey (just to string off a few) where growth will be exponential over the same kind of period.

Middle class aspiration will also grow numbers and might also be expected given not only capacity constrain but also the effects of global rankings. I’m sure this will grow international numbers faster even allowing for capacity shortfalls. But having said that there is evidence notably from the economist research unit that there is a limit to a nations belief that overseas education is superior to home-grown and that fashion can drive the aspirational goals. So in other words, there is some evidence of this already in China. There is not a straight line more middle class equals more international education there can be a kind of kink because it’s also partly fashion driven and at some point it may no longer be fashionable to take degrees overseas.

Student mobility will grow then but the growth rate is liable to slow whereas the growth rate for TNE will rise, that is the safe bet and presumably good news for the majority of us in this room. This shift obviously will be driven by the rise of virtual learning, by the growth in the part time market (that mustn’t be forgotten). It will be driven by the cost in overseas residence, by visa restrictions, to protect local culture and will guard against permanent immigration. I am sure someone has already mentioned in the course of the conference that more people study for English degree outside UK than they do inside as things stand at the moment.

So there are any number of big collaborative projects looking at internationalisation of one kind or another. There are the old ones of course U21 (World universities network) the newer ones like WC2 run by City University here in London, local arrangements such as Warwick’s with Monash. There are also the NYU arrangements which I will come back to speak about briefly, not to mention the arrangements that we have in front of us in this room. Then we also have the large for-profit organisations, particularly I think of the Laureate Network whom I’ve advised which have some 60 institutions globally. So lots of collaboration and the bet would be that this is going to increase partly because of that disaggregation we’ve been talking about and partly because the traditional markets place is exploding with more and more countries actually playing a very significant part.

Overseas campuses, well again one needs to distinguish overseas campuses from foreign backed universities (I think it is a crucial distinction and often one that is missed) will I suppose grow in numbers but there may well be long term question marks over the campus model. Depending on the attitude to overseas versus local degrees- that is campuses offering in country education but an overseas degree versus a local degree and the extent to which these ventures are seen as alien to local culture. Clusters of focus providers bringing an international feel might be more acceptable in a single multi-faculty overseas provider in the medium to long term. One can think of examples in Singapore or Korea where it may be more advantageous for the host country to effectively disaggregate a university and talk to four or five universities to actually provide the service rather than have one simply launching an overseas campus in the country, city or state. So that again is something that might drive disaggregation.

Franchising of degrees is very common but largely at one end of the market it has to be said.

Following the logic that I have just been outlining , one wonders how long before consultancy is seen as the better model for the host country to build capacity, that’s not franchising a degree from outside but using outside expertise. So a kind of disaggregated bit of another university to help grow local provision. Dual, joint, network degrees all different have a kind of repository feel to them lacking in franchise arrangements just important to highlight again and again, many people in this room will appreciate that I’m sure.

NYU model of multiple entry point is one version of what, quoting University of Sydney, calls “Multinational universities of which the value chain is sliced up” and again that goes back to the idea of disaggregation. Different parts of the single institution providing the elements for which it is best suited. Well, the NYU model is under a bit of pressure from its faculty at home at the moment but it does seek to provide a genuinely multinational student experience which might be more robust than either student mobility to a single institution or an overseas campus tu cur. That leads us towards the end of what I wanted to say inevitably to online provision in general and MOOCs more specifically.

Obviously the involvement of prestigious institutions such as Stanford, Harvard and Princeton has given online provision a new respectability. We must remember that MIT started this MOOC business some years ago, with open access to its courses in what was primarily a marketing initiative - a free hook for its normal priced degrees. One just wonders exactly how much has changed with the involvement of institutions like that of Stanford, Harvard, Princeton and institutions here in the UK like Edinburgh for example. Now although Michael Sandel’s course on Justice for example, is a much more sophisticated thing there is still an element of that involved, to get a recognised qualification you have to pay. Now some institutions Georgia Tech, Washington (to give just two examples) do offer a free taster as it were and then a cut price qualification if you want to go further down the tracks. It seems to me that the breakthrough here, interesting breakthrough might be cross-accreditation for some of the institutions which will be available through their MOOC partners. So that is if all the institutions, let’s say working with Coursera were to start cross-accrediting their courses towards their degrees you would have something which is immensely powerful but also quite frighteningly difficult I suspect, to actually organise politically. Whether it will happen or not I don’t know but I suspect in the worst of the traditional universities nightmares you might imagine that happening and it would certainly be very interesting.

The business model is also very interesting, although the development of an online programme from an existing one costs something around $25,000 dollars just to do the course mock up and therefore can be sold in the vast numbers involved for a comparatively low price and still make an apparent margin, but the sunk costs behind this can be massive. The salaries of the Professors for example if nothing else, they are not included in the cost of Michael Sandle’s Justice Course for example, his salary is paid elsewhere. As Aldwyn and I were just saying before I started to speak, in order to provide proper support service for a MOOC it is really rather expensive. When we set up the online programmes at Liverpool with Laureate, I remember we had two programmes initially and to service these two programmes 24/7 online, wholly online delivery we needed 54 part-time tutors. If you are going to do it properly it is not a cheap option.

So various developments, let’s use that label disaggregation, the complexity of delivery; I do not think any one of these delivery mechanisms is going to win. I think what will happen is that we will get more and more of them. So the disaggregation and increasing complexity are going to drive the necessity for collaboration. What will be successful it seems to me will be determined essentially long term, by employers. Not by the regulatory environment and oddly not by student fashion either although that might determine things in the short term. Long term employers are actually in the driving seat of all of this. So it’s a conference about collaboration, it’s a very good moment to have such a conference, although I think you have one every year.

Well there you are, every year is a good year to have a conference about collaboration. But do remember in order for these things to work they are complex, they must be managed, you must maximise the benefit out of every collaboration, you must try to understand how the other institution actually works and how it organises it hierarchies and its finances.

Thank you.

Professor Aldwyn Cooper: Drummond has kindly offered to answer a few questions from the floor before the end of the session. So if you would like to ask any questions on the topics Drummond has raised and his conclusions please raise your hand.

Questions from the floor Toni Hilton, Regent’s University London: One of the topics we haven’t touched on much during the conference and actually you haven’t touched on; so it is a bit of a cheeky one, is the matter of the power base between the institutions and staff and the staffing issues in terms of the competition for high quality staff and particularly I’m thinking in the context of a lot of the world now teaching in English as they see that as an opportunity. So where does that leave institutions wanting to hire high quality English speaking staff and therefore the mobility of high quality English speaking staff? and whether we are going to suffer more in the UK than perhaps elsewhere?

Well, I mean it’s certainly true, high quality staff are rather mobile whether they speak English or not. But obviously if they speak English it makes it pretty difficult. I think one of the ways we can get staff to stay is actually by allowing them to move if that doesn’t sound too paradoxical. If you have an arrangement with a university in another country is to invite your faculty to move to the other country for two or three months. I think people get hung up on short term placements. I don’t think there is anything wrong with short term placements. They can actually revitalise people, make them excited again about their job.

So being flexible and I go back to that phrase I used about being a confident institution, I think a confident institution says to its faculty “you want to go and work in our partner institution in China, fine go and do it but there is a job for you when you get back”. I think it’s good for faculty, I mean the internationalisation of the workplace as well. You do have to watch some gender issues, there are family issues which can unbalance things a little bit in the way one manages these opportunities.

Judith Lamie, Regent’s University London: You touched upon the establishment of the campus in China. I wonder if you could tell us a little bit more about that, some of the positives some of the negatives and whether you would you do it again?

Just to fill people in a little, the University of Liverpool jointly with Xi’an Jiaotong University in China owns a campus in the city of Suzhou. It is a Chinese University it works under Chinese law, the students normally get a Chinese degree but if they want to come to Liverpool to finish their degree and get a dual degree then that’s fine and they can come and do two years in Liverpool. This is a foreign backed university, going back to that distinction I made earlier, it is not a campus of the University of Liverpool. It doesn’t directly offer Liverpool degrees and it manages itself. It takes its curricula largely from Liverpool but there are some courses there which are mandatory for students to get a Chinese degree which Liverpool obviously can’t supply. Also all the faculty are trained by Liverpool they all get PGCE Liverpool teaching qualifications so the relationship is pretty close.

The great thing that Liverpool has found out is that both for those people coming to finish their degree in Liverpool and particularly those coming at PG level, is it’s a very economical way to recruit. Liverpool knows exactly the standard that the students have achieved and know exactly what they will have learned. So there is none of that “oh do they actually know X, have they done X is their previous course? Is what I’m being told about their previous course actually true?” The students are very economical to teach. The money earner for Liverpool has been through these students. The organisation itself in China washes its face but it doesn’t create huge profits. Anybody going into overseas campuses who thinks they are going to create huge profits, frankly needs their head looking at, it’s just not going to happen.

As I said, it does wash its face and some of the capital for that was originally provided by Laureate as a side deal with Liverpool. I think it has been a terrific success, there are around 9,000 students in this institution and it ranks very highly inside China. Indeed, the Imperial College London will only accept applications from the directly funded institutions in China plus the Liverpool institution in Suzhou, so academically it is doing extremely well.

What we had to learn at the time were all these kind of cultural differences, things you don’t know that you don’t know. The really weird one was the fact that in the UK when you get permission to teach a course you get permission at the same time to graduate the students. We kind of thought that was logical, how can you possibly accept students on to a course and then not graduate them at the end? But the Chinese point of view was how do you know that the teaching has been good enough to graduate them until they’ve done the course? So in China you could get permission to teach the course but not permission to graduate the students. It took us about three months to work our way through that as neither party knew what the other party were talking about it. Both positions are logical but we had to learn a lot of that kind of thing.

[Audience question]It strikes me that there is nobody more appropriate to talk to us about the effects of multinational experience on the student environment. May I ask you Professor given the multinational context of this conference, how many of your students in Balliol are actually studying abroad and how many of the students in Balliol actually come from abroad? Also in relation to the University of Liverpool exchange, how many of the Liverpool students actually went to study in China? They are just simple questions but I think they do seek to measure the extent at which internationalism is really double ended.

The other thing I would like to ask, a more fundamental question based asking for your perspective on your extensive experience as to the politics of HE. We have heard students here today, alumni of this institution who spoke very highly of their experience, of its influence on their working lives and they came across as very open people. Listening to them it certainly seemed to me that it was the institution that had given them that openness. I wonder to what extent this is supported sufficiently by governments. Very often the obstruction to the opening of minds is often the policies of governments in the pursuit of the interests of the particular state that they govern. A classic example would be having a Pakistani students and an American student discussing Guantanamo bay, you will discover an awful lot about the state policies how it affects the minds of students. It underlines the importance to all of us that all students undergo international experience.

I am wondering in fact if there is sufficient determination on the part of governments to actually support this internationalisation and recognition of its need in terms of creating the stability in this increasingly fractious world?

Sir Drummond Bone: Let me go back to your first questions. In Liverpool one of the reasons why we chose the particular site in China was because it lent itself to ascending students on internships into multinational companies in the same business park as our own university. We were able to mentor them from our campus so that they were having a genuinely multinational experience in a Chinese environment. That internship programme was very successful. So that was a very deliberate decision, following the line of your questioning it is crucially important to get students from here to move about but by and large they don’t.

In Balliol the good news is about 20% of our UG students are from overseas and about 80% of our PG are from overseas. I’m comfortable in Balliol because of the college environment that there is genuine integration much more so than I would have been at other institutions where I think, one has to say, there is ghettoization in accommodation or courses oversubscribed by international students. That’s not good for overseas students they don’t get to meet UK students and UK students don’t get to meet the overseas students. So following your line, I think there are real problems sometimes about what internationalisation really means. It doesn’t just mean moving people around especially if they are going to stick with their own. We are not very good at getting people to leave Balliol. We do have programme in US during the summer where they go to live with previous alumni which proves very popular and leads to many jobs I’m pleased to say. We have also recently extended that to send Balliol students to Asia, mainly China and Hong Kong and we hope to an increasing number of countries but the numbers are woefully small.

Finally does government help with internationalisation? Well, no not really, if I go back to that 2008 report we made great play of re-introducing foreign languages inside schools and we made absolutely no headway with that at all. Changing visa arrangements in the

UK leads to retaliatory measures where other countries change the visa arrangements for UK students going overseas. I don’t see much movement of government policy, although I do think David Willetts understands the problem but it’s a matter of getting that understanding, that traction of policy is another matter.

Colleagues, I’m afraid we have just about run out of time so if I can say a few final words.

Coming to the end of the formal sessions of this conference I hope that you will all agree that it has been a really stimulating and worthwhile event with lots of interaction, lots of excellent inputs from colleagues within the Regent’s network and from external speakers as well. If you have enjoyed it let us know and compliment the staff here. If you have found various areas that are at want, let us know. Please fill in your feedback forms so that we can start working next week on the planning of next year’s conference. Perhaps you might like to suggest a major topic for next year or specific topic areas that we could focus on. An event like this takes a huge amount of organising and the support of a large number of people and there are far too many for me to mention them all individually and I hope they’ll forgive me for that. However, I couldn’t allow the conference to finish without thanking, a few groups of people. Firstly, of course, Maria Veiga-Sanchez and her International Partnerships Office team, they literally did start working on this conference the week after the conference last year. We have had a really well organised conference planning team working through them throughout the year. I would also like to thank Rachel Azzopardi and her hospitality team for the way in which they made everything work in terms of the accommodation and the catering and everything else concerned.

But there are lots of others- staff on the front desks, our marketing and communications department, my office and then of course all the speakers who have contributed to the programme over the last few days; from visitors from the network , external speakers and indeed our alumni who have participated which is always very satisfying. Then of course thank you to all of you as delegates for attending this conference and we hope to see you and more representatives of your institutions here next year. It is my duty now to call the conference to a close and invite you to the informal part of the conference, the reception in Herringham Hall where we can carry on the discussions. I know some of you will be having dinner this evening in the refectory. So thank you all very much for coming.

Country

Institution

Attendees

Argentina

Universidad Argentina de la Empresa (UADE)

Mrs Cristina SLICA Institutional Relations and Students Affairs Director Ms Lic. Paula Catalina IGLESIAS International Relations Coordinator

Austria

Johannes Kepler Universität Linz

Dr Evelyne GLASER Head of the Centre for Business Languages and Intercultural Communication

Belarus

Minsk State Linguistic University

Ms Elena BETENYA Vice-Rector for Academic Affairs

Chile

IEDE Business School

Prof Marta GALIANO Dean

China

Qingdao University

Mr Yunxu ZHOU Director of International Exchange Section Mr Honglin CUI Director of International Colleges Ms Xiaoping WEI Program Manager International Colleges

Czech Republic

Divadelní Fakulta Akademie Múzických Umeni (DAMU)

Ms Martina SCHLEGELOVA Vice-Dean for International Relations

France

ESG Management School

Miss Clémence MACHEREZ International Relations Coordinator Miss Valérie PASTUREL Academic Dean for International Studies

ISC Paris School of Management

Claire VERDIER Deputy Director of International Affairs Michael DOLAN Dean of International Affairs

Université Nice Sophia Antipolis

Prof Nadine TOURNOIS Dean Dr Davide SALOTTO Director International

University Paris Dauphine

Mrs Nadia WAJNAPEL Director International Office

Germany

Bonn-Rhein-Sieg University of Prof Klaus DEIMEL appl. Sciences Dean Ms Stefanie DRUEGG International Relations Mr Karsten HEINRICH Coordinator of Incoming Students Catholic University Eichstaett- Mr Philip HOCKERTS Ingolstadt Deputy Director International Relations

EBC Hochschule

Dr Uwe EISERMANN President Mr Jérôme RICKMANN Deputy Director Campus Berlin

International School of Management

Ms Kathrin ACKERMANN Study Abroad & Exchange Advisor

Munich Business School

Ms Martina DENGLER Outgoing Student Coordinator Prof Stefan BALDI Dean

Reutlingen University

Ms Carolien VAN DER HULST Exchange Coordinator

University of Applied Sciences Worms

Mr Joachim MAYER Director International Center

University of Rostock

Dr Christine BRÄUNING Managing Director of Science Group in ICT

WHU - Otto Beisheim School of Management

Ms Madlen SCHWEIGER Program Manager

Ireland

Griffith College Dublin

Miss Olivia HEGARTY Student Advisor Prof Diarmuid HEGARTY President Mr Michael MC NAMARA Development

Italy

Academy of Fine Arts of Foggia

Dr Silvia VISCIANO Account Manager / Erasmus Institutional Coordinator

Roma Tre University

Dr Marco TUTINO Assistant Professor of Business Administration Miss Mihaela ILIE International Relations Assistant Mrs Loretta MASTROENI Professor Prof Andrea Gheno Associate Professor of Mathematical Finance

Sapienza University of Rome

Mrs Filomena NENNA Responsable Administrative Erasmus Faculty Prof Gianluca VAGNANI Full Professor

Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore

Mr Damiano ANELLI Outbound Students Services Coordinator

University of Florence

Miss Susanna SABATINI Incoming Erasmus Students Coordinator

Japan

Hokusei Gakuin University

Prof Masae HARASHIMA Dean of Economic Faculty

Otemon Gakuin University

Ms Yuko HAKOZAKI Director - International Studies

Jersey

Government of Jersey

Mr Philip Ozouf Treasury and Resources Minister at States of Jersey

Malaysia / UK

University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus

Prof Christine Ennew Provost & CEO

Mexico

Tecnológico de Monterrey

Mr Alejandro DE SANTIAGO International Undergraduate Program Director

Morocco

HEM Business School

Mr Ali ELQUAMMAH Director of Academic Affairs in Charge of International Relations

Institute of International Trade and Law

Mrs Elena LOMONOSOVA Legal Language Teacher

Lomonosov Moscow State University

Mrs Olga ALEKSANDROVA Head of the Department Prof Natalia GVISHIANI Professor

Plekhanov Russian University Of Economics

Mrs Elena STROGANOVA Head of Study Abroad Department

Russian Foreign Trade Academy

Prof Svetlana VOLODINA Academic Administrator of PearsonLCCI Qualications Examinations Business English Teacher Dr Georgy ALEKSEENKO Head of International Department

CEU San Pablo

Dr Jose Luis PIÑAR MAÑAS Vice-Rector of International Relations

Colegio Universitario de Estudios Financieros (CUNEF)

Dr Joaquin López PASCUAL General Secretary Miss Rosario SÁNCHEZ ALONSO Erasmus Coordinator

Deusto Business School

Dr Elena OCHOA Vice Dean International Relations

EBS Madrid

Mrs Victoria CHICO Coordinadora de Programas Internacionales

Escuela de Negocios Novacaixagalicia

Dr Ana CONDE Undergraduate Programmes Manager

Russia

Spain

European University of Madrid

Miss Raquel GARCIA PERAL Head of the international School of Social Science Dr Alberto MORENO MELGAREJO Academic Director, Faculty of Social Sciences

Universidad Autonoma de Madrid

Prof Martha SABOYA Vice-Dean for International Relations Ms Adriana PEREZ ENCINAS Head International Relation´s Office

Universidad Católica de Valencia

Dr Rosa CURRÁS International Coordinator Prof Francisco J. LARA Ex Vice President International Relations

Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Dr Jesús GARCÍA DE MADARIAGA Vice-Dean of International Relations

Universidad Francisco de Vitoria

Miss Sabrina MEUWESE International Projects Coordinator Miss Mónica ALBERICH Incoming Students Coordinator/ Responsible of International Administrative Office

Universidad Nebrija

Mr Bruno PUJOL University Development Director Ms Ana KELLER International Student Coordinator Ms Stephanie LIM Exchange Coordinator

Universitat de Valencia

Miss Esperanza BARREIRO MAYO Administrative staff Miss María SOLEDAD SÁNCHEZ PUÉRTOLAS Administrative staff Ms Rosa BALLESTEROS Administrative - Training Staff Center and Quality

University of Barcelona

Dr M.Cristina POBLET Vice Dean Faculty of Economics and Business Miss Montse CERVERA International Relations Coordinator

Switzerland

Haute Ecole de Gestion de Genève

Prof Xavier BURDET Prof HES, International coordinator

Turkey

Istanbul Aydin University

Miss Bengu BOSTANCI UK Representative

UK

Association of Business Practitioners

Mr Jason RAIFE Chief Executive Officer

British Council

Prof Rebecca Hughes Director, International Higher Education

British Government

Rt Hon David Willetts Conservative MP for Havant & Minister for Universities and Science

Citi Investment Solutions

Mr Torquil Wheatley Director, Citi Investment Solutions at Citi, EBSL 1991 alumnus

Embassy of Hungary

Mrs Andrea NORMANWALKER Acting Deputy Head of Mission of the Embassy of Hungary

Embassy of Japan in the UK

Mr Eiji WATANABE Counsellor for Education & Sports

Free-lance / Regent’s University London

Ms Sue GIL Free-lance London Tour Guide and Visiting Lecturer at Regent’s University London

FRSE,FRSA, Balliol College, Oxford

Sir James Drummond Bone Master of Balliol College

Gartner Inc

Ms Jana Pione Recruiting Relationship Manager

Gasol Plc

Ms Cornelia Meyer Honorary Fellow, Regent’s University London

GConsultancy

Dr Julia Goga-Cooke Chief Creative Officer

Global Education Consultants

Ms Nina BARRENGOS Educational Consultant

GuildHE

Mr Andy Westwood Chief Executive of GuildHE

HEPI

Mr Nick HILLMAN CEO

Higher Education

Ms Alison Goddard Editor of HE

Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA)

Mr Daniel Kidd Head of Training

iGraduate

Will Archer CEO

IBM Global Services

Ms Manuela Doutel-Haghighi Professional Development Manager

InterContinental Hotels Group

Ms Lexie Sims Director Resourcing, Europe

Institut Français

Dr Catherine Robert Higher Education Attachée to the French Embassy in London

Kingston University Business School in Surrey

Mr David STENHOUSE University Business School Lecturer

Leadership Foundation for Higher Education

Mr David Lock Director of International Projects

MHA Consultants

Ms Mary HOLLAND Business Owner

MIT Sloan School of Management

Dr Peter HIRST Executive Director of Executive Education

Nottingham Trent University

Prof Nigel Healey Pro-Vice-Chancellor (International) & Head of the College of Business, Law and Social Sciences

OBHE

Dr Wiliam Lawton Director, Observatory on Borderless Education

Pearson Qualifications International

Mr Alasdair MELVILLE Mr Luke WALES Pearson Qualifications International

Positive Experience Training

Ms Clare Concannon Positive Experience Training Founder

Racounter Media

Mr Freddie Ossberg MD & Founder, Raconteur Media, EBSL 2005 alumnus

QAA

Mrs Carolyn Campbell Head of International

QS (Quacquarelli Symonds)

Mr Nicholas Sequeira University Relationship Manager QS Intelligence Unit Mr Bernado Rodrigues Amador Iberia & Latin America Account Executive QS Intelligence Unit

Sky News

Ms Sofia Petkar Director, Media Professionals Alliance UK, RACL 2006 alumnus

USA

St Patrick’s International College

Dr Tommie Anderson-Jaquest, FHEA Dean of Quality & Standards and Principal Lecturer

Times Higher Education

Mr John MORGAN Deputy News Editor

The American Institute for Foreign Study (UK)Ltd

Sir Cyril TAYLOR Founder and Chairman

The Association of Business Schools

Ms Julie DAVIES Deputy Chief Executive

The Open University

Dr Kate CLARKE Director OUVS Dr Victoria Lindsay Deputy Director, Partnerships

TourService Ltd

Ms Lita EPPEY Managing Director

UK Council for International Student Affairs

Mr Dominic Scott Chief Executive

UK Higher Education International Unit

Mr Daniel Shah Assistant Director (Policy)

University of Kent

Prof Alex Hughes Pro-Vice Chancellor External

University of London

Mr Tim Gore Director Global Networks and Communities

University of South Wales

Mr Bobby MEHTA Head of Student Recruitment

University of Sussex

Professor Chris Marlin Pro-Vice-Chancellor (International)

Auburn University

Dr Craig BERTOLET Professor of English Dr Anna BERTOLET Associate Professor of English

Baylor University

Mr Robert LEIS Exchange Program and Study Abroad Advisor

Belmont University

Dr Miriam (Mimi) BARNARD Provost for Interdisciplinary Studies & Global Education

Carroll University

Ms Jeannie BURNS Assistant Director of International Education

College of St. Scholastica

Mr Tom HOMAN Director, International Education

Drury University

Dr Thomas RUSSO Dir., Study Abroad / Prof of Art History Mr Michael THOMAS Associate Dean for International Programs

Fairfield University

Rev Jeffrey VON ARX President

Fitchburg State University

Mr Papa SARR Director International Education

Forsyth Technical Community College

Prof Bernie YEVIN Dean, Business & Information Technologies Division Dr Susan PHELPS Dean of Educational Partnerships

John Carroll University

Dr Andreas SOBISCH Director Prof Walter SIMMONS Professor

Marymount California University

Dr David DRAPER Special Assistant to the President for Global Outreach

Michigan State University

Mr Brett BERQUIST Executive Director of the Office of Study Abroad Ms Anne BARTHEL Study Abroad Coordinator

Monmouth University

Dr James KONOPACK Department Chair, Associate Professor of Health & Physical Education

North Carolina State University

Dr Karen LEONAS Professor and Department Head

Oklahoma State University

Ms Jordan GARRIOTT Outreach and Study Abroad Specialist Dr Shiretta OWNBY Professor and Associate Dean, Academic Programs & Services

Pace University

Dr Sonia SUCHDAY Professor & Chair, Psychology Department

Robert Morris University

Prof Robert TENUTA Professor

Saint Louis University

Ms Margaret KESSLER Study Abroad Counselor

SUNY Oneonta

Dr Katherine ANGELL Chair, Dept. of Human Ecology

Susquehanna University

Mrs Christina DINGES Study Away Advisor Dr Ali Haji-Mohamad ZADEH Professor of Finance, Department Chair, Management

The New School

Mr Pippin PARKER Director, The New School for Drama Ms Sherri BARBER Admissions Counselor

University at Albany

Mr James M. PASQUILL Director of Study Abroad and Exchanges

University of Arkansas

Dr Kathleen SMITH Assistant Professor Dr Laurie APPLE Associate Professor and Area Coordinator, Apparel Studies

University of Idaho

Dr Sandra EVENSON Professor

University of New Hampshire Mr Douglas LANIER Professor of English Webster University

Mrs Kimberly MANTIA-OCHOA Study Abroad Advisor Mr Guillermo RODRIGUEZ Director, International Projects and Office of Study Abroad Ms Kim MCGRATH Assistant Director, Office of Study Abroad

MJDennis Consulting/Regent’s University Trustee

Mrs Marguerite DENNIS President/ Trustee

Programme organisers Professor Aldwyn Cooper Chief Executive and Principal María Veiga Sánchez Head of International Partnerships Office Lady Sophie Laws Programme Director for Humanities and Study Abroad Professor Judith Lamie Head of External Relations Professor Toni Hilton Dean of Business and Management Faculty Professor Judith Ackroyd Dean of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences Faculty The organisers would like to thank all speakers and key departments across the University who participated and helped in organising this event including the International Partnerships Office coordinated by Clare Burke, Conferences and Catering, Media Services, Communications, IT, Student Services, Reid Hall staff and Residential Assistants, SPA Academic Advisors, Campus Services, Room bookings and International Events Management students.

International Partnerships Office Regent’s College London Inner Circle, Regent’s Park London, NW1 4NS, UK Tel Fax Email

020 7487 7518 020 7487 7486 ipo@regents.ac.uk