Dr Viv Caruana

The 307,000 results which accrue from the process of ‘googling’ the phrase ‘Internationalisation of the Curriculum’ (IoC) suggest the current ubiquity of the phrase and the universal importance ascribed to it across the higher education (HE) sector. Such ubiquity and universality reflects a fundamental shift in thinking regarding the internationalisation of higher education in the context of the 21st century globalised knowledge society. The ‘symbolic internationalisation’ of mobility, acculturation and international content is being challenged in favour of a more ‘transformative’ approach which develops dispositions, skills and other capabilities which enable graduates to challenge culture-bound knowledge and to produce new knowledge in a global context (Appadurai, 2001 as cited in Caruana, 2012). Frequently, academics and other colleagues supporting student learning readily understand the internationalised curriculum as an abstract, distant, objective phenomenon, but struggle with the concept in the more proximate, subjective and practical territory of their own learning, teaching and assessment practice (Caruana, 2010; Vavrus, 2002). This keynote suggests a framework for thinking constructively about curricular and pedagogic practice in the context of IoC, through an exploration of key principles, enablers, issues and possible actions. Caruana, V. (2012) ‘Appreciatively Inquiring into the Internationalized Curriculum – A model for CPD’ Educational Developments, the magazine of SEDA 13.2, June 2012 Caruana, V. (2010) ‘The relevance of the internationalised curriculum to graduate capability: the role of new lecturers’ attitudes in shaping the ‘student voice’’, in Jones, E. (ed.) (2010) Internationalisation and the Student Voice: Higher Education Perspectives London: Routledge

Most universities now have some form of transnational education arrangements in place, yet TNHE processes and practices tend to be under-represented in the literature on the internationalisation of HE. This interactive session explores issues encountered in collaborative approaches to TNHE within a framework of three key principles: equivalence, positionality and interculturality. Following a short presentation, participants will have the opportunity to share experience and develop ideas/strategies for developing practice in communicating with distant colleagues and students who may have very different prior educational experiences, developing and maintaining collegial relationships and enhancing the ‘glocal’ student experience.

In recent years the mantra of internationalisation has come to pervade universities world-wide under the impact of globalisation and the ascendancy of the neo-liberal model of globalised knowledge-based economy. While the notion of internationalisation is firmly rooted in the history and tradition of universities, internationalisation of the curriculum represents a relatively new and unfamiliar concept, particularly in an environment where internationalisation has largely focused on recruiting international students and encouraging international mobility. This seminar argues that internationalisation of the curriculum is first and foremost about acknowledging that all our students will experience intercultural interactions as part of their daily lives. Jayne and Dipboye (2004) assert that diversity initiatives that are based on the ‘integration and learning’ perspective – rather than ‘access and legitimacy’ or ‘discrimination and fairness’ perspectives – are most likely to motivate individuals in a sustained manner, thereby achieving long term change. In embracing the social transformation model of internationalisation the challenge of IoC becomes one of re-thinking pedagogies to harness the richness of our student diversity and engage them in a process of transformative learning, thereby enabling them to cross cultural boundaries with ease, to develop new global imaginaries and to realise intercultural understanding. The seminar provides an opportunity for participants to explore conceptually the notion of the internationalised curriculum as transformative learning and to consider the practical challenges and possibilities in multicultural learning environments.

Session delivered as part of 'From Franchise to Equalise? Equitable learning in local and global contexts' Higher Education Academy Workshop and Seminar Series 2013-2014

Whilst the concept of internationalisation is rooted in traditional structures of higher education (HE) ‘Internationalisation of the Curriculum’ (IoC) is very much a new and unfamiliar phenomenon. It presents particular issues of conceptualisation since its emergence coincides with a period of rapid and complex change in HE fuelled by a neo-liberal discourse of institutional shortfalls, international competition, target markets, international student recruitment, global rankings and the pursuit of ‘soft power’ to enhance institutional reputation and promote the ‘UK brand’ of HE. It may be argued that in some ways marketization is irresistible, yet many HE institutions continue to aspire to goals which transcend a purely economic role in society embracing notions like inclusion, intercultural understanding, global citizenship, social justice and the common good. In the complex environment which is HE today it is perhaps unsurprising that the key agents of change in curriculum reform – those who design, deliver and support learning - may readily conceive of IoC within the seemingly distant and abstract context of institutional strategy and yet often encounter fundamental challenges of operationalisation in the more proximate and concrete domain of their own practice. This keynote focuses on closing the gap between institutional rhetoric and academic practice through an exploration of the underpinning principles of the internationalised curriculum which in many ways challenge us to reconceptualise the boundaries of sites of learning and how we develop innovative pedagogies which engage learners in both the virtual and real worlds. Academics’ dispositions towards IoC will also be considered along with a model for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) to support the process of change. Finally, the keynote will outline the institutional approach to IoC taken at Leeds Beckett University, an approach which was designed to embed ‘global perspectives’ in the undergraduate curriculum.

RUSTLE...and internationalisation; Institutional influences; The context of the internationalised curriculum: Internationalisation; Internationalising the Curriculum; RUSTLE...and Internationalising the Curriculum; Embedding international and intercultural orientation – a taxonomy?; Learning and Teaching in the multicultural classroom; The inclusive curriculum; From strategy to engagement?; Manifestations of tolerance; Engagement assumes cross-cultural capability?; How do we as teachers ask students to engage?; Carelessness or discomfort?; The ‘pedagogy of recognition’?; Resources to support curriculum design; Assessment in the multicultural classroom; Challenges of the internationalised curriculum intensified by the use of ICT?; Constructivist model of learning; ICT supporting international perspectives; Taking the risks and sharing the outcomes: CAPRI; CAPRI in principle…; RUSTLE...postscript – the Global Citizen...another story?????

Two fundamental perspectives; Approaches to internationalisation; Challenges of internationalisation intensified by use of ICT?; Constructivist model of learning; ICT supporting international perspectives; Benefits of online collaboration; Challenges of designing online collaboration; Good practice in online collaboration/ e-learning; Reciprocal challenges within constructivist models?; Wider implications of the ‘e’ experience; Conclusions

Conceptions of Professional landscapes; Institutional models of internationalisation; Academic dispositions; Achieving the internationalised curriculum; From middle-out to CAPRI?

The evaluative questionnaire remains the most popular method of obtaining feedback from students on their learning experience. However, there are issues. This session is about student consultation meetings showing how they can provide the precursor to action research for collaborative curriculum design.

Caruana and Spurling (2007) note that whilst multi-cultural group work has benefits for the student learning experience intra-group interactions are complex and challenging. Cultural differences that remain unresolved can create conflict which transcends any notion of ‘creative tension’(De Vita, 2002; 2001). Recent work with home students suggests that perceived tension may indeed, manifest in a lack of engagement. Some studies cite an unwillingness to work with international students, some cite willingness without action and yet others deploy theoretical frameworks like the Integrated Threat Theory (differentiating between realistic, symbolic and cultural threat) to understand the factors underlying relative dispositions towards engagement with international peers (Harrison and Peacock, 2008; Hyland et al 2008; Clifford, 2005). The key question is how can we as educators provide the ‘safe’ learning environment which reduces the tension and positively invites the multiple perspectives characteristic of cross-cultural capability? This workshop invites colleagues to consider how they make use of text in multicultural group work and to engage in a ‘hands-on’ activity designed to prompt strategies for reducing the tension and encouraging genuine interaction.

Many students regard UK campuses as welcoming environments, providing ‘a home from home’. Furthermore, evidence also suggests that students value the diversity they encounter at uni. and are eager to communicate across cultural boundaries. Nonetheless, all students – whether designated ‘international’ or ‘home’ – can sometimes feel marginalised in diverse campus settings. Sharing insights from recent research commissioned by the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) UK Internationalisation and Equality and Diversity in Higher Education: Merging Identities, a case study of policy and practice in six universities this session will enable participants to: • Discuss what students identify as good practice in promoting integration within a diverse student body • Explore students’ views regarding how existing practice may be developed by universities and student unions, to support meaningful and sustainable cross-cultural relationships, which will enhance the learning experience for all students

‘The climate that … students are growing up [in] is dramatically different from what's been true of the last even ten or fifteen years. This will change how they think in the same way that our parent's views of how they behaved were shaped by the depression. I think this is their depression, and I'm confident that they are even now taking lessons out of it - of things they see that they don't like. Things that they don't want to do, as well as hopes that they have for what they could do better.’ (Sandra Sucher, Harvard Business School, March 2009). This paper explores global citizenship education within the culture of higher education (HE). Undeniably global citizenship is becoming a ‘hot topic’ in HE. For some universities it is a central plank of mission, policy and strategy for others it is, at least, implicit in schemes that are being developed to engage students in international volunteering or similar international and/or multicultural community learning experiences. Drawing on literature in the field this session offers participants the opportunity to consider fundamental questions: Who is the global citizen that shall emerge from the experience of higher learning given the diversity of universities’ missions, competing priorities and different disciplinary perspectives? Should we deliberately avoid embedding volunteering and similar experiences in mainstream curricula in order to provide a counterweight to disciplinary norms and perspectives, in the hope of producing the ‘…epistemological and ontological disturbance…’ that will enable graduates to ‘live at ease’ with what can be a ‘perplexing and unsettling environment’ and ‘make a positive contribution to the supercomplex world’? (Barnett, R. (2000) Realising the University in an Age of Supercomplexity Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press).

This presentation is designed to encourage colleagues to conceptualise the internationalised curriculum in a holistic way, considering how it relates to other key agenda across the HE sector, including Equality and Diversity, (E and D), Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) and graduate employability. This is complemented by a discussion of what the internationalised curriculum might look like in different disciplines. Key perceptions and issues within academic practice will be explored from both staff and student perspectives and this will be complemented by practical advice and guidance which draws on the experience of lecturers and others who have researched their practice in the field.

As UK universities recruit increasing numbers of international staff they are also establishing websites, advice centres, networks and other resources dedicated to supporting this group. At the same time, the ‘deficit-assimilationist’ model applied to the international student experience has been challenged under the influence of the internationalisation agenda. As universities turn their attention towards the international student as a source of cultural capital, much research to date has concerned the quality of their learning experience and in turn, it is now acknowledged that integration is a key issue in harnessing cultural capital to enhance the learning experience for all students. International staff are similarly an invaluable source of cultural capital and in the corporate sector research addressing the role of international assignees as knowledge transfer agents highlights the significance of three sets of human-related factors: abilities and motivations of international staff, abilities and motivation of local employees and the relationship between local and international staff (Bonach and Zárraga-Oberty, 2008). This paper suggests we know relatively little about the motivations, expectations and experiences of our international staff. A key question is can greater synergy between internationalisation and Equality and Diversity shift the focus from assimilation and compliance to valuing the cultural capital of our international colleagues?

Professional Development for Internationalisation: The Challenge - the development continuum; Engaging academics?; Ideological positioning?; Curriculum aspirations; Alternative models to support change; Staff development for internationalisation; Staff Development for Internationalisation: Some Alternative Possibilities?; Curriculum development models organised on a project basis; Diffusionist model: middle-out; Centre for Academic Practice and Research in Internationalisation; International staff : their role, their contribution?; International staff: key issues

Introduction It has been argued that there is a lack of consensus surrounding the concept of global citizenship and global citizenship education in UK higher education. A lack of definition contributes towards incoherent and often contradictory goals which make it difficult to understand the impact of teaching and learning in the field. This chapter explores concepts inherent to characterisations of global citizenship, particularly as they relate to the internationalised curriculum, by engaging with a sociological literature which demonstrates how this lack of consensus is the outcome of tensions created by globalisation and knowledge economy and learning society discourses within UK higher education. The central argument is that in order to understand their practice higher education teachers need to reflect on the moral and political attitudes, values and beliefs that are influential and presuppose particular renditions of what global citizenship in the context of an internationalised curriculum means. Furthermore, if learning in universities is to constitute ‘higher learning’, engagement with particular concepts in terms of curriculum and pedagogy are necessary in order to counter the influence of popular academic discourses in the global age.

‘The climate that … students are growing up [in] is dramatically different from what's been true of the last even ten or fifteen years. This will change how they think in the same way that our parent's views of how they behaved were shaped by the depression. I think this is their depression, and I'm confident that they are even now taking lessons out of it - of things they see that they don't like. Things that they don't want to do, as well as hopes that they have for what they could do better.’ (Sandra Sucher, Harvard Business School, March 2009). This paper explores global citizenship education within the culture of higher education (HE). Undeniably global citizenship is becoming a ‘hot topic’ in HE. For some universities it is a central plank of mission, policy and strategy for others it is, at least, implicit in schemes that are being developed to engage students in international volunteering or similar international and/or multicultural community learning experiences. Some universities take their lead from global citizenship education within the compulsory sector’s national curriculum and Oxfam’s definition of the knowledge and understanding, skills and values and attitudes that make up the global citizen. However, is global citizenship in Higher Education much more of a ‘mixed bag’ mirroring the tensions regarding institutional purposes, priorities, processes and potentially conflicting disciplinary perspectives? Drawing on literature in the field this session offers participants the opportunity to consider fundamental questions: Who is the global citizen that shall emerge from the experience of higher learning given the diversity of universities’ missions, competing priorities and different disciplinary perspectives? Should we deliberately avoid embedding volunteering and similar experiences in mainstream curricula in order to provide a counterweight to disciplinary norms and perspectives, in the hope of producing the ‘…epistemological and ontological disturbance…’ that will enable graduates to ‘live at ease’ with what can be a ‘perplexing and unsettling environment’ and ‘make a positive contribution to the supercomplex world’? (Barnett, R. (2000) Realising the University in an Age of Supercomplexity Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press). Does global citizenship education in HE represent an emerging transdisciplinary endeavour which challenges disciplinary boundaries to provide the nuanced multiple perspectives which are necessary in negotiating the complex interplay of local, national and international contexts characteristic of the problems encountered in today’s global economy and society?

This presentation is designed to encourage colleagues to conceptualise the internationalised curriculum in a holistic way, considering how it relates to other key agenda across the HE sector, including Equality and Diversity, (E and D), Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) and graduate employability. This is complemented by a discussion of what the internationalised curriculum might look like in different disciplines. Key perceptions and issues within academic practice will be explored from both staff and student perspectives and this will be complemented by practical advice and guidance which draws on the experience of lecturers and others who have researched their practice in the field.

As UK universities recruit increasing numbers of international staff they are also establishing websites, advice centres, networks and other resources dedicated to supporting this group. At the same time, the ‘deficit-assimilationist’ model applied to the international student experience has been challenged under the influence of the internationalisation agenda. As universities turn their attention towards the international student as a source of cultural capital, much research to date has concerned the quality of their learning experience and in turn, it is now acknowledged that integration is a key issue in harnessing cultural capital to enhance the learning experience for all students. International staff are similarly an invaluable source of cultural capital and in the corporate sector research addressing the role of international assignees as knowledge transfer agents highlights the significance of three sets of human-related factors: abilities and motivations of international staff, abilities and motivation of local employees and the relationship between local and international staff (Bonach and Zárraga-Oberty, 2008). This paper suggests we know relatively little about the motivations, expectations and experiences of our international staff. A key question is can greater synergy between internationalisation and Equality and Diversity shift the focus from assimilation and compliance to valuing the cultural capital of our international colleagues?

Global education and global competencies in UK Higher Education generally embrace two different, but not necessarily mutually exclusive models: preparing graduates as global citizens who can succeed in a global marketplace and preparing graduates as global citizens in a civic sense, who are responsible, participative and active. Evidence suggests enhanced employability (gaining the competitive edge) is a key consideration for students embarking upon international volunteering schemes within universities since ‘…Global citizenship in the civic sense offers little in the face of diminishing career prospects, corporate downsizing, wage deflation and unprecedented student loan debt…’ (Scorza, 2004) This paper explores: • student expectations of international volunteering at a UK university • perceived outcomes from the volunteering experience which can provide a starting point for developing global citizenship in terms of civic responsibility and capability • the challenges and possibilities for couching the volunteering experience within a structured pedagogical framework to enable students to develop as global citizens not only in an economic, but also in a civic sense. Scorza, J.A. (2004) Teaching Global Citizenship: The Paradox of Competency and Power, Paper prepared for the 2004 Annual Meeting of the American Political Society Association, Chicago 2-6 September

This article reviews research on transnational higher education (TNHE) published in academic journals between 2006 and 2014 through the lenses of network power and dissensus. Conclusions suggest the need for more research on the ‘entrapping’ aspects of global social relations to provide a counterweight to the influence of dominant paradigms. It is argued that research at local-institutional level, harnessing the dissensus of the academic community with the needs and aspirations of students provides the means to develop global imaginaries and initiate new policy directions which break free of entrapment and address the perverse outcomes of globalised knowledge-based economy models in higher education (HE).

This report critically reviews contemporary educational research and practice in the field of internationalisation within the business education subject communities in order to inform curriculum development and pedagogy geared towards the development of international perspectives and intercultural learning. Drawing on current pedagogical literatures as well as staff and student consultations, it identifies a number of key points which reflect good practice in business education curricula. Due to the broad disciplinary scope of the subject area in focus and the diversity of curricular activities across the UK, this critical review is selective rather than exhaustive and seeks to stimulate further discussion and research in the field. The report is structured as a reference text around key themes and issues emerging from the review, providing the reader who has a particular interest or issue in their practice with an outline of key texts which can be followed up as appropriate.

This paper is based on a literature review commissioned by the Higher Education Academy in 2006 which aimed to identify existing published literature and current practices of direct relevance to the Internationalisation of Higher Education in the UK. The review was based on the assumption that a range of concerns exists, that there are emerging issues and that there are inconsistencies and gaps in the literature. The project focused on a number of questions including: what working definitions of internationalisation of higher education are in currency? what meanings are attributed to internationalisation of the curriculum? what models for institutional internationalisation are emerging? and, what curriculum models are emerging/being adopted? The literature trawl identified in excess of 300 international sources of relevance, of which, more that 100 originated in the UK. This paper draws on the analysis of these sources to determine ‘where we are’ in the UK in comparison with our Western counterparts, particularly HEIs based in Australia.

This article reflects on a review of the literature on the internationalisation of UK higher education (HE) commissioned by the Higher Education Academy (HEA) in 2006. Recent progress on some of the key themes is considered and likely issues and possibilities for the future explored. Methodology is grounded in the author’s own experience in the context of research in the field and recent developments in assessment, learning and teaching policy and practice as they affect the internationalisation agenda. Emerging themes include global citizenship and graduate attributes at the institutional level and notions of critical thinking and phronesis as they relate to the internationalised curriculum. A key consideration is how academics may be supported in developing the internationalised curriculum. The author argues that a focus on generic graduate attributes for employability could unintentionally detract institutions from a much-needed reassessment of purposes, principles and practices required by diversity. Such reassessment implies the deconstruction of our understanding of concepts like critical thinking and critical literacy in pursuit of a curriculum that embraces multiple perspectives and provides the space to cross cultural boundaries through the deployment of threshold concepts in teaching and learning strategies. While acknowledging that facilitating border-crossing may seem quite alien to some teachers in HE, it is argued that the most effective way forward is via a research-informed and evidence-based approach to curriculum design rather than a ‘best-practice checklist’ approach.

This paper assesses the historical impact of central government policy on the planning and ownership of UK airports with particular reference to development at Ringway, Manchester. We argue that during a crucial period in the creation of airport infrastructure, central government policy proved equivocal. This meant that it was left to the municipal owners to undertake investment if the airport was to grow. The only significant state support was the provision of grant aid when government generally rejected the principle of subsidised airport operations. The local authority displayed considerable initiative, and the result was the nurturing of an international gateway. © 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

This article presents a comprehensive review of research on transnational higher education published between 2006 and 2014. It aims to provide an overview of a highly complex field that is both nascent and shifting, with research developing unevenly and concentrated in particular areas. This overview will enable academics working in transnational higher education to place their practice in the wider context of socio-political and cultural discourses. The review adopts the concept of positionality, which defines individuals and/or groups not in terms of fixed identities but by their shifting location within networks of relationships as a means of understanding the changing landscape.

The establishment of the first civil airport at Manchester in 1929, and its subsequent development, especially after World War II, owed a great deal to the enterprise and vision of the local authority. Despite potential constraints upon investment arising from municipal ownership, Ringway became an important regional centre of civil air transport, and operated consistently on sound commercial principles. This article considers the ways in which the mode of ownership affected policy formulation and implementation down to the early 1980s, when the major post-war planning phase was completed. It concentrates on three distinct, but interrelated, issues. It identifies the crucial initiatives that underpinned airport development. It shows how conflicting interests within the authority were resolved, first during the early period of financial losses and then later, when profits began to accrue. Finally it probes key aspects of the evolving organisational, structure in terms of the political economy of ownership, management and control.

Developing graduates as global citizens is a central aim of the internationalised university of the 21st century. International student mobility premised on notions of cosmopolitanism is regarded as a key component of the student learning experience. Yet there is little evidence to suggest the benefits of international mobility for intercultural understanding, which is an essential quality of the global citizen. This paper reports the findings of a Higher Education Academy-funded project exploring how students draw on their diverse backgrounds in developing resilience within multicultural learning environments. The research findings suggest that student diversity provides a rich source of lived experience that can be harnessed as a resource in developing graduates as global citizens. The paper therefore suggests that institutions re-conceptualise global citizenship as a concept embracing diversity, belonging, community and solidarity and support the development of pedagogies that embrace cultural biography and storytelling.

This report identifies and critically reviews contemporary practice in the field of internationalisation within the HLST subject communities in order to inform curriculum development and pedagogy geared towards the development of international perspectives and global awareness. Drawing on current pedagogical literatures as well as staff and student consultations, it identifies a number of key points which reflect good practice in UK HLST curricula in the UK. Due to the broad disciplinary scope of the subject area in focus and the diversity of curricular activities across the UK, this critical review is selective rather than exhaustive and seeks to stimulate further discussion and research into this area.

Summary This project arises out of Eade and Peacock’s (2009) scoping report, commissioned by Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) entitled Internationalising equality and equalising internationalisation: The intersection between internationalisation and Equality and Diversity in higher education. The principal aim of the current study is to identify the advantages of building on the intersection of Internationalisation and E and D agendas, through an exploration of the effective mechanisms for linking E and D and internationalisation policies, structures and activities within a small sample of heterogenous HE institutions located in Australia, England and Wales. Reflecting a multi-level and mixed-method approach this report provides an in-depth account of awareness, commitment, understanding and involvement of domestic and international staff and students, and other key players, in Internationalisation and Equality and Diversity. This account is supported by examples of good practice and synergy and consideration of areas of potential improvement in the two fields. The mixed-method approach involves desk research to consider the influence of geographical location, profile and size on rationales for internationalisation and commitment to Equality and Diversity, complemented by interviews of key personnel to provide insights regarding performance, accessibility etc. Data regarding staff and student awareness, perceptions and dispositions is captured via online survey and focus groups. Finally a review of the literature supports data interpretation by suggesting emergent key themes. Institutional challenges are identified within the context of what may be learned from other organisational forms. A central focus is the student learning experience, with discussions embracing key issues such as competing perspectives on learner support models, the association between inclusive curricula and multicultural education and attendant barriers and tensions. Extensive and systematic analysis of institutional policy in Internationalisation and Equality and Diversity within specific local contexts provides substantial evidence of how current and future direction is shaped by the socio-economic and cultural make-up of surrounding communities, tempered by institutional aspirations in the global arena. The insights of senior managers provide the personal accounts and deep insights into the ongoing strategic initiatives and perceived challenges which determine the practice which emerges from the rhetoric of policy statements. The in-depth exploration of awareness, perceptions and dispositions of staff and students serves to highlight a striking continuity of perspective across the range of stakeholders, within different institutions which approach Internationalisation and Equality and Diversity from widely contrasting positions vis-à-vis locality, status, market position and relative size. Seemingly, any shortcomings of policy to practice transfer are not the outcome of a lack of will on the part of those who have engaged in this research, but rather reflect the complexity of finding the most appropriate way, whether senior manager, teacher, support and development professional, student or other stakeholder. The challenges of internationalisation and Equality and Diversity simply manifest themselves in different ways at different levels within different institutional contexts and key messages from this research include for example: • The need to manage structural diversity within the framework of a broadly-based business-case approach in order to maintain internal cohesion and external credibility. Such an approach should acknowledge diversity of mission which derives from the nature of the global-local interface, profile, status etc. • Broad awareness of the potential synergies between Internationalisation and E and D within a framework of inclusive practice • Broad consensus surrounding the merits of inclusion embodying both local and global dimensions. At this level, diversity of mission, location, status etc. becomes irrelevant. Universities with different cultures can learn much from each other since inclusion should be the response of all institutions recruiting international and/or students from a diversity of cultural, ethnic, religious, socio-economic etc. backgrounds • Awareness of tensions at policy and practice levels, which might be eased by appropriate organisational structures and processes designed specifically to embed synergy across institutions • Acknowledgement of the need to embed the concept of synergy at three levels of diversity: structural (demographic mix); classroom (curriculum and pedagogies) and interactional (informal and social settings) • The significance of readily accessible research-informed and evidence-based practice to raise awareness, build confidence, promote engagement and inform future direction within cross-disciplinary and cross-institutional contexts

Introduction Recent research with UK students in Higher Education (HE) suggests that whilst they have a prevailing interest in other cultures and recognise the benefits of working in the ‘international classroom’ their experience is not tied more widely into learning or skills acquisition and benefits are often incidental, of low yield and not contextualised. Some students also feel that it is the institutions’ responsibility to review policy, procedure and pedagogical practice to better facilitate communication between different student groups (Harrison and Peacock, 2007; Peacock and Harrison 2006; Peacock and Harrison in this volume). Arguably this process of review is well underway and at some institutions it has prompted notions of internationalisation which embrace the concept of global citizenship (Bourn in this volume; Caruana and Spurling, 2007). At the institutional level the rhetoric of global citizenship is manifest in mission statements and internationalisation strategies that trumpet internationalised, intercultural and inclusive curricula (Caruana and Spurling, 2007). However, internationalisation is not a clearly defined, absolute set of ‘best practices’ but rather a nuanced construct which is highly context specific. In other words internationalisation will manifest in different ways depending upon disciplinary perspectives, whether it is viewed from an academic or administrative stance, from an institutional, faculty or department vantage point or from staff, student , employer and other stakeholder perspectives. However, the crucial factor determining the possibilities for intercultural dialogue within the student learning experience is academics’ attitudes towards, and the ways in which they understand, the process of internationalisation (Hyland et al, 2008; Schoorman, 1999). This chapter draws on research undertaken at a UK University with graduates of the institution’s Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Education Practice and Research (PGCHEPR), the first component of a Masters level programme, compulsory for all new academic members of staff. The programme is informed by a philosophy of transformative learning and critical pedagogy that provides a counterweight to the conservative (rather than expansive), instrumental (rather than evidence-informed), common-sensical (rather than scholarly) approach to teaching and learning often encountered in the immediate practice setting (Knight, Tait and Yorke, 2006). This study shows that discussing internationalisation strategy as part of a formal programme of study or encountering it within the informal operational context of disciplinary practice are equally lacking when it comes to understanding the complexity of the internationalised curriculum and global citizenship. This probably reflects the assertion made at the start of this chapter, that internationalisation is a construct rather than a set of ‘best practices’. Internationalisation strategy is correct in anticipating a long process of evolution and development but more important is the form which the process will take. It is likely (particularly in light of Australian experience) that assigning curriculum development exclusively to individual schools and departments will not deliver the internationalised curriculum which will benefit all students. Rather institutions need to encourage the broad based cross-faculty dialogue characteristic of the PGCHEPR in shaping institutional strategy and broadening staff and students’ horizons beyond a traditional outlook based on periods of study or placement abroad. Development is likely to be iterative, if not incremental and a ‘diffusionist’ or ‘middle-out’, centrally co-ordinated and facilitated approach encompassing ‘the bringing together of faculty and students for discussion of processes…’ in the spirit of collaboration and insider perspectives characteristic of action research seems to offer more potential for authentic engagement than either of the tried and tested top-down (from senior management) or ‘bottom-up (from students) approaches to internationalising the curriculum (Campbell, 2008; Caruana and Hanstock , 2008; Chang et al, 2004).

Welcome to this seventh issue of Innovative Learning and Action (ILIA) which celebrates and disseminates some of the work produced by recent cohorts on the Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Education Practice and Research programme. As part of their assessment in the second module, Learning Design and Enquiry participants engage in action research completing a planned, first cycle of what is essentially an iterative process. Participants inevitably confront action research from different perspectives largely based on past research experience. Some perceive themselves as ‘novice’ researchers generally, when they encounter this paradigm, whilst others are seasoned researchers steeped in more traditional approaches. Part of the assessment therefore addresses evaluation and reflection on action research processes as they have been experienced and this is included in the work presented. The insights generated are the product of genuine concern, interest and enthusiasm in responding to the challenges of teaching and learning that pervade Higher Education today. This small sample of papers demonstrates a heightened awareness of issues; the student voice is apparent but it is reinforced in conversation with academics. The papers show how action research builds on the authors’ willingness to collaborate with their students and indeed, other stakeholders in seeking mutual understanding of complexity and in formulating ideas to enhance the quality of the student learning experience. Each of the contributions has direct relevance to both policy and practice encouraging readers to reflect on key issues in the context of Widening Participation. The transition to HE is clearly a fundamental concern. Authors explore support systems for both students and their workplace managers in the challenging context of secondment to study in pursuit of CPD; the potential of FE/HE teaching exchange as a form of professional development to enable lecturers and teachers to facilitate their students’ journey across the sectors and the possibilities for enhancing the academic writing skills of students. One common theme is the complexity encountered in negotiating cultural boundaries in different contexts – the boundaries between workplace and place of study, between one educational sector and another and between one style of communication and another. A final contribution prompts us to consider the complexities of teaching and learning across international boundaries in exploring the potential for enhancing learning through the use of video-clips in a distance learning programme. I hope you will enjoy these papers which I feel provide much food for thought. I am also sure that the authors would welcome approaches from colleagues either within or outside their respective disciplines who are interested in similar areas of practice.