Study Abroad: A 21st Century Perspective - Volume
1 - Table of Contents
How study abroad impacts overseas academic communities
by Axel Markert
Director of International Relations, Eberhard-Karls Universität
Tübingen
In the decade following World War II, the German universities were
eager to attract students from abroad again. During the late fifties,
many American institutions began to establish programs for undergraduate
students. Usually these programs were for groups of juniors since
the German regulations would not allow for earlier admission and
the home universities, as a rule, wanted the students back on campus
for their year of graduation. Many of these Junior Year Abroad Programs
were organized by a given American college but accepted students
from other schools as well. A 'Resident Director' was often hired
by the sending institution to help with the integration of the students
in the German higher educational context, to provide a liaison function
to the German host university, and to help with credit transfer.
These programs, which of course also existed in Britain, France,
Spain and Italy, presented one of the first examples of non-degree
'organized mobility' on the German academic scene. German universities,
before the expansion of the 60's, were still elitist in their outlook
and especially academic periods abroad were reserved for the cream
of the crop. The German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), which
had already been founded in the 1920's, would continue to select
advanced individual applicants from its member universities and
send them abroad with generous grants. In turn, it provided scholarships
to highly qualified foreign students who, as a rule, also had to
be graduates. Guest students at German universities who came from
other countries were usually individual applicants, and often came
to earn a degree rather than to just broaden their academic experience.
Since the American colleges paid for their Resident Directors and
other infrastructural items which they deemed necessary for their
students, there was usually no offer of reciprocity despite the
fact that students were charged tuition fees at home while there
were (and are) no such charges at the German schools. The DAAD offered
a certain number of contact or linkage grants to German universities
which they could pass on to graduates from their partner institutions,
provided there was a counteroffer on the other side. These often
took the form of teaching assistantships in the German language
departments. Some of the Junior Year Programs also made such offers
to the German host institutions - not necessarily for altruistic
reasons: The German students, after all, had to work for their grants,
and were also welcome helpers in the recruitment process for the
program. When in the 60's and 70's demand for study abroad experiences
started to grow in Germany, roughly parallel to the general growth
in student numbers, DAAD and Fulbright scholarships as well as contact
grants were not sufficient any longer to satisfy the demand for
places abroad. The US continued to be the favorite destination for
German students, and as a matter of fact Germany remains the most
important sending country among the European nations. Some of us,
therefore, started to look for other than the trodden elitist paths.
The Junior Year programs on our campuses and their general education
philosophy provided a useful egalitarian model: Every student with
a halfway decent GPA could participate, and we felt that at least
every German student of English should be offered similar opportunities
in the UK and the US. Reciprocity, therefore, became the name of
the new game. Since funding for the tuition fees overseas was not
available to the average students, and our students, at least at
that time, were unwilling and unable to come up with such sums on
their own and, finally, since we in the institutions had no subsidies
to offer, we started to negotiate with our American partners of
the Junior Year scene for fee waivers from the other side.
I had learned my lesson as an undergraduate student in Ohio in
the mid 60's at a time when the dollar/DM exchange rate was over
4:1. Grandmother's savings went for one semester of tuition at the
University of Toledo, and without the help of the Rotary Foundation
I would literally not have survived a full academic year. I knew
that without an adequate administrative infrastructure very few
students would dare to embark on similar adventures. When it turned
out that our American partner institutions were very open to our
demands for reciprocity, we also started to build the required infrastructure.
Of course, we could not expect a (tuition-free) place in the US
for every Junior Year student who was enrolled in Tübingen.
Quid-pro-quo was easily said, but we had to take the real cost into
consideration which was incurred by the American colleges for administering
their programs on site. 3:1 was a starting point, soon to develop
into a 2:1 ratio—one Tübingen student accepted at the
partner institution, tuition-free, for every two American exchange
students from that school. In our exchanges with state institutions,
especially the newer ones, we could often send as many students
as we accepted. True to German tradition, we still wanted to send
our students not in a program, not in a structured group, but as
individual students. Therefore, rather than sending more students
to a given institution, we developed more exchange relationships
which led to a fast growing number of agreements. Until the late
70's, though, we did not have specialized study abroad advisers
to face the challenge which this growth rate presented. As at most
German universities, this task used to be the part-time responsibility
of a foreign student advisor who was also giving advice on application
procedures for DAAD and Fulbright grants and doling out information
on higher education abroad. I am inclined to think that Tübingen
was the first one among the German universities to establish the
position of a full-time Study Abroad Adviser, a lesson we learned
from our American counterparts. Others followed soon.
Therefore, the ground was well prepared in Germany when the European
mobility programs started to come around. In some of the major receiver
countries of American students, however, it was not. I , for one,
therefore doubted that programs on that scale could be administered
in some of these countries which were lacking the technical infrastructure.
Nor was I completely wrong. The students were usually exchanged
in groups, another lesson learned from the U.S. study abroad programs,
and notably Italian universities, in the early years of ERASMUS,
seemed to be unable to cope with the administrative demands of expediting
student groups. For a while, the Italian 'free mover' became a minor
headache in some of the host universities. But nearly all of the
participating countries caught on rather quickly : The flow of euros
from Brussels was likely to be smoother if the handling became more
professional. By the time the European Association for International
Education was founded in 1989, there was a goodly number of European
colleagues who thought of themselves as study abroad staff. Interestingly
though, the Europeans continued to regard Foreign Student and Study
Abroad Advisers as members of one crew. The section which the EAIE's
founders had intended to model after NAFSA's SECUSSA, the SECtion
on U.S. Students Abroad, therefore became a 'SAFSA' for Study Abroad
and Foreign Student Advisers.
The more general trend towards 'internationalization' has meanwhile
replaced the study abroad and foreign student activities of higher
educational institutions on both sides of the Atlantic. In its wake,
English seems to have become the uncontested lingua franca, and
not only in academia. European language departments in most American
colleges suffer from it, and Junior Year Abroad programs in those
Western European countries who had been the main receivers, have
started to dwindle. Germany, which at any rate has held only the
fifth rank among those (behind the UK, France, Spain and Italy)
, suffers the most precisely because it was and is the main sender
country. The reciprocity for which we fought twenty years ago and
which in the final balance used to be to the (numerical) advantage
of American institutions, has now developed into a balance which
is unequal the other way around. Tübingen, which used to receive
over 250 students from the US and sent 200, has now only 130 American
students for over 180 it sends. A considerable advantage on which
we can now fall back in Tübingen is that some of our earliest
Junior Year Abroad operations, notably the Antioch and Tufts Programs,
in over 40 years of existence have become dependable partners in
testing and establishing new formats, and reciprocity is generously
viewed in its broadest possible sense. The same, of course, is true
for similar programs in other German universities. Our State of
Baden-Württemberg has established a good number of statewide
exchanges with Oregon, Massachusetts, California and others whose
broad and diversified basis also helps to overcome the present-day
problems.
It is not unlikely that tuition charges will be levied at German
universities in the not-too-distant future, and this will change
the nature of the game substantially. Mutual waivers, of course,
will remain a condition for exchanges and the established American
study abroad programs therefore should be sheltered from such charges.
The developments described above will lead, and have already led
in some cases, to programs which are partially or even totally taught
in English. This poses a new challenge in terms of integrating the
guest students and ensuring an adequate command of English among
our teachers. Fortunately, we have excellent models to follow among
our neighbors to the north who, with their 'less spoken languages,'
had to adapt to these necessities long ago. For the first time in
German university history, we will have to give serious thought
to marketing and recruitment and pay attention to what our exchange
customers expect from us - rather than just adopting a take-it-or-leave-it
stance as we could afford to in the past. Networks and consortia
will play a larger role in it all, since sharing of resources and
economies of scale will impose themselves. Shorter and more intensive
programs will become available, and the reproach of 'academic tourism'
will lose most of its sting. Finally, the demands of business on
its way to an ever faster process of globalization will necessitate
our attention with its demands for a work force which has living
experience in, and practical expertise for more than just one country.
Internships will therefore be more in demand than ever before. Fluency
in a foreign language will become less important than it used to
be, but a sound knowledge of a country's culture and customs will
play more of a role instead.
The impact of study abroad on other academic communities cannot
be overestimated, as the German-American example shows. 19th century
German influences on the American system, usually in itself a result
of academic sojourns of notable Americans at German universities,
have come back to their sources with Junior Year Abroad programs
and have in turn influenced German higher education. Taking its
lead from the US example, Study Abroad has become a high-priority
item on the agenda of practically all German universities and will,
I am sure, continue the cross-fertilization process between both
systems.
Next article: Still Missing the Boat? Faculty
Involvement in Study Abroad by Norman J. Peterson
Back to Study Abroad: A 21st Century Perspective
- Table of Contents
|