A three-year internationalisation plan had been introduced at the university two years prior to the commencement of data collection for this case study and a draft internationalisation policy and plan was in circulation at the time the case study data were collected. A particular driver for the development of the plan was an upcoming quality review of the University to be conducted by the Australian Government. The internationalisation plan included a curriculum internationalisation project supported by two dedicated staff. The aims of the project were to develop a community of practice within the university through organizing workshops and building networks of interested and committed people.
Neither the university’s strategic plan or its teaching and learning plan specifically mentioned internationalisation, however one of the five graduate attributes of the University related specifically to the development of global perspectives in graduates. This global perspective was linked to awareness of the discipline in a global as well as local context, and being able to function in a multicultural, globalised context. Internationalisation was widely interpreted by academic staff as being primarily concerned with attracting international students and encouraging outbound student mobility.
The Business faculty had recently reviewed the extent to which graduate attributes had been embedded in its courses and programs, including the graduate attribute most obviously related to internationalisation – global perspectives . Stakeholder consultation (with students, staff and, most importantly, industry) indicated that the attributes and skills that students should have been graduating with were not always clearly demonstrable. It appeared that summaries of graduate attributes had been attached to course outlines, but in most cases little consideration had been given to how they the graduate attributes were actually developed and assessed. The focus of the review of the implementation of graduate attributes was that any claims needed to be supported by evidence. That is, it was not enough to list graduate attributes in course outlines, there needed to be evidence that they were being appropriately developed and assessed. It had been quite difficult to get academic staff to participate in the review process. They often complained that they felt overburdened by administration and they viewed this review process as just another management fad that would eventually pass.
A desk audit of the embedding of all graduate attributes within the Business faculty was undertaken and obvious gaps were identified. Next a checklist of how the graduate attributes could be embedded in the various courses and programs was developed. The checklist was based on the following principles:
The next stage involved engaging academic staff in the review process. Each academic discipline took the checklist and adapted it to the discipline and related professions. Academic staff across all discipline groups in the faculty of business were then invited to comment on the checklists. Subsequently, one-on-one meetings were arranged with course coordinators and teaching staff to go through each course in detail. Specific assessment criteria were aligned with each graduate attribute statement, to ensure that all skills and all attributes were actually being assessed. Every course was not required to cover all of the graduate attributes, but in each year of the program all graduate attributes and skills needed to be cumulatively developed and assessed.
The documentation of the embedding of all graduate attributes enabled mapping of the development and assessment of graduate attributes over whole programs. Every major was mapped, gaps in provision and courses where these might be addressed were nominated and changes to curriculum and assessment were negotiated with the course coordinators.
In this initial review of the development of graduate attributes, internationalisation was not singled out or given top priority. It was considered only within the ‘global perspectives’ attribute and mostly addressed by group work and the inclusion of course and subject aims related to the development of intercultural competence.
In the Imagine stage the focus of internationalisation of the curriculum was broadened to include all graduate attributes rather than focussing only on the ‘global perspectives’ attribute as the driver of internationalisation of the curriculum. For example, how could the attribute related to ‘communication skills and the attribute related to ‘problem solving skills’ be internationalised?
It was also decided to try to link internationalisation of the formal curriculum with internationalisation of the informal curriculum. As students tended to come onto campus for classes, and then leave immediately, despite having a culturally diverse student population the opportunities for students to get to interact across cultures informally were very limited.
A second iteration of the mapping and gap analysis was undertaken, linking internationalisation with all of the graduate attributes. For example ‘operating on a body of knowledge’ can be extended to include in an international as well as Australian contexts and examples; communication can be defined to specifically encompass culturally and linguistically diverse groups; problem solving can be specified to include research in an international context, and ethical behaviour interpreted within a broader context of considering the impact of decisions on culturally diverse people in different countries.
A professional development program to support course leaders and teaching staff in making changes to curriculum design, teaching and assessment was implemented as some staff had indicated they did not feel comfortable with the pedagogical aspects of internationalisation, especially their skills to develop the intercultural competence of students. The latter was identified as a particular priority.
Developments in the informal curriculum were planned to assist the development of a campus culture that openly valued and supported students to interact across cultures as part of their everyday campus experience.
The process to this point took around 12 months.