Knowledge across and in disciplines is at the centre of the framework. As international communities, disciplines largely determine what and whose knowledge is valued and that in turn affords and or constrains the scope of the curriculum and understandings of curriculum itself. However, the complexity of problems faced by the world and its communities requires ‘problem-defining and solving perspectives that cross disciplinary and cultural boundaries’ (Hudzik 2004,1). As such, interdisciplinary approaches that ‘apply insights and perspectives from more than one conventional discipline to the understanding of social phenomena’ and cross disciplinary approaches that ‘involve real interaction across the conventional disciplines’ (Millar, 2020, np.) have produce holistic solutions.
Curriculum decisions are not value free. They are usually influenced by the dominate paradigms in society, the institution and the discipline. However, paradigms are not static and paradigms shift (Kuhn, 1962). When dominate examples of beliefs, practice, laws, theories, and taken-for-granted ways of thinking and worldviews are challenged by anomalies, new problems or changing conditions, there will be a paradigm shift (Kuhn, 1962). Following Mestenhauser (1998), internationalisation of the curriculum requires that we ‘challenge the paradigms on which the curriculum is based’ (p. 21).
The process of curriculum design involves a series of choices about what and whose knowledge will be included, and what skills and attitudes will be developed. This is often decided, by default, according to dominant paradigms, with little if any consideration being given to alternative models and ways of practising a profession or viewing the world.
An important part of the process of internationalisation of the curriculum is to think beyond dominant paradigms, to explore emerging paradigms and imagine new possibilities and new ways of thinking and doing. This is a challenging task for all faculty and staff. They have been socialised into their discipline, or into the department or groups’ culture and ways of working. Through that process they have developed a sense of identity and personal commitment to the shared values and associated ways of doing, thinking and being embedded within dominant paradigms of their discipline and work communities (Kuhn 1996). Thus, faculty and staff are themselves culturally bound by their own disciplinary training and thinking (Becher & Trowler 2002).
Internationalisation of the curriculum is concerned with the development of the individual as a social and responsible members of society and preparation for citizenship (local, regional and global) as well as professional life and practice. It should not just be about training for the performance and demands of professional practice in a globalised world.
However, the requirements of professional practice are important considerations when decisions are being made about what and what not to include in a curriculum, especially when the program is accredited by external professional bodies at all levels, local, regional, national and global.
‘At its best, internationalised education is about promoting the welfare of the future world and tackling its most serious problems’ (Haigh, 2018, p.3). A university education is not just about training for demands of professional practice in a globalised world. The moral responsibilities that come with local, national and global citizenship are also important considerations when planning an internationalised curriculum. Education for global citizenship concerns the promotion of social harmony, tolerance, social justice and sustainability of the global habitat (Haigh, 2018). Every university student should be aware of the key problems afflicting societies and the globe. Responsible internationalisation of the curriculum aims to help all learners ‘become active citizens of this polycultural and environmentally challenged world’ (Haig, 2018, p. 7). Looking after the welfare of the places we inhabit, thinking and responding locally and globally to issues close and far, appreciating difference, diversity, and the Other within our communities and globally is the responsibility of all citizens and a key rationale for internationalisation of the curriculum.
An important consideration in curriculum design is what you would expect students to be able to do at the end of a program and as graduates. ‘Decisions about what students will learn and, in particular, the extent to which the learning outcomes of a course of study will focus on international and intercultural knowledge, skills, and attitudes are critical curriculum design decisions’ (Leask 2020, np). ‘Assessment defines the curriculum and for many students assessment practices will have more impact on learning than does teaching (Gibbs 2006). It is important, therefore, to clarify for students what levels of international and intercultural understanding and performance will be required of them in assessment tasks as early as possible in the course’ (Leask 2020, np).
In internationalisation of the curriculum, constructive alignment constructive alignment is widely applied in curriculum planning and development (Biggs 1996). The key elements of a constructive alignment are:
Intended learning outcomes (also known as ‘learning outcomes’ or sometimes ‘learning objectives’).
Assessment that is matched to the learning outcomes and the learning activities to show evidence learning outcomes have been attained.
Activities (what you want the learner to be able to do and achieve to meet the learning outcomes), learning resources and pedagogy to facilitate learning. (Teaching Frameworks and Models, University of Queensland)
This can then be used to plan assessments, tasks and learning experiences in different courses at different levels in the program, ensuring that students are provided with regular feedback on how they are performing and progressing. In an internationalised curriculum it is important to specifically provide feedback on and assess student achievement of clearly articulated international and intercultural learning goals.
The systematic development of international and intercultural knowledge, skills and attitudes in an internationalised curriculum requires careful planning, collaboration with colleagues and coordination across a program of study. The development of skills such as language capability and intercultural competence may need to be embedded in a number of courses at different levels. Given that not all students will enter the program with the same capabilities, a range of strategies to assist all students to achieve desired learning outcomes by the end of the program are likely to be required. Finding ways in which student services and the informal curriculum can support the work undertaken in the formal curriculum is an important part of curriculum design. Mapping where desired knowledge, skills and attitudes will be developed and assessed in the formal curriculum is a good starting point.
Universities are under constant pressure to respond to a wide array of external and internal forces and pressures necessitating changes to policies, priorities and focus. Such forces include employability and preparing students with knowledge and skills needed in the job market locally and/or internationally. Institutional mission, ethos, policies, and priorities in relation to other matters also influence what is possible and approaches taken to internationalisation of the curriculum.
The formal curriculum does not operate in isolation. The informal curriculum, the various extra-curricular activities and services available to students, are an important part of the context in which the formal curriculum is enacted. Together, the formal and the informal curriculum define the total student experience. Both the formal and the informal curriculum occur within, and are influenced by, the institutional context. Both will, to some extent, be shaped by university mission and ethos. These are reflected in various ways in policies (such as in ‘graduate attributes’ statements), the range and focus of degrees offered (such as the availability of foreign language study and recognition of concurrent global experience programs), funding priorities (such as to what extent international service learning is supported) and staff development opportunities.
Developing students’ abilities to be ethical and responsible local citizens who appreciate the connections between the local, the national and the global is an important aspect of internationalisation of the curriculum. The local context includes social, cultural, political and economic conditions. All may provide opportunities and challenges for internationalisation of the curriculum. For example, there may be opportunities for students to develop enabling intercultural skills, knowledge and attitudes through engagement with diversity in the local community.
Local accreditation requirements for registration in a chosen profession may require a seemingly exclusive focus on local legislation and policy. However, the local context is reciprocally connected to national and global contexts. Developing all students understanding of these connections is an important part of the process of developing their ability to be critical and reflexive citizens and professionals able to think and act locally, nationally and globally.
A region can be defined by culture and ethnicity, language, religion, and government and may be governed by its own laws, rules, and regulations within a nation. As with the national and global contexts the regional context is an important consideration when engaging in internationalisation of the curriculum. Social, political, economic, and environmental issues at the regional level can influence and shape what is possible for internationalisation of the curriculum as these are the background against which institutions formulate and enact policy. Understanding and designing responsive curriculum and preparing students to be ethical and responsible citizens in their regional context is a core consideration in internationalisation of the curriculum.
National and regional matters and related government policies concerning internationalisation are the background against which institutions formulate policy and academic staff do or do not engage in internationalisation of the curriculum. For example, policies concerning foreign language learning and support for student mobility, the recruitment of international students and the extent to which universities are connected with others in the region will all influence approaches to internationalisation of the curriculum. Different national and regional contexts will to some extent determine the options available.
World society is not one in which global resources and power are shared equally. Globalisation is being experienced as discriminatory and oppressive in some places and beneficial and liberating in others. It has contributed to increasing the gap between the rich and the poor of the world, and the exploitation of the ‘South’ by the ‘North’. This domination is not only economic, it is also intellectual. The dominance of Western educational models in the developed world defines what is knowledge, who will apply it and to what ends. The hegemony of the global North and Western perspectives imported into higher education is now increasingly challenged, as is the legitimacy of universalizing concepts and approaches emanating from Western European and American countries and the passive acceptance of unproved ‘globally established truths’ (Cross, Mhlanga & Ojo, 2011, p. 76). Internationalisation of the curriculum aims to unsettle and provoke critique of delivering a curriculum that presents only one view of the world – especially if this view of the world does not challenge the neo-liberal construction of globalisation and produces graduates in the dominate developed world who, in pursuing their own economic goals, create even greater inequality in the economically less developed world.
In the process of internationalisation of the curriculum it is important to consider the kind of world we live in and the kind of world we want for our students now and for future generations. The answers to these questions have the potential to impact what we teach (whose knowledge), what sort of experiences we incorporate into the curriculum, the learning spaces and environments we construct and the pedagogies we use (how we teach), and what sort of learning outcomes (knowledge, skills, attitudes, mindsets and dispositions) we look for in graduates.