Global Perspectives in Higher Education: Taking the Agenda Forward in the United Kingdom

http://jsi.sagepub.com

International Education Journal of Studies in

DOI: 10.1177/1028315307308332 online Feb 11, 2008;

2008; 12; 231 originally publishedJournal of Studies in International EducationJenny Lunn

the United KingdomGlobal Perspectives in Higher Education: Taking the Agenda Forward in

http://jsi.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/3/231 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association for Studies in International Education

at:can be foundJournal of Studies in International Education Additional services and information for

http://jsi.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://jsi.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jsi.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/12/3/231SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms):

(this article cites 7 articles hosted on the Citations

at Kings College London - ISS on September 15, 2008 http://jsi.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://www.asie.org

http://jsi.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jsi.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jsi.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/12/3/231


231

Author’s Note: Grateful thanks go to Professor Piers Blaikie (School of Development Studies, Universityof East Anglia) for his invaluable advice and assistance in the preparation of this article. Please addresscorrespondence to the Head of Research and Higher Education, Royal Geographical Society (with IBG),1 Kensington Gore, London, SW7 2AR, UK; or the author at [email protected].

Journal of Studies in International Education, Vol. 12 No. 3, Fall 2008 231-254DOI:10.1177/1028315307308332© 2008 Nuffic

Global Perspectives in Higher Education:Taking the Agenda Forward in theUnited Kingdom

Jenny Lunn

The economic, social, and cultural interests of the nation demand that graduates havesound knowledge of global issues, the skills for working in an international context,and the values of a “global citizen.” Research funded by the British government’sDepartment for International Development sought to assess how such “global per-spectives” are currently integrated into undergraduate learning and teaching acrossa variety of disciplines, departments, and institutions in the United Kingdom. Thefindings suggest that there are a wide variety of opportunities for students to developglobal perspectives, and there are some excellent examples of innovative approaches;however, the extent to which global perspectives are embedded in departmental andinstitutional practice largely depends on individual enthusiasm and discretion. Forglobal perspectives to become an integral part of higher education, there needs to bea coordinated strategy for developing activities that foster global perspectives andresources to implement the strategy, as well as ensuring that there is sufficient recog-nition and rewards for doing so.

Keywords: global perspectives; Department for International Development; under-graduate curricula

Are U.K. graduates globally aware? Do students engage with the most contempo-rary global issues? Does higher education teach a balanced view of the developingworld? These are some of the basic questions that the Global Perspectives in HigherEducation project sought to answer. Commissioned by the U.K. government’sDepartment for International Development (DFID), the project at the RoyalGeographical Society with the Institute of British Geographers was designed as ascoping study to assess the current status of “global perspectives” in U.K. higher



education and to make recommendations as to how DFID could be involved intaking this agenda forwards at a policy level.

Global perspectives ought to be an integral part of higher education, in learningand teaching, in research, and in the other activities of institutions. The current studyfocussed on developing global perspectives amongst the student body and equippingstudents with a set of knowledge, skills, and values for the future beyond university.With knowledge about the people, places, and cultures of the world and an under-standing of political, economic, social, and environmental processes and issues, theyare aware of the world around them and can interpret contemporary global issues athome (such as immigration) and abroad (such as natural disasters). With a range ofskills such as languages, they are trained to communicate effectively across languageand cultural divides and can compete in the international job market. With an aware-ness of diversity and a respect for difference, they hold the values, attitudes, andbehaviour that help them appreciate diversity and multiculturalism in the UnitedKingdom, and beyond, and can make a contribution as national, as well as global,citizens. All these qualities combine to create a graduates, whatever subject they mayhave studied, who can contribute to the nation’s economic, social, and political lifein an increasingly interdependent world.

The intention was for the research to focus on the global dimension in teaching atthe undergraduate level in a sample of 10 different subjects. It was soon recognised,however, that an investigation of the global dimension in the curriculum could notbe considered in isolation from other factors of an international and global naturewithin higher education. These included the recruitment of students from overseas;widening participation in the United Kingdom, particularly opening up higher edu-cation to minority ethnic groups; delivering programmes on campuses in othercountries; establishing international partnerships for research; increasing participa-tion of students in volunteering, particularly abroad; and exchanging staff and stu-dents between institutions in different countries.

With a wide range of activities that could be labelled as “international” or “global,”together with a diversity of groups of people and organisations involved, there is amultitude of terms in use, some uncertainty as to whether the different conceptscontradict, overlap, or complement each other, and a duplication of activities.

The first section explores the meaning and scope of global perspectives by lookingat factors such as terms in current use, stakeholders, and components. The secondpart evaluates why global perspectives in higher education are important and whythis agenda has come to prominence recently. The third section outlines some ofthe current policies, strategies, and initiatives related to global perspectives in highereducation. The fourth section gives an overview of the project’s findings regardingthe current status of global perspectives, particularly at undergraduate level. Thefinal part sets out some recommended actions and interventions at discipline,

232 Journal of Studies in International Education Fall 2008



department, and institution levels for taking forward the global perspectives agenda,and identifies some of the key actors.

MAPPING THE TERRITORY OFGLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

The purpose of embedding global perspectives in higher education is to enable studentsto develop knowledge about different places and cultures of the world; cross-cuttingglobal issues, problems, and events—past, present, and future; and an understanding ofthe relevance to their own lives. Such students will be made more aware of differentways of thinking about the world and contemporary issues and will cultivate values,attitudes, and skills that equip them to be informed and active citizens, voters, employ-ees, employers, and travelers in the world.

This was the working definition adopted for the purposes of the Global Perspectivesin Higher Education project. It will not resonate with everyone; however, thissection sets out to unpack some of the discussions about terminology, actors, stake-holders, components, and outcomes of global perspectives that surrounded thepreparation of such a definition.

TerminologyOver recent years, the higher education sector has been engaging with a number

of cross-cutting, interdisciplinary concepts such as globalisation, interdependence,sustainability, ethics, global governance, and corporate social responsibility. Theiractivities have been labelled in many different ways. A review of documentsrevealed education for sustainability or education for sustainable development as themost commonly used term, followed by internationalisation or internationalisationof the curriculum, global education, development education, and global or inter-national dimension. Other terms included intercultural competence, citizenshipeducation, development awareness, and global learning.

There are many different users of these terms, each with their own interpreta-tions, visions, agendas, and activities. The lack of clarity of terminology in the fieldof global education and interchangeable use of words has been described as “con-ceptual fuzziness” by Hicks (2003). He suggested that though there is a “family like-ness” in many of the terms used, they also all have their own distinct meanings. Afurther dimension to add to this complexity is that of translating concepts. With ref-erence to sustainability and sustainable development, Canning (2005) noted that, inaddition to the lack of consensus over the meaning of these terms in the UnitedKingdom, is the question of whether the concepts do—or do not—translate intoother languages and cultures.

Lunn / Global Perspectives in Higher Education 233



Thus agreeing a single definition or imposing a single all-embracing approachis neither desirable nor achievable given the diversity of actors; hence the termglobal perspectives was chosen for the project and is considered here as a “discur-sive coalition” (Hajer, 1995). Hajer (1995) described this term as “the ensemble ofa set of story lines, the actors that utter these story lines, and practices that conformto these story lines, all organised around a discourse” (p. 47). Here, the termdescribes a coalition of different actors focussed on a set of words (global perspec-tives); however, each actor is interpreting the term in his or her own professionaland cultural context, and not necessarily engaging with each other directly on“global perspectives.” They may be drawn from the staff of higher education insti-tutions, students, nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) with an internationalfocus, employees of international corporations, and so on. Approaching “globalperspectives” in this way avoids the imposition of a single correct or authoritativedefinition and acknowledges the diversity of usage and breadth of the differentgroups which use it.

StakeholdersThere are various key stakeholders interested in developing “global perspectives”

in higher education. The government wants the United Kingdom to be able tocompete and thrive in what is now a global marketplace for higher education pro-vision, and to produce graduates who can contribute to the economic, political,social, and cultural life of the nation. Employers require graduates who have theknowledge, skills, and capabilities to operate in international and multiculturalworkplaces. Academic departments seek to be at the cutting edge of research intoissues of global relevance. Teaching staff want to teach enthusiastic students whohave the ability to make a difference in the world. Institutions desire an internationalreputation that reflects on their research, and international ethos that affects theirrecruitment. Students want to use their experience in higher education as a spring-board for living, travelling, and working around the world.

LevelsThe current study focussed on global perspectives at three levels within higher

education. First is the discipline level where rigorous understanding on the majorchallenges facing the world are developed through research and teaching; where thecommunities of academics set the agenda for developing new knowledge on keyissues; and where learning and teaching are regulated and assessed. Second is thedepartment level where students engage in learning about their chosen disciplinethrough the taught curriculum as well as outside the classroom in the form of field-trips, research, and work placements, and where they develop subject-specific and




generic skills that can later be applied in the workplace. Third is the institution levelwhere formal structures such as strategy, policy, and partnerships with overseas insti-tutions reflect the international orientation of the institution, where people informallydevelop global perspectives through living and working in a multicultural commu-nity, and where students and staff can experience different places and culturesthrough language learning, exchange programmes, and other opportunities.

ComponentsA variety of components contribute to developing global perspectives within higher

education institutions. These can be divided into three categories: (a) the activitiesthat incorporate a global dimension, such as learning about global processes andissues, researching places or topics overseas, teaching as part of interdisciplinaryinitiatives, and providing educational programmes on overseas campuses; (b) the oppor-tunities for experiencing global perspectives through exposure to other people andcultures, for example, through international conferences, overseas work placements, orvolunteering; and (c) engaging with global perspectives by interacting with those otherpeople and cultures. All these components are interrelated and complementary.

OutcomesFor the purposes of the project, which focussed on embedding global perspectives

amongst students, three key outcomes were identified: knowledge and understandingof global processes, major global issues facing humankind, different places and culturesof the world, international events (past, present, and future)—gained through teaching,learning, and research; skills that equip people to communicate and work effectivelyacross language and cultural divides—gained through training; and values, attitudesand behaviour of a global citizen such as the awareness of diversity in the world,recognition of interconnectedness, and a respect for differences—gained throughpersonal development.

CONTEMPORARY IMPORTANCE OFGLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

Having mapped some of the parameters of “global perspectives” as they relate tohigher education, it is necessary to consider why it is so important to equip studentswith such knowledge, skills, and values for their future beyond the university. Thissection considers four key reasons that are driving global perspectives to increasingprominence: the internationalisation of the higher education sector; media coverageof global issues; poor student knowledge and experience of other places and cultures;and the national political, economic, and social interest.




Changes in the Higher Education SectorA recent survey by The Economist (“Special Report,” 2005) identified four reasons

why higher education is facing some fundamental changes: the democratisation or“massification” of higher education means that ever-increasing numbers of peoplein “developed” and “developing” countries are gaining higher education qualifications;the rise of the knowledge economy1 for which universities are a vital driver; theglobalisation of higher education turning the sector into an import-export industry;and the competition higher education institutions face for students and funding. Thesechanges mean that higher education funding, recruitment, research, collaboration, andteaching must take place in an outward-looking, international setting. The GlobalPerspectives in Higher Education study sought to explore how this increasing interna-tionalisation of the higher education sector affects the global dimension in learningand teaching.2

Issues in the Media and Public SpotlightThrough fast-changing technologies, the media have brought international

events and global issues increasingly into the public spotlight. Over the past 20years, they have, for example, been responsible for bringing poverty, famines,wars, natural disasters, world trade, and climate change into immediate focus. Thecoverage has been particularly noticeable since the incidents of September 11,2001. Indeed, during the course of the project (2004 and 2005), the media coveredthe Asian tsunami, hurricanes in the United States, and the Pakistani earthquake;the London bombings and continued unrest in Iraq; European Referenda; theAfrica Commission, the G8 meeting in Scotland, and Live8 concerts. Through thismedia reporting, the general public are faced and challenged with a range of criti-cal issues. Academics and academic bodies seem to keep pace and engage withmost contemporary issues, as can be seen in the themes covered by journal arti-cles, publications, and conferences across different disciplines. The GlobalPerspectives in Higher Education study sought to establish whether the curriculataught in higher education institutions are equally quick to react to existing issuesof global importance, to shape future foci of media attention, and whether studentsin the lecture theatre engage with current affairs and understand the contributiontheir discipline can make to addressing contemporary global issues.

Student Knowledge and ExperienceA recent lament in the United Kingdom has been the poor general knowledge of

graduates. A number of surveys have looked particularly at student awareness ofglobal issues, with some worrying results. Chapman (2005) tested second-yeargeography students at Lancaster University prior to taking a module on geopolitics;he found widespread ignorance of world affairs and poor general knowledge about




politics, economics, geography, and history. Indeed, there were very few questionsin which more than one half the participants got the right answer. The quiz was alsocompleted by Danish students with similarly low results. Ottewill, Chandler, Long,and Wall (2005) were concerned about the low levels of political literacy amongststudents at the University of Southampton and Sheffield Hallam University. Theyused a questionnaire for students embarking on courses in business, management,and politics to assess how much they knew about current affairs. The survey includedfactual knowledge-based questions on the political, economic, financial, and sociode-mographic environments, opinion-based questions on sociopolitical issues, and ques-tions about the respondents’ lifestyles. Although 76% of Southampton studentsscored 60% or more, only 0.5% of Sheffield Hallam students did so. A survey ofpostgraduate teacher-training students undertaken as part of the Education forSustainable Development and Global Citizenship project at the Bangor University inWales (Bennell, 2005) aimed to assess how much understanding they had of globalissues and sustainable development as a result of their undergraduate degreeprogrammes. Only around one fourth felt that their degree had helped them to under-stand a range of such issues.

Similar studies have taken place in other countries; for example, Clarke (2004)surveyed more than 700 college students in America to ascertain their global aware-ness and attitudes to internationalism. The findings suggested that students had aver-age levels of global awareness and mixed beliefs about the United States’involvement with other countries. Meanwhile, the Roper survey (RoperASW, 2002),commissioned by the National Geographic, provides an international comparison. Ittested the geographic knowledge of 18- to 24-year-olds in Canada, France, Germany,Italy, Japan, Mexico, Sweden, Great Britain, and the United States. It is most worri-some to note that results for American young people included the fact that 83% ofrespondents could not find Afghanistan on a map, more than 75% could not locateIsrael, 29% did not know where the Pacific Ocean was, and 11 could not even locatethe United States. There was a correlation between the highest scores in the test(Sweden, Germany, and Italy) and the international experiences of the young people(at least 70% of these young adults had travelled internationally in the past 3 years,and the majority spoke more than one language). Conversely, of the young people inthe lowest scoring countries (United States and Mexico), only about 20% had trav-elled abroad during the same period, and the majority spoke only one language.

Not only do many British students have poor knowledge of contemporary globalissues and current affairs, but they also lack the interest to experience other places. Thisis illustrated by a study on international student mobility (Sussex Centre for MigrationResearch and Centre for Applied Population Research, 2004), which was undertakenout of concerns about the low levels of outward mobility by U.K. students comparedwith students from other European countries. Statistics show that there has been adecline in the numbers of U.K. students participating in the European Commission’s




Socrates and Erasmus exchange programmes—from 11,988 students in 1994 to 1995to 7,956 in 2002 to 2003—and should trends continue, the figure could be as low as6,500 by 2006. The report suggested what the results of this trend might be:

Low student mobility links to wider concerns about the lack of a cosmopolitan andmultilingual perspective among U.K. graduates in an increasingly globalised labor market.It might put the UK economy at a competitive disadvantage, especially in fields such asbusiness, research and international organisations. There is an argument that Englishhas become the “global language” and that UK students should not feel the need to learnanother language, but this ignores the important intercultural learning experience that aspell abroad can bring. (Sussex Centre for Migration Research, 2004, p. 9)

The ability of British students to experience the “global community” within their ownuniversities is further hampered by the factors which preclude some internationalstudents from attending UK institutions, namely high fees and visa requirements(Katulushi, 2005).

The Global Perspectives in Higher Education study sought to explore whetherthe taught content of undergraduate programmes in different disciplines equipsstudents with sound general knowledge about politics, economics, geography, andhistory and assesses the opportunities available for students to study overseas.

National InterestKnowledge about other people, places, and cultures is important not only for

educational purposes per se but also in the national interest, in terms of politics, theeconomy, and society.

First, the global dimension in education is essential for national political interests.For example, the British Army was exposed during the recent involvement in Afghanistanand Iraq for having a shortage of people who understood the culture and languagesof these countries and having recruit translators and interpreters from amongstuniversity undergraduates (Walker, 2004). In the United States, following the Ropersurvey (RoperASW, 2002) and the worryingly low results of American young people,Carr (2006) outlined the effects of such geographical illiteracy. Without geographybeing compulsory at any level within the education system in the United States (theonly developed nation for which this is the case), the general public’s understandingof global issues is poor. In turn, the public do not demand that global concerns becomea political and policy priority, and this is eventually manifest in the United States’ lackof commitment to global accords such as World Trade Organization (WTO), Kyoto,and Johannesburg agreements.

Second, it is in the national economic interest for the higher education sector toproduce graduates equipped with the knowledge and skills prepared for employmentand able to compete in an increasingly internationalised job market. IsabellaMoore, the Director of CILT, the National Centre for Languages, described how




many companies recruit globally nowadays and expect candidates to have anotherlanguage as standard. Without the international credibility of another language ontheir CV, our young people will be seriously disadvantaged if they want to competeon an international stage. (CILT, 2005, p. 4)

Third, as well as their potential contribution to national economic life, it is impor-tant to nurture graduates with global perspectives who will be responsible and activecitizens as well as potential future leaders. One of four recommendations about theaim and purpose of universities as set out in the Dearing report (National Committeeof Inquiry into Higher Education, 1997) was that universities should “play a majorrole in shaping a democratic, civilised, inclusive society” (Main Report para. 5.11).Fryer (2005) suggested that this aspect has been given least attention in policy debateand practical attention; however, it could actually be seen as universities’ “mostnoble, challenging, fundamental and even transcendental activity.” He went on toelaborate that this means “universities play a pivotal role in the education and devel-opment of citizens and enlarging social inclusions, especially in the lives of thosewho might be expected to provide leadership in all kinds of civil society” (p. 76),and that, as such, this includes the implications of globalisation and challenges ofsustainable development. Thus, he believed, that citizenship should be incorporatedinto teaching, learning, research, community engagement, and other activities ofhigher education institutions.

The Global Perspectives in Higher Education study sought to explore whetherundergraduate programmes of study are preparing students with the knowledge, skills,and values for their future beyond the university in the workplace and in society.

CURRENT ACTIVITIES RELATING TO GLOBALPERSPECTIVES IN HIGHER EDUCATION

This section outlines some of the recent and current policies, strategies, andinitiatives related to global education that provide the backdrop for the GlobalPerspectives in Higher Education project. There is also a more detailed considerationof how the current study fits into the evolving policies and initiatives of the project’scommissioning body, the Department for International Development.

Policies, Strategies, Projects, and EventsSome of the topics that make up global perspectives such as internationalisation,

citizenship, sustainability, and others suggested above have begun to emerge inpolicies, strategies, and initiatives at different levels. The following paragraphs out-line some key examples.

On a world scale, the United Nations launched the Decade of Education forSustainable Development in 2005 while U.N. Educational, Scientific, and Cultural




Organization (UNESCO) has been active in promoting Education for Peace,Human Rights and Democracy. At a regional scale, the Council of Europe has beenrunning an Education for Democratic Citizenship project and in 2005 held theEuropean Year of Citizenship through Education. Meanwhile, the higher educationsector is affected by policies and programmes as part of the Bologna Process cre-ating the European Higher Education Area and the Lisbon Strategy seeking tomake the European Union the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-basedeconomy in the world. At a national scale, the Department for Education and Skillsproduced Putting the World into World-Class Education: An International Strategyfor Education, Skills and Children’s Services in 2004 and a revised version ofDeveloping a Global Dimension in the School Curriculum in 2005. Also in 2005,the Higher Education Funding Council for England produced the strategic state-ment and action plan Sustainable Development in Higher Education and a reporton Strategically Important and Vulnerable Subjects.

A number of other organisations have also been undertaking research, preparingstrategies, and conducting projects. The Global Perspectives in Higher Educationproject of the Development Education Association (DEA) supported the trial ofmodules at four universities that sought to introduce global perspectives to studentsin innovative ways (McKenzie et al., 2003). Forum for the Future (FFF) have beenpromoting the concept of sustainability literacy, which refers to people having suffi-cient knowledge and skills to be able to contribute towards sustainable developmentwhatever their role in society, and working to integrate it into higher educationcurricula (FFF, 2004). In 2005, the Higher Education Academy (HEA) commissionedan investigation into how sustainability is being incorporated into curricula acrossdifferent disciplines that identified good practice, the potential barriers to embeddingsustainable development into institutional learning and teaching strategies, and thepossible solutions (HEA, 2006).

There have also been events including Graduates as Global Citizens: QualityEducation for Life in the 21st Century (DEA, London, April 2005); Education forSustainable Development: Graduates as Global Citizens (DEA, Bournemouth,September 2005); The Internationalisation Agenda for UK Higher Education (HEA,London, December 2005); and Working Knowledge: Developing Sustainability Skillsin Higher Education (HEA & FFF, Edinburgh, January 2006).

Other groups, alliances, and networks of parties interested in global perspectiveshave been developing and growing. For example, The Sustainability IntegrationGroup (SIGnet) is a pioneering network of the bodies that fund, plan, and regulatethe postschool sector aiming to work together to integrate sustainability literacy intothe curricula (Parkin, 2006); the Global Perspectives in Higher Education Networklaunched in 2001 at the British University Chaplains’ conference has expanded sig-nificantly so that the majority of members are now academics working in the highereducation sector. Discipline-based groups also exist, such as the Best PracticeNetwork on Global Health Education and Engineers Against Poverty (Neal, 2005).




Through commissioning the Global Perspectives in Higher Education study, theDepartment for International Development was engaging with this recent growth ininterest in global perspectives. DFID endorses many of the objectives of these initia-tives but was particularly interested to establish whether these and other initiativeshave, and could, promote the global dimension in undergraduate curricula.

Department for International DevelopmentFor several decades, development education was given little importance by the

U.K. government. The Department for International Development’s White Paperon International Development (1997) finally addressed this by highlighting twoparticular areas: the need for increased public understanding of global mutualdependence and the need for international development; and the desirability forevery child to be educated about development issues.

The strategy paper Building Support for Development (Department for InternationalDevelopment, 1999) set out four priority areas for development education: formaleducation (particularly at school-level and teacher training); the media, business,and trade unions; and churches and faith groups. The government has demonstratedits commitment to development education by significantly increasing the budgetfor education and awareness-raising activities from £0.75 million in 1997 to £8million in 2004 and 2005 (DEA, 2004).

Within this programme there have been a number of significant actions. For exam-ple in formal education, Enabling Effective Support: Responding to the Challengesof the Global Society: A strategy of Support for the Global Dimension in Education(Department for International Development, 2003) was produced to provide teacherswith more effective support for embedding the global dimension. This includedsupport for curriculum development and school-based projects; improved access toresources, support, and training; dissemination of a range of best practice models;pilot projects exploring new ways in which schools can work with other schoolsand organisations; and improved networking and the development of links withother local and regional networks.

Opportunities for the global dimension in the higher education sector, along withyouth work and adult education, were not precluded in the Building Support forDevelopment strategy paper; however, they were not seen as a priority at that time.The Global Perspectives in Higher Education project was commissioned in 2004 asa scoping study to assess the current status of the global dimension in U.K. highereducation and identify how DFID could contribute to the strengthening globalperspectives in this sector. The reality is that the higher education sector has a directimpact on DFID’s four target groups for “development awareness”: It is the gradu-ates from higher education who disproportionately go on to work in the education,media, business, and NGO sectors, and are future leaders in their workplaces and




communities. Therefore, strengthening the global dimension in higher education isvital for achieving DFID’s other strategic development awareness goals.

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES IN PRACTICEThis section gives a summary of findings of the Global Perspectives in Higher

Education project. The aim of the study was to identify the current status of globalperspectives in undergraduate learning and teaching in the United Kingdom bytaking a snapshot of the situation in 2005, and to make recommendations as to howto strengthen global perspectives.

A sample of 10 predominantly social science disciplines that have clear connec-tions to the global dimension were chosen: anthropology, area studies, business,development studies, earth and environmental sciences, economics, environmentalstudies and environmental management, geography, politics and international rela-tions, tourism, and hospitality.

Information was gathered in six main data collection stages as follows:

1. The eight relevant Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) subjectbenchmark statements were examined for references to global perspectives.3 Thisincluded the way in which the discipline recognises the importance of the globaldimension and its contribution, as well as the recommendations for a global dimensionto be incorporated into subject knowledge and understanding, subject-specific andgeneric skills, and values/qualities of mind. The chair of each benchmarking group wasasked for comments on the analysis.

2. An inventory of all undergraduate programmes at U.K. institutions relating to the 10subject areas was compiled from Universities and Colleges Admissions Service(UCAS) and Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) data, as well as informationfrom subject associations and individual institution Web sites. The purpose was togive a snapshot of the current situation in 2005 and to estimate the potential numberof students who may be exposed to global perspectives.

3. For each subject area, a small sample of 10 programmes was chosen for course contentanalysis with the aim of assessing how global perspectives tend to be incorporated intotaught programmes. Data were collected from institution Web sites and programme doc-umentation (course manuals and module descriptors), and the analysis was based onprogramme aims and structure, module titles, and content.

4. An online survey was sent to heads of departments across the 10 subject areas, seekingtheir views on the levels of internationalisation in departments, the global content ofprogrammes, and the changes over recent years. Sixty-nine responses were receivedfrom across nine of the subject areas.

5. Teaching staff from academic departments across the United Kingdom were invited tosubmit examples from their own teaching to illustrate different ways in which globalperspectives can be integrated into learning and teaching across different disciplines.More than 50 case studies were received and were compiled into an online resource.4




6. Representatives at three different levels—institution, discipline, and department—were consulted about their opinions on the current status of global perspectives inhigher education and how to take forward the global perspectives agenda. Therewere 13 face-to-face interviews with representatives at institution level (includingfour vice and three pro-vice chancellors), seven face-to-face interviews with teach-ing staff across six different disciplines, a combination of interviews with and e-mailresponses from five discipline representatives, and interviews with two representa-tives at sector level (QAA and HEA). The responses were compiled in a strengths,weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis.

Research FindingsThe data collected revealed that the global dimension is present and growing, at

department, discipline, and institution levels, but also that there are some weaknessesand threats to the development of global perspectives. These are highlighted below.

Through QAA subject benchmark statements, guidelines for incorporating theglobal dimension into learning and teaching are in place. In particular, all disciplinesdescribe the place of the global dimension within subject knowledge and understand-ing. However, most subject benchmark statements do not make explicit how theglobal dimension in a student’s subject knowledge would be transferable to develop-ing the skills for work in an international context and the values of a global citizen.

A significant number of undergraduate programmes are specifically internationalor global in orientation. For example, the words international or global or reference toa particular country/region appear in the title of around one tenth of all programmesrelating to business, one fifth of programmes in tourism and hospitality, and onethird of programmes in politics and international relations. This could be seen as anencouraging trend or else as a marketing ploy to attract students. However, expand-ing student choice could be crowding out the global dimension. For example, whenan institution offers two parallel programmes, such as “Business Studies” and“International Business Studies,” it is unclear whether there would be any globaldimension to the “Business Studies” programme. Thus the global dimension risksbecome an option, rather than something embedded into learning for every student.Unfortunately some disciplines, such as computer science, engineering, and psy-chology do not appear to perceive that their subject matter has much of a globaldimension or that their students need to engage with global perspectives.

In some cases, the components of joint and combined degree programmesstrongly complement each other, for example, Area Studies and Modern Languages,or Economics and Politics. However, the provision of modules in each subject is usu-ally completely separate, and no attempt is made to make connections between thesubject knowledge gained in different disciplines. One assumes it is left to the studentto recognise and interpret the links. On the other hand, students with a knowledge andskills base that is multidisciplinary are attractive in the employment market.




The research findings show that a wide range of compulsory and optional taughtmodules are available that have a distinct global, international, or non-U.K. focus,and that there has been growth over recent years in the supply by departments anddemand from students for undergraduate programmes and modules with global con-tent. For example, of the 23 heads of departments from geography who responded tothe survey, two thirds felt that the global content of degree programmes has increasedover the past 5 years. The same number reported that the departmental provision ofoptional modules covering global issues had increased, as had the student enrolmenton optional modules covering global issues. About one half of respondents said thatthe number of optional modules focussing on non-European Union (EU)countries/regions had increased, as had the provision of optional non-EU fieldtrips.However, if internationally oriented modules are available as options, there needs tobe thematic progression between years or enticing “packaging” to encourage stu-dents to make this choice. Many students prefer to select modules on familiar sub-jects that are seen as “safe” or easy options and may also be more familiar toprospective employers.

Many disciplines seem to keep undergraduate teaching up-to-date with contempo-rary issues. For example, in a sample of 10 Tourism Management programmes therewere two modules on Ecotourism and a further seven including the word sustainableor sustainability in the title, whereas in a sample of 10 International Relations pro-grammes there were five modules specifically relating to terrorism and securityissues in the light of September 11, 2001. Once again, this begs the question ofmotivation: ensuring curricula are contemporary or clever marketing to entice morestudents to choose such modules. One disappointing finding was that across all sub-jects, the number of taught modules relating to specific global regions is heavilyweighted towards Europe, with particularly poor coverage of the Middle East,Africa, and Latin America. The picture is similar for the destinations of fieldtripsand exchanges.

The study uncovered numerous examples of global perspectives being inte-grated into learning and teaching in new, innovative, and unusual ways. For example:the Reading History module at Newcastle University gives history students theopportunity to engage with texts that present historical periods, issues, and eventsfrom non-European perspectives; master’s students at Royal Holloway studyingsustainability and management have Mock Climate Change Negotiations, an active-learning exercise that allows them to experience the challenges of achieving multi-national agreements; and The Business of Restaurants module at London MetropolitanUniversity for international hospitality management students takes London as a“live” case study for examining how globalisation causes continuous changeand innovation in food culture and restaurant design. Individual academic staffcommitted to global perspectives and developing new curricula can often feel likelone voices in their departments. The lack of “critical mass” of enthusiastic staff atthe department and institution level hinders the promotion of the global perspectives




agenda to the fore. Also, the persistence of rigid disciplinary structures hindersinter/multi/cross-disciplinary initiatives in research and teaching. Because almost allglobal issues cut across disciplinary boundaries, the disciplinary approach is notalways appropriate; however, individuals and departments find collaboration difficult,practically and academically.

At the heart of the study was an examination of the current status of the globaldimension in 10 disciplines, the key parameters being knowledge, skills, and values.Figure 1 gives an overall assessment of the evidence for the global dimension ineach discipline based on the data collected. This is a generalisation; there areexceptions in every category. If the global dimension is to be embedded into everydiscipline, it would need to be integrated into all elements of learning and teaching.Hence, this representation helps to identify the weak points and possible areas forintervention.

There are a number of factors beyond the discipline-based taught curricula thatcontribute to students’ global perspectives. According to the research, students havea variety of opportunities to travell, study, and work overseas as part of theirprogrammes of study. In some cases, this is a prescribed element of a programme,such as in-country language learning or a fieldtrip; in other cases, students can elect totake part in an international exchange programme, to do a work placement overseas,or undertake dissertation research in another country. At Northumbria University,there is a centrally coordinated institution-wide programme developing overseasplacements for students, whether they wish to go overseas for volunteering duringtheir holidays, for an industrial placement, for language learning, or independentresearch. This scheme aims to provide some regulation and quality control of inter-national opportunities. A range of language-learning opportunities are available forstudents at all institutions. In addition, some universities, such as Bournemouth andPlymouth, accommodate those who find language learning difficult by providingparallel alternative modules in International Awareness through which students canalso develop skills for cross-cultural communication.


Figure 1. Evidence of the global dimension in undergraduate programmes by discipline.

Knowledge Skills ValuesAnthropologyArea Studies BusinessDevelopment Studies Earth & Environment EconomicsGeographyPolitics and International Relations Tourism & Hospitality

Significant evidence Moderate evidence Poor evidence



The presence of international students on campus helps to create multiculturaluniversity communities. One lecturer said that “the international mix of students inthe classroom is the single most important thing in trying to teach global perspec-tives.” However, the cohort of international students by no means represents theworld. In particular, high fees and visa issues have hindered the recruitment, reten-tion, and support of some overseas students, particularly from Africa. Many institu-tions also face widespread problems concerning the lack of mixing between homeand international students in departmental, social, and residential settings.

Overall, institutions are becoming increasingly internationalised, through recruitingstudents from overseas, providing degree programmes on overseas campuses or throughdistance learning, and working in partnership with overseas institutions. In a fewcases, global perspectives are being holistically integrated into institutions through acombination of support from above by senior management and action from below byan enthusiastic group of “champions.” For example, a network of interested staff atBournemouth University developed a vision for global perspectives throughout theuniversity that is now being implemented in an institution-wide strategy: A GlobalPerspective at Bournemouth University: Education for Global Citizens and SustainableDevelopment. Meanwhile, as part of Leeds Metropolitan University’s institution-widestrategic approach to internationalisation, Cross-Cultural Capability has been intro-duced across curricula in all disciplines to enable students to develop international,intercultural, and global perspectives.

The positive examples, however, are in the minority. The global perspectivesagenda faces competition from other issues and initiatives that are fighting for theattention of vice chancellors, such as Widening Participation and Education forSustainable Development. All these agendas are important; they have the potentialto be highly complimentary but at present tend to be perceived as separate. Hencein institutions where senior managers, and in particular vice chancellors, do nothave a strategic vision for global perspectives, there is little resulting action.

At the department level, pressures of time and funding often mean a gapbetween the perceived importance of global perspectives activities and the actualactivities carried out. For example, several respondents to the survey suggested thathosting visiting lecturers from overseas would be a valuable mechanism for devel-oping global perspectives in the department; however, in reality relatively little ofthis activity is undertaken. The Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) in particulartakes precedence in most departments and could be seen as a competing priorityfor global perspectives in that it does not reward activities that could contribute toglobal perspectives. If there are opportunity costs to undertaking research withglobal perspectives, researchers will tend to focus on formats and subject matterthat they can quickly turn into publications for the RAE and that are based on anexisting knowledge base. It also encourages introspective forms of the production




of knowledge through academics working with each other and does not recognisethe work of academics in communicating externally with the media, corporations, andgovernment departments to making their discipline’s contribution to contemporaryissues. The RAE is just one example of the present lack of “rewards” for promotingglobal perspectives, which could be achieved through extra resources or researchand teaching recognition.

Many of these findings, the positive and negative, echo results of other studiesand discussions in the academic literature including: Eber (2003) on sustainabilityinto the leisure and tourism curriculum at undergraduate level; Khan (2003) on“greening” curricula in further education; Knight (2003) on the internationalisation ofhigher education worldwide; FFF (2004) on developing skills for a sustainabilityliterate society; Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability (2004) on sustain-ability initiatives in higher education; Martin and Jucker (2004) on EducatingEarth-Literate Leaders; Haigh (2005) on “greening” the university curriculum; HEFCE(2005a) on strategically important and vulnerable subjects and (HEFCE, 2005b) onsustainable development in higher education; Lewis (2005) on “integrated interna-tionalism” in U.K. higher education; Stirling (2005) on integrating education for sus-tainable development systematically into higher education; Solem and Ray (2005) oninternationalisation activities of geography faculty in America; Witham (2005) on sus-tainable development in the economics curriculum; and Dawe (2006) on sustainabil-ity across a range of disciplines in the United Kingdom.

RECOMMENDATIONSThe research suggests that the current status of global perspectives in U.K. higher

education is mixed. There are many existing strengths, and with the agenda gather-ing pace, there are opportunities for embedding the global dimension further. At thesame time, a number of weaknesses and threats persist. These findings, together withdiscussions earlier in the article about the meaning and scope of global perspectivesand its contemporary relevance, point to three necessary requirements for globalperspectives to become a real and integral part of Higher Education. First, a clarificationof terminology, which requires recognition amongst actors and stakeholders of thediversity of terms in use and, despite divided priorities, the possibility of being partof a discursive coalition that brings together different actors to share a coordinatedstrategy. Second, a consensus of opinion with agreement amongst an explicit coalitionfor the promotion of global perspectives in higher education and the ways in whichit can be delivered. Third, the coordination of support because given the multipleobjectives and competing agendas, a clear lead for embedding global perspectives atdiscipline, department, and institution levels is required from the government.Specific recommendations as to how to strengthen the global dimension at discipline,department, and institution levels are made below.




Discipline LevelThe current status of global perspectives in U.K. higher education at discipline

level is encouraging because many of the subject bodies seem to recognise theimportance of the global dimension to their discipline, as well as their discipline’scontribution to the global dimension. This is seen in increasing numbers of researchprojects, articles, workshops, and conferences on topics relating to global perspec-tives. In addition, academics wishing to take forward the global perspectives agendain their discipline are joining networks and organisations, such as the Best PracticeNetwork for Global Health Education and Engineers Against Poverty.

If the profile of global perspectives is to continue to rise and result in wideninginterest and activities at discipline level, the following actions are advised:

• Use the subject associations (learned societies, professional bodies, and HEA SubjectCentres) as fora for exploring the global dimension of the discipline, sharing ideas andgood practice of how to incorporate global perspectives into learning and teaching, andsupporting new initiatives in this field.

• Take the opportunity of the current revision of QAA benchmark statements to recon-sider what constitutes the global dimension within each discipline and the extent towhich students should develop global perspectives through the course of study.

• Challenge those who maintain narrow disciplinary boundaries by seeking opportunitiesfor interdisciplinary approaches to addressing cross-cutting global issues. Practical col-laboration across subject boundaries is possible in a variety of ways; at undergraduatelevel, it could include ensuring that the subject matter in joint/combined degree coursesis better integrated.

Department LevelThe current status of global perspectives in U.K. higher education at the depart-

ment level seems fairly encouraging because the global dimension is present inmany programmes and modules across a variety of social science subjects. Althoughstudents seem to have opportunities for gaining knowledge and understanding of theglobal dimension to their discipline, there is less evidence of curricula incorporat-ing the development of skills and values that explicitly relate to living and workingin the global world, such as a respect for different opinions, the ability to communi-cate across language barriers, and sensitivity to cultural differences.

If the global dimension in learning and teaching is to be broadened and deep-ened, it is advised that subject associations (learned societies, professional bodies,and HEA Subject Centres)

• Seek ways to refresh and revitalise the global dimension in subjects where it is natu-rally present, such as geography, development studies and anthropology, for example,




through encouraging attractive new elements in the curriculum and innovative teach-ing methods.

• Support and promote those subjects with a strong global dimension that are underthreat from government cutbacks and university closures, such as modern languagesand area studies.

• Help and encourage subjects that do not recognise how the global dimensiondirectly applies to them to understand its relevance, such as the hard sciences andvisual arts, for example, through sharing examples of practice that can be appliedacross disciplines.

Institution LevelThe current status of global perspectives in U.K. higher education at the institu-

tion level is mixed across the country. Institutions tend to fit one of three categories:(a) the minority of institutions have embedded global perspectives thoroughly intotheir ethos, strategy, activities, and provision; (b) some institutions are becomingmore aware of the importance and relevance of global perspectives to higher educa-tion and are beginning to take action; (c) the majority of institutions are hindered bycompeting priorities and tend to associate global perspectives almost exclusivelywith the recruitment of international students.

If the global dimension is to be embedded formally into the policies and struc-tures and informally into the ethos and daily life of institutions, the followingactions are advised:

• Showcase those institutions that are actively promoting and embedding global per-spectives, for example, through sharing good practice on a Web site.

• Support those institutions that are aware of the importance of global perspectives andwho wish to develop and implement initiatives, for example, by supporting them inwriting internationalisation strategies and action plans.

• Ensure that those institutions that have so far taken very little action understand therelevance and imperative of global perspectives in higher education, for example, bya road show in which institutions who are strongly engaged with global perspectivesexplain the impact of global perspectives in the short and long term.

These recommendations cannot be realized without resources. Activities such asgrants for teaching development, Web sites to share good practice, scholarships forexchanges, funding for fieldwork overseas, and partnering/twinning schemesbetween institutions require financial and managerial inputs. Furthermore, thereneeds to be the incentive of clear rewards for engaging in activities related to globalperspectives.




Key ActorsThe variety of recommendations made for interventions at different levels to

strengthen and embed global perspectives in higher education will involve a numberof stakeholders. As part of the interviews undertaken as part of the project, respon-dents were asked which individuals, groups, and organisations were best placed toinfluence the agenda, those within higher education institutions as well as externally.They were not prompted with a list but left free to comment positively or negativelyabout any actors. The responses included comments on the current involvement ofdifferent actors as well as their potential future influence. Figure 2 shows the distri-bution of the opinions of respondents, with the current level of involvement plottedon the Y axis and the potential level of influence in the X axis.

The graph reveals distinct patterns in the way that different stakeholders are per-ceived. It is interesting to note that central government’s influence is seen as currentlyand potentially low suggesting that people are sceptical of the ability of any govern-ment initiative to be genuine and have real lasting impact. Neither employers noremployer organisations are perceived as being highly involved at present but wereidentified as having significant potential. Teaching staff, who have daily interactionswith students, are perceived as having high current and potential involvement sug-gesting that the support of such people via HEA Subject Centres, learned societies,


Figure 2. Key actors for embedding global perspectives in higher education.

HighLow

Low

High

Current involvem

ent in global perspectives

Potential influence onglobal perspectives

ViceChancellors

LearnedSocieties / Professionalbodies

ResearchCouncils

Students

Employers

Centralgovernment

HigherEducationAcademy

Teaching staff

InternationalOffices

StudentUnions

Employers’organisations

Benchmarkstatements

HEASubjectCentres

Schoolcurriculum

FundingCouncils



and other groups may be the most effective way to develop the global perspectivesagenda.

CONCLUSIONIt is clear that higher education has a crucial role in developing and communicat-

ing discipline-based knowledge about global issues through research and teachingand also holds the responsibility of producing graduates who are trained for employ-ment in international and multicultural workplaces, who can excel in a competitiveinternational job market, and who are ready for their roles and responsibilities ascitizens of a global world.

The research has found that the global dimension in U.K. higher education iscurrently growing but still rather ambiguous. On one hand, there is a wide range ofinitiatives and activities relating to global perspectives, such as enthusiastic staffusing innovative approaches to incorporating a global dimension into learning andteaching, and committed vice chancellors building the global dimension into thestrategies and policies of their institutions. On the other hand, the presence ofglobal perspectives in different disciplines, departments, and institutions is uneven,and there are also a number of threats to strengthening global perspectives, such asdisciplinary structures that restrict new approaches to cross-cutting issues, compe-tition with other academic priorities, and the preoccupation with international stu-dent recruitment for financial reasons.

To move forward from the piecemeal activity, there needs to be some kind ofcoordination and a strategy for increasing the rewards to promoting globalperspectives. The multitude of actors and stakeholders mean that there can be nouniform solutions or quick fixes for embedding global perspectives. Although thedifferent actors do need to recognise some shared agendas, they also should be freeto interpret global perspectives in a way that is meaningful and engages in a waythat is appropriate for them.

The Global Perspectives in Higher Education project has identified that globalperspectives are important and relevant, but that embedding them in higher educa-tion is also a huge challenge. There has been much progress, much of it rhetoricalat this stage; however, actual practice is slower to change, such as recognition inteaching and learning strategies of institutions and the provision of supportingresources. The project has taken a step in the direction of breaching this gap by iden-tifying what interventions are needed at discipline, department, and institution levels.What is needed now is further coordination leading to an explicit and well-publicisedstrategy, which is then linked to the mobilisation of resources to pursue the strategy,supported by a more visible reward structure in higher education as a whole.




NOTES

1. Knowledge economy refers to the use of knowledge in terms of science, research, technology, andinnovation to contribute to a country’s economy.

2. The subjects of funding for higher education and the internationalisation of research are enormoustopics in their own right; and as they are much-debated and discussed elsewhere, they have remained onthe fringes of this study.

3. Though there were 10 participants in the sample, only eight benchmark statements were analysed.The project’s categories earth and environmental sciences and environmental studies and managementare represented in one benchmark statement earth sciences, environmental sciences and environmentalstudies. There is currently no statement for development studies.

4. See www.rgs.org/globalperspectives.

REFERENCES

Bennell, S. (2005). Education for sustainable development and global citizenship:Towards an integrated approach in North Wales—Final project report. Availablefrom http://www.bangor.ac.uk/addysgbyd/WAGDAFWEC%20Finalreport.pdf

Canning, J. (2005). Global issues, local responses: Engaging with environmentalissues through Languages and Area Studies curricula. Available from http://www.lang.ltsn.ac.uk/resources/paper.aspx?resourceid=2433

Carr, D. L. (2006). US foreign policy and a geographically challenged US citizenry.AAG Newsletter, 41(2), 16-17.

Chapman, G. P. (2005, June). -Graphy: The remains of a British discipline. Presentationat GEES Subject Centre Annual Conference, Belfast, Northern Ireland. Availablefrom http://www.gees.ac.uk/events/2005/ac05/1

CILT. (2005). Languages Work–global. Higher (the bulletin of CILT, the NationalCentre for Languages), 12, (Autumn 2005), p. 4. Available from http://www.cilt.org.uk/pdf/pubs/bulletins/higher_12.pdf

Clarke, V. (2004). Students’ global awareness and attitudes to internationalism in a worldof cultural convergence. Journal of Research in International Education, 3(1), 51-70.

Dawe, G. (2006, January 24). Teaching and learning for sustainability. Presentation atWorking Knowledge: Developing Sustainability Skills in Higher Education confer-ence, Edinburgh, Scotland. Available from http://www.psychology.heacademy.ac.uk/docs/ppt/p20060130_GeraldDawe.ppt

Department for International Development. (1997). White paper on internationaldevelopment—Eliminating world poverty: A challenge for the 21st century.Available from http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/whitepaper1997.pdf

Department for International Development. (1999). Building support for development.Available from http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/buildingsupportdevelopment.pdf

Department for International Development. (2003). Enabling effective support:Responding to the challenges of the global society: A strategy of support for theglobal dimension in education. Available from http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/Enabling-effective-support.pdf

Development Education Association. (2004). Funding for development awareness.Development Education News, 13, 1.




Eber, S. (2003). Integrating sustainability into the undergraduate curriculum:Leisure and tourism (ATHE Guidelines No 10). Available from http://www.athe.org.uk/Guidelinesnumber10.pdf

Forum for the Future. (2004). Learning and skills for sustainable development:Developing a sustainability literate society—Guidance for higher educationinstitutions. Available from http://www.forumforthefuture.org.uk/uploadstore/curriculum.pdf

Fryer, R. H. (2005). Universities and citizenship: The forgotten dimension? In S.Robinson & C. Katulushi (Eds.), Values in higher education (pp. 74-106).Bridgend, Wales: Aureus.

Haigh, M. (2005). Greening the university curriculum: Appraising an internationalmovement. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29(1), 31-48.

Hajer, M. A. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

Hicks, D. (2003). Global education: what does it mean? The Challenge of theGlobal Dimension in Education—Lecture Series No 1 (2004). London: Instituteof Education.

Higher Education Academy. (2006). Sustainable development in higher education:A progress report for employers, unions and the professions. York, UK: Author.

Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2005a). Strategically importantand vulnerable subjects. Available from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2005/05_24/05_24.pdf

Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2005b). Sustainable development inhigher education. Available from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2005/05_28/

Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability. (2004). On course for sustainability:Report of the HEPS 2000-2003. Available from http://www.forumforthefuture.org.uk/uploadstore/On%20course%20for%20sustainability.pdf

Katulushi, C. (2005). Diversity, values and international students in HigherEducation. In S. Robinson & C. Katulushi (Eds.), Values in higher education(pp. 189-215). Bridgend, Wales: Aureus.

Khan, S. A. (2003). “Greening” FE curricula: A position paper. Available fromhttp://www.projectcarrot.org/publications/GreeningFE.pdf

Knight, J. (2003). Internationalization of higher education—Practices and priori-ties: 2003 IAU Survey Report. Available from http://www.unesco.org/iau/internationalization/pdf/Internationalisation-en.pdf

Lewis, V. (2005, October 12). Integrated internationalism: Interpretation and imple-mentation in UK HE. Presentation at Education for Sustainable Development:Graduates as Global Citizens conference, Bournemouth, UK. Available fromhttp://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/about/the_global_dimension/downloads/IntegratedInternationalism_VickyLewis.ppt

Martin, S., & Jucker, R. (2004.) Educating earth-literate leaders. Available from http://www.sustainabilityalliance.org.uk/uploads/HulmeConferencePaperMar04.doc

McKenzie,A., Bourn, D., Evans, S., Brown, M., Shiel, C., Bunney,A., et al. (2003). Globalperspectives in higher education. London: Development Education Association.




National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education. (1997). Higher education inthe learning society. London: HMSO.

Neal, I. (2005). Skills for the global engineer. Development Education Journal,12(1), 15-16.

Ottewill, R., Chandler, J., Long, P., & Wall, A. (2005). Enhancing first-year poli-tics teaching through an evaluation of the entry-level “political literacy” ofundergraduates at a “new” and “old” university. Learning and Teaching in theSocial Sciences, 2(1), 39-54.

Parkin, S. (2006, January 24). Promoting sustainability through policy—SIGnet.Presentation at Working Knowledge: Developing Sustainability Skills in HigherEducation conference, Edinburgh, Scotland.

RoperASW. (2002). National Geographic—Roper 2002 Global GeographicLiteracy Survey. Available from http://www.nationalgeographic.com/geosur-vey/download/RoperSurvey.pdf

Solem, M., & Ray, W. (2005). Gauging disciplinary support for internationalisation:A survey of geographers (AAG Report to the American Council on Education).Available from http://www.aag.org/AAG_ACEfinalreport.pdf

Special report: The brains business. (2005, September 8). Economist. Availablefrom http://www.economist.com/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=4339960

Stirling, S. (2005, September 12). Making connections: Towards culture change ineducation. Presentation at Education for Sustainable Development: Graduatesas Global Citizens conference, Bournemouth, UK. http://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/about/the_global_dimension/downloads/StephenSterling.ppt

Sussex Centre for Migration Research (University of Sussex) & the Centre for AppliedPopulation Research (University of Dundee). (2004). International student mobility.Available from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2004/04_30/ 04_30.pdf

Walker, H. (2004, March 24). Why the UK needs area studies. Keynote speech pre-sented to Area Studies Project conference, London, UK. Available fromhttp://www.lang.ltsn.ac.uk/resources/paper .aspx?resourceid=2046

Witham, H. (2005, September 12). Embedding sustainable devlopment in the HEeconomics curriculum. Presentation at Education for Sustainable Development:Graduates as Global Citizens conference, Bournemouth, UK. http://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/about/the_global_dimension/downloads/H_Witham_Bournemouth.ppt

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Jenny Lunn is studying for a PhD in International Development at Royal Holloway,University of London. She was the research manager for the Global Perspectives inHigher Education project at the Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute ofBritish Geographers) that ran from October 2004 to March 2006. For more detailsabout the project visit the Web site: http://www.rgs.org/globalperspectives




Global Perspectives in Higher Education: Taking the Agenda Forward in the United Kingdom

Documents

Transcript of Global Perspectives in Higher Education: Taking the Agenda Forward in the United Kingdom