Enhancing Learning in the Social Science Vol_2_1_Killick[1]


of 33
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Curriculum internationalisation: identity, graduate attributes and ‘altermodernity’ David Killick Leeds Metropolitan University G14 Macaulay Hall Headingley Campus Leeds LS6 3QS UK Tel: 0113 283274 Email: d.killick@leedsmet.ac.uk Biography Since joining Leeds Metropolitan University in 1991 after a career in EFL, David has played a significant role in developing the university’s distinctive approach to curriculum internationalisation through cross-cultural capability and global perspectives. Hi
  ELiSS, Vol 2 Issue 1, July 2009 ISSN: 1756 ‐  848X 1   Curriculum   internationalisation: identity, graduate attributes and ‘alter-modernity’   David Killick Leeds Metropolitan UniversityG14 Macaulay HallHeadingley CampusLeeds LS6 3QSUKTel: 0113 283274Email:d.killick@leedsmet.ac.uk  Biography Since joining Leeds Metropolitan University in 1991 after a career in EFL,David has played a significant role in developing the university’s distinctiveapproach to curriculum internationalisation through cross-cultural capabilityand global perspectives. His publications, workshops and conferencepresentations in this area have significantly added to internationalisationdebate and practice across the UK. David is currently researching the livedexperience of students undertaking international mobility and how this relatesto learning and development theory.  ELiSS, Vol 2 Issue 1, July 2009 ISSN: 1756 ‐  848X 2   Abstract  Internationalisation is a complex and contested term, which UK highereducation is only now defining for itself. I focus on specific rationales forinternationalisation, arguing that it is to be interpreted as the educationalresponse to globalisation. It is argued that curriculum internationalisation canenable students to situate themselves, and be helped to responsibly navigatethe ‘liquid flows’ which challenge their self-identity. This paper proposes thatself-identification as a ‘global citizen’ and the ‘attributes’ of cross-culturalcapability and global perspectives can form the basis for a values-basedinternationalised university curriculum across the disciplines, enablingstudents to make their way  in the world. Keywords : internationalisation, curriculum, cross-cultural capability, identity,graduate attributes  ELiSS, Vol 2 Issue 1, July 2009 ISSN: 1756 ‐  848X 3   ‘ Universities are places, perhaps above all, for the formation of studentidentities.’(Barnett and Di Napoli, 2008a: 161) Section 1UK higher education and internationalisation Since the turn of the millennium, ‘internationalisation’ has becomeincreasingly visible in the discourse of UK higher education (HE). Reports,strategies and research projects (Bourne et al, 2006; Caruana and Spurling,2007; Fielden, 2007; Fielden et al, 2007; Hudson and Todd, 2000; Lunn,2006; McKenzie et al, 2003; Middlehurst and Woodfield, 2007; Trahar, 2007;Universities UK, 2005), conferences (Bournemouth University, 2008; BritishCouncil, 2004, 2006, 2008; HEA, 2007, 2009; Oxford Brookes, 2008, 2009)and themes within conferences, journal articles (too numerous to cite)including this special edition, books (Brown and Jones, 2007; Atfield andKemp, 2008; Jones, 2009) and related guidelines, and case studies andtraining materials spanning the HEA’s subject centres crowd a previouslyrather barren space. (Note, for example, the absence of internationalisation inDearing’s report (1997a) on the role of HE in the UK.)In the year 2008–2009 at least four UK universities launched units dedicatedto some aspect of internationalisation (Bournemouth University’s Centre forGlobal Perspectives, Oxford Brookes University’s Centre for InternationalCurriculum Inquiry and Networking, UCL’s Centre for Applied GlobalCitizenship and Leeds Metropolitan University’s Centre for Academic Practiceand Research in Internationalisation). Given the UK’s comparatively belatedinterest in this area, we should not be surprised to find contention andconfusion surrounding the term, and a tendency hitherto to seek clarificationin definitions and descriptions drawn from North America and Australasia isunderstandable (for example, the many citations for the works of Janet Knight  ELiSS, Vol 2 Issue 1, July 2009 ISSN: 1756 ‐  848X 4   and Betty Leask (Altbach and Knight, 2007; Knight, 1997, 2003, 2004; Leask,1999, 2001, 2003, 2004)). In this historical perspective, it is hard to see thevalidity of Professor Trainor’s claim that ‘[m]ost observers will agree that theUK higher education sector has been in the vanguard of internationalisation’(Fielden, 2008: foreword), not least in the context of a report which itselfadopts Jane Knight’s (1994) definition of the term.At the same time as UK HE has been adopting, adapting or ignoring themovement to internationalise, UK schools have been given very strong steersregarding the ‘global dimension’ in the curriculum (DfES, 2004, 2005). This, Ibelieve, is highly relevant to how the HE sector might respond to theglobalising world in which its graduates will need to find their place and make their way  . There has been an almost simultaneous drive towards ‘citizenship’education (Crick, 1998), and the ensuing debates around what citizenship canmean in the context of multiculturalism and globalisation are of consequenceto the notions of ‘global’ citizenship and ‘altermodernism’ referenced below. Ofparticular significance to the role universities may play in the (re)location ofself-identity is Olser and Starkey’s call for all citizenship education to bedirected towards a cosmopolitanism in which ‘educated cosmopolitan citizenswill be confident in their own identities’ and will see their responsibilities toothers ‘within the local community and at a global level’ (Osler and Starkey,2003: 276). At the same time, we see issues of identity arising in a number ofother discussions in HE: the challenges of supercomplexity (Barnett, 2000);the challenges to disciplinarity (Kreber, 2009a); the blurring of boundariesbetween the ‘academic’ and the ‘market’ or the ‘consumer’ (Barnett and DiNapoli, 2008c). It is likely that each of these challenges to the identity of theuniversity is also reflected in the ongoing social construction ofinternationalisation within the academic community.Hitherto, consonant with the marketisation of HE, the predominant approachto internationalisation in the UK has been a single focus on the for-profitrecruitment of international students (and possibly also the creation of‘offshore’ or ‘transnational’ delivery of parts of the curriculum to internationalstudents in their home countries). For many of us, it is unfortunate but not
Related Search
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks