Request for Comment

TOWARDS AN INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION MASTER’S DEGREE:

CONTENT, COMPETENCIES, AND CERTIFICATION

Concept Outline for AIEA Roundtable Discussion, February 16, 2010

Proposed by:

Michael Basile

Murray State University

Background/Context:

            The Urias, Deardorff, and Heyl state of quality standards for the International Education Master’s Degree done two years ago[1] sets out 10 standards, with associated benchmarks, that spans a widely-defined international education field.  What is commonly understood as international education may take several forms and emphases:  e.g., global education, international development, international programs administration for student services, higher education, etc.  Given the breadth of this span, there appears to be a need to clarify the field in at least three functional areas:  program content options, emphases, and concentrations within programs; corresponding competencies; and relevant certifications.  Overlap exists not just functionally, but also by content, with variations that stem from institutional history and interest.  Considering growth of enrollment as well as programs offered the past decade or so, it seems the time is ripe to pursue means to put some order to content, competencies, and certification at the Master’s level.

Purpose/Goals:

            The overall purpose of this effort is to set up a working and standing means toward a Master’s Degree in international education.  Specific goals of this pursuit would be to:

• Clarify major content areas for the Master’s in International Education Degree;
• Determine competencies for each of the content areas; and
• Outline a certification process that sets out quality standards for content and competencies review to which institutions may refer.

Because variations in content, program purpose, and structure of degree, reaching working consensus on establishment of standards of quality “across the board,” the effort should be guided by tenets of the need to specify minimal quality standards on the one hand while affording institutional flexibility on the other.  Discussion of purpose and scope up front is therefore a first order of business of this working group.

Intended Ends/Outcomes:

• Content Clarification:
  • What are the major sub-categories of international education content at the Master’s level?
  • What programs can be included in the field?
  • What areas of commonality exist among them?
  • Is there a “core” that defines basic content at the Master’s level?  What would it consist of?
• Competencies:
  • To what extent and in what ways do/should competencies derive from content areas?
  • What general competencies span the field?
  • What might a mechanism for determining and reviewing competencies look like and how should it work?
• Quality Standards/Certification:

• What would a process to review degree programs and offerings have to cover?
• What/whose interests would be served by quality standards and certification?
• How would a certification process be administered?

Interim Steps:

• By end of AIEA 2010 meeting, formation of standing working group:
  • Composed of at least five or more institutional representatives
  • General plan of operation agreed
• Scope of work defined for first year to cover and propose for 2011 AIEA meeting:
  • Definition of degree content areas
  • Derived competencies identified
  • Quality standards for certification identified
  • Alternative means for administration for discussion

[1] See IIE website posting for full citation and paper: 

http://www.iienetwork.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-10000/1710/folder/53578/Urias.Deardorff.pdf