April 6, 2002

 

To: SenEx

From: International Affairs Committee

Re: Final report

 

Recommendation: This year’s International Affairs Committee deliberations has led to a recommendation that SenEx approve one of the following two options:

 

1. Disband the committee.

 

Logic: The four international agencies on campus have the authority, responsibility, resources, expertise, and necessary coordination to address every present charge and every conceivable future charge of the International Affairs Committee. In the future, as SenEx identifies issues that it feels are not being adequately addressed, it could ask the appropriate agency to consider the issue in a special report.

 

2. Reconstitute the existing committee as one that serves a strictly advisory role relative to the four campus-wide international agencies.

 

Logic: Same as above. In addition there may be some value to these agencies in having an external group committed to providing guidance and advice when needed. Many agencies on campus have external advisory councils. There is no reason why these four should not have such a group. At the same time, other agencies do not require SenEx approval to create advisory councils. Under the recently modified reporting lines all four agencies report to the Dean of International Programs. At least one of these entities already has an advisory committee and there have been discussions regarding creating similar advisory committees for the others. The need for an advisory council to report to SenEx is greatly diminished under these conditions.

 

Collectively the committee favored the first recommendation over the second.

 

Report: This year’s committee focused on the existing University resources committed to international students and programs. There are four major University offices that provide significant support in this area. These offices are: International Student Services (ISS), Office of Study Abroad (OSA), Office of International Programs (OIP), and the Applied English Center (AEC). During this year’s meetings a report on each of these entities was given. A synopsis of those reports is provided in the minutes of the individual meetings.

 

The operating officers of each of the four international agencies have been ex-officio members of the International Affairs Committee on a regular basis. As a result, previous years’ committees provided, among other things, a forum for discussion and coordination among these four entities. The committee’s other major functions seemed to be as a mechanism for providing information to faculty, lending support to international initiatives across campus, and attempting to negotiate changes and improvements in various University policies and procedures, frequently those implemented by one of the four international agencies.

 

Historically these offices did not report to a single dean or director. This was changed recently by putting all four agencies under the Dean of International Programs, Diana Carlin. This move provided a level of formal coordination among these groups including the development of standard practices, reporting requirements, duty assignments and resource allocation techniques, thus impacting the previously needed role of the international affairs committee. Under this new structure the Dean of International Programs’ activities and responsibilities are in many ways more similar to those of an Associate Provost than to those of a Dean, indicating that a title change may be appropriate for this position.

 

The committee felt that review of its charges in light of the new reporting lines for the four international agencies was also an appropriate use of time. The committee felt that all of the charges, except for the charge to report to SenEx, seem to fall within the purview of one or more of the four international agencies. (See attached matrix indicating high, medium and low involvement.)

 

The committee noted that some charges are very specific while others address extremely wide-ranging general concerns. Also, many of the charges were for the committee to act in an advisory capacity (e.g. “monitor enrollment/admissions policies”) while others requested that the committee itself complete specific tasks such as “identify concerns of international students.” Charges in this category do not address the issue of the availability of resources necessary to the successful completion of the desired task. In addition, some of these tasks seem to be under the direct authority and responsibility of one of the four agencies listed or, in one case, a different agency on campus. In these cases, the role of the committee was unclear. For instance, a part of one charge was to consider exploring additional safety education prior to study abroad participation. The committee in this case would approach the OSA, whose director is a member and has specific expertise in this area. They would have discovered that OSA had quickly taken steps to this end at the direction of its Dean. Clearly the appropriate authority and responsibility for any action falls outside the committee itself. At the same time the resources to be used reaching a decision to act and those needed for any implementation are unavailable to the committee. Consequently, any role for the committee, even when the charge seems to imply action, can at best be advisory. This line of reasoning has led to the question of whether the committee was a necessary component of SenEx structure at this time and, if so, whether the committee should be charged with only an advisory role to the four campus-wide international agencies. These two options are described at the beginning of this memo.

 

 


International Committee Charges and University Entities Involvement Level

 

Charge

ISS

OSA

AEC

OIP

Provide policy advice on issues affecting international students and programs.

 

 

 

H

 

L

 

M

 

M

Facilitate University-wide understanding and awareness of the role and possibilities for international activities.

 

 

L

 

L

 

L

 

H

Monitor enrollment/admissions policies and standards affecting international students. Identify possible impediments to enrollment of international students at KU and recommend ways to address those barriers.

 

H

 

L

 

H

 

M,L

Submit to SenEx: minutes, recommendations, report.

NA

NA

NA

NA

Follow the progress made in exploring ways of increasing scholarship funding for international students and students studying abroad.

 

 

M

 

M

 

L

 

M

Consider and make recommendations for means of providing mentoring support at the school level for sponsored international undergraduate students.

 

 

M

 

 

H

 

Examine recommendations concerning the transfer of credits from foreign universities.

 

 

 

H

 

 

 

Identify concerns of international students.

 

 

 

H

 

M

 

M

 

M

Continue monitoring options for short-term housing for international students.

 

 

 

M

 

 

M

 

M

Develop a plan to work with the KU Endowment Association and the KU Alumni Association to track international alumni.

 

 

L

 

L

 

L

 

L

Evaluate steps taken by the Office of Study Abroad and other University offices to ensure the safety of our students abroad. Consider exploring additional safety education prior to study abroad participation.

 

 

H

 

 

H

                                                 

ISS = International Student Services                AEC = Applied English Center          OSA = Office of Study Abroad         OIP = Office of International Programs

H = high involvement          M = medium involvement                   L = low involvement            Blank = minimal or no involvement