



































INTERNATIONALIZATION OF COLLEGE EDUCATION – THE ROLE OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES


Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

57 
 

 

Internationalization of College Education 
– the Role of New Technologies 

 
Kathrin Ullrich 

 
Universidad Regiomontana, Mexico 

 
Abstract 

 
Each day the world is more connected and the population and 
companies think that international experience increases students’ 
professional capacities in the areas of communication, flexibility, 
innovations and ambitions among others. It is the duty of institutions of 
higher education to ensure that graduates have received a complete 
training, including skills to cope with globalization. While only a small 
percentage of graduates actually have the opportunity to take part in 
an international program abroad during their studies, 
internationalization of the home campus offers many possibilities. 
Allowing and inviting professors to participate in global education, 
universities must think of implementing a comprehensive strategy to 
modernize teaching methods and train global citizens. 

 
Introduction 

 
Society believes that it is the obligation of universities to offer young people an 
education that prepares them to face the challenges of a globalized world. This 
preparation of young people by universities necessarily includes an international 
vision.  
 
Some efforts have been made to internationalize the campus environment, but a real 
change from regionally focused teaching to true international education is missing. 
Traditionally universities have demonstrated some international mission (Foskett & 
Maringe, 2010), but they do not seem to keep up with the current reality. Most 
academic institutions lack a straightforward internationalization strategy. More or 
less, what is done by universities seems to be an answer to existing opportunities; 
planning, if any, is expressed only within development policies or guidelines (de Wit, 
Jaramillo, & Knight, 2005). 
 
The point of departure is the word “internationalization”.  Its definition is unclear. 
Some people even think of internationalization as expanding the university to new 
international markets by recruiting international students. This can be done by 
exporting education through virtual programs or even through new university 
campuses abroad (the so called campus franchising; compare van der Wende, 
2007).  
 
Generally speaking, internationalization includes all the aspects that enrich college 
life with intercultural elements, such as direct international experience on trips, 
contacts with international students on campus, foreign points of view in textbooks, 
use of a second language in the classroom, visiting professors, and so on.  



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

58 
 

Internationalization also happens through mobility, flexible curriculum, and activities 
in the university environment to present the student with cultural diversity. These 
intercultural activities link the theoretical learning with real life diversity.  
 
The use of modern information and communication technology (ICT) can also help 
create international learning settings. ICT is internet-mediated communication, 
including various videoconference systems, chat and social networks. About 80% of 
students report having social network profiles and over 50% use social networks 
frequently (Mikal & Grace, 2012). While Mikal and Grace speak of the millennial 
generation. It can be assumed that most college students are from this age group. 
ICT has been identified as a way to support students during the culture shock 
experienced on exchange programs (Mikal & Grace, 2012). It has also been used 
sporadically for networking within the classroom. There are many options to use ICT 
to create modern international settings and foster intercultural cooperation. This 
helps the internationalization of colleges and universities and meets the needs of 
students regarding international training. 
 

Internationalization and Globalization 
 
Training needs today are not the same as 50 years ago. Today´s students live in an 
information society. Living in the modern society of information and knowledge 
means being interconnected on all levels and facing the challenges of globalization, 
which is not synonymous with internationalization. The word globalization refers to 
the changes of the society, the formation of a society of information, ways of mobility, 
integration of markets and also political, economic and socio-cultural changes. 
(compare Wächter, 2000)  
 
Reichert and Wächter (2000) confirm this idea that: “Globalization refers to forceful 
changes in the economic, social, political and cultural environment, brought about by 
global competition, the integration of markets, increasingly dense communication 
networks, information flows and mobility.” (p.10)  
 
Internationalization on the other hand is the answer to this change. It looks for ways 
to face the challenges of globalization (Wächter, 2000).  
 
Many authors (e.g., de Wit et al., 2005; Ramirez, 2011) have wondered about the 
purpose of internationalization. It seems to be the key concept, but still there are no 
answers yet. De Wit et al. formulate some important questions: “What is the purpose 
of internationalization? What are the expected benefits or outcomes? What values 
underpin it? Who are the main actors, stakeholders, and beneficiaries? What are the 
positive consequences, the unintended results, and the negative implications? Is 
internationalization a passing fad?” (p. 350) There are many unanswered questions. 
Finding the answers is important to develop a comprehensive internationalization 
strategy and will help to reach the goal of truly facing globalization. 
 
Within the era of the global economy as a result of globalization, it makes no sense 
to train students for the local market (Wächter, 2000). While the purpose of 
internationalization is defined accordingly as preparing young professionals for 
global environments, no consensus has been reached about the definition of 
Internationalization itself. “… there is a great deal of confusion about what it 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

59 
 

(internationalization) means. For some people, it means a series of international 
activities, such as academic mobility for students and teachers; international 
linkages, partnerships, and projects; new international academic programs and 
research initiatives. For others it means delivering education to other countries using 
a variety of face-to-face and distance techniques and such new types of 
arrangements as branch campuses and franchising.” (Knight, 2008, p. 1) 
 

The traditional concept of internationalization: Mobility Programs 
 
Historically internationalization is understood widely as the mobility of individuals 
(e.g. Otten, 2000 or Altbach & Knight, 2007). A key or important part to mobility is 
international programs (e.g. study abroad) for students. Including such an 
experience on the resume not only shows future employers intercultural 
competence, but also adaptability, autonomy, maturity and leadership abilities.  
 
In this context, internationalization is traditionally seen as a service provided by a 
specific area, i.e. the international office of the university. The international office 
provides study abroad trips to students and works in close proximity with the 
academic fields, but the study plan itself remains untouched by international 
viewpoints and other intercultural encounters (Nilsson, 2000). Although few students 
go on study abroad programs, growth of participation in international student mobility 
programs is expected to increase from 2 million students participating now to 15 
million within the next 10 years, due to the awareness of students about the 
importance of functioning in multicultural environments (Altbach & Knight, 2007). 
Even though some believe that the importance of mobility decreases because of the 
existing international environment (Kehm & Teichler, 2007), without a doubt, 
traditional mobility programs will remain a tool for internationalization of individuals; 
however, changes in international programs are to be expected. Internationalization 
will be better integrated in study plans and directed towards a bigger public inside 
the universities. 
 
There are some initiatives to offer international experiences to more than one 
student at a time. Group programs are done usually as academic study trips of a few 
weeks of length. Yet short term programs lack the typical exchange experience as 
students tend to stay in their group and are guided throughout the whole experience. 
Typically students on a study abroad experience benefit from being in a completely 
different environment and having to face day to day challenges by themselves. This 
increases the above mentioned skill of adaptability to different work environments. 
Staying in a group with members of the same cultural background and with a 
professor taking care of unexpected throwbacks reduces the development of new 
skills and can only serve to awaken the interest of the student to search for other 
international experiences. 
 
Even considering group travel, the larger part of the student community still remains 
without contact to the internationalization efforts of the university. Usually only about 
5-10% of the students can leave home for a considerable amount of time and 
participate in a semester abroad experience (of course the numbers worldwide differ 
extremely, with only 3% participation in the US (Engle & Engle, 2001), 25% 
participation in Germany (Siems & Suermann, 2012) or Mexico, where there is a 
huge difference in participation numbers between public and private universities 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

60 
 

(compare Patlani, http://www.patlanimexico.org/). As shown in studies of Avila, with 
only 4% of students participating in study abroad, Latin America has in general very 
low student mobility (Avila, 2007).  
 
Probably the maximum that a university can hope for is to have around 20% of 
graduates with direct international experience. Of course while there are incredible 
examples like 54% of international participation in the Europa University Viadrina of 
Frankfurt Oder, a university located directly on the border, (Weber, 2010), 
unfortunately this is the exception. This is due to obstacles students face when they 
consider studying abroad.   
 
The efforts of the family supporting the extra expenses for traveling and living cannot 
be underestimated. Altbach and Knight (2007) found “Most of the world’s more than 
2 million international students are self-funded, that is, they and their families pay for 
their own academic work.” (p. 294). Families make huge sacrifices to make study 
abroad possible and there will always be many students without the possibility to 
participate. Aside from finances, other reasons for not being able to participate in 
study abroad programs include family and work related issues. 
 
What can institutions of higher education do if not all students can travel to get 
international experience? Being a trained professional today includes knowing what 
is going on outside of the direct environment, not only to know there are other 
cultures, but to understand the context of the professional fields in a global 
environment. The changes brought on by globalization demand an international 
profile and a network of contacts, provided during college education and contributing 
to a global economy by putting the international dimension into teaching (Foskett & 
Maringe, 2010; Gibbs & Maringe, 2008).  
 
Universities search to fill the gap in education and include an international point of 
view into the curricula. Now that faculties begin to understand that the traditional 
teaching methods need to be re-done and completed with international elements, 
new ideas are needed and the question about “internationalization at home” arises. 
 

Internationalization at Home 
 
The classic definition of internationalization at home is Knights´(1993): “the process 
of integrating an international dimension into the research, teaching and services 
function of higher education.” (as cited in Wächter, 2000, p. 5). For the first time 
internationalization is not reduced to study abroad travel, but looks for local options 
to bring international aspects into the students’ regular environment. De Wit et al. 
(2005) clarifies that internationalization at home wants to add the international 
concepts to a traditional education. 
 
To the point, Wächter confirms that internationalization at home is any internationally 
related activity with exception of the traditional mobility of students and staff 
(Wächter, 2000, p.10). In other words, internationalization at home is any innovative 
and creative way that professors and universities can think of incorporating 
international components into the classrooms. There are no limitations or end of 
possibilities. More possibilities are likely to emerge every day, especially when 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

61 
 

thinking of the modern world applications within the information society. Examples of 
these types of activities are discussed later in this paper. 
 

The Modern Internationalization Concept 
 
The five most important aspects of internationalization in this broader sense 
including traditional mobility and Internationalization at Home are (1) to recruit 
international students. This aspect is very important in commercial universities as it 
opens new markets. (2) The mobility of students and university staff. Traditional 
mobility and especially student exchange programs are the core of 
internationalization. These study abroad experiences are highly valued within the 
labor market as they increase not only the cultural awareness, but help students to 
develop maturity and problem solving skills. It makes them effective communicators, 
leaders and team players. (3) Cooperation between professors of different 
institutions and countries becomes increasingly important and allows sharing 
knowledge, co-teaching and using intercultural projects and dynamics in class. (4) 
The development of global research partnerships and (5) an international curriculum, 
from minor changes in the content to a complete re-design of learning methods 
(Foskett & Maringe, 2010).  Developing an international curriculum means including 
lectures of regional studies and global topics, raising the awareness of the need for 
bi- or multilingualism, having internationally trained professors who share their 
experience with students about the need for intercultural understanding and an 
outcome based approach such as students’ competences. All those efforts lead to 
young professionals trained to face the challenges of globalization as described 
above. 
 
For many universities expanding the marketing strategy to attract international 
students is important. This tendency can be seen especially within younger 
universities without a research division (Foskett & Maringe, 2010). Marketing attracts 
students from developing countries to universities in the first world. English speaking 
countries receive most of these students with universities high in global rankings 
getting the largest portion (Van der Wende, 2007). Interestingly there is a tendency 
for international students to stay in their country of study professionally, resulting in 
academic loss in their countries of origin.  
 
However, within the criteria of training students to be better prepared for a globalized 
environment, the recruitment of international students for profit is not analyzed. But, 
having those international students sharing their point of view within the classroom 
helps to create a diverse environment and plays into other elements of 
internationalization.  
 

Internationalization today within the institutions of higher education 
 
In order to set the correct internationalization strategy within a university, the student 
profile is of major interest. The student population has suffered important changes. 
Traditionally students used to present similar socioeconomic patterns, but with time, 
two groups, 1) the already internationally active (internationalized) students and 2) 
first generation college students, can be detected and will demand attention and the 
correct type of education. 
 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

62 
 

First, universities already have internationalized students. Without the need for the 
university to act, students have looked for internationalization by themselves, and 
entered the universities already globalized. They have fully understood the 
importance of learning a second language and demand opportunities for growth in a 
very specialized level from their universities. They are looking for academic study 
abroad options that not only offer a first insight into other cultures but offer new 
specialized knowledge in the academic field. They want added value to the content 
taught at the home university. Students want to grow not only in cultural aspects, but 
also academically. 
 
Look at the recent studies of Kehm and Teichler (2007): “Many students newly 
entering higher education have already experienced stays abroad or have gained 
knowledge about other countries through the media and actual encounters with 
people from other countries in their daily life that the “added value” of study abroad is 
most likely decreasing.”(p. 271) 
 
This is the top group of students. Global citizens of this kind do not require 
internationalization with basic mobility programs; they need different international 
programs challenging them academically.  They will search for special offers adding 
value in any aspect of their studies, not only through isolated experiences in a 
mobility program. Those students need the opportunity to get involved in specific 
activities and training global leadership skills that are highly connected to their 
academic sectors. Adequate programs, such as those offered through the Free 
Trade Alliance Education Foundation, can include international competitions related 
to the field of study, such as, for example, an international business plan 
development contest.  
 
Then there is the increasing group of students from a lower socioeconomic level and 
whose families traditionally have no involvement in university education. These first 
generation college students, now more and more at universities, will not participate 
in study abroad experiences for different reasons and will need internationalization at 
home tools. 
 
“If Internationalization cannot be realized to a higher degree, internationalization 
efforts of higher education institutions will lead to a polarization of winners and 
losers.” (Kehm & Teichler, 2007, p.271). Ramirez (2011) reported a similar 
observation.   
 
This important thought underlines the importance of finding appealing international 
education options not only for the top group of students but for all students. This will 
increase the employability of the entirety of the college population.   
 

Applying Internationalization at the Campus 
 
Universities have a myriad of possibilities to internationalize the study environment 
and offer intercultural experiences to their student populations. Some methods stand 
out and should be examined further. 
 
Generally speaking, universities can put into place activities to create an 
international feeling on campus. This means international activities not related to the 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

63 
 

study plan. They can also foster internationalization of the curriculum, such as the 
incorporation of international aspects into course work.  
 
The experiences on campus not directly related to course work that create an 
international environment can be free time activities with exchange students, 
language cafes, international brochures and newspapers in waiting areas, foreign 
movies on campus and so on. Such learning experience through meetings with 
international students and other contacts with international contexts within the 
campus raises the perception of their own culture and values and it trains the ability 
to act efficiently and appropriately in multicultural endeavors (Nilsson, 2000). 
 
Then there is the international curriculum. Sometimes the expression 
internationalization at home and internationalization of the curricula seem to overlap 
(Beleen, 2011). However, internationalization includes both international activities of 
any kind at the campus and international coursework directly leading towards an 
international curriculum. Without a doubt the key to internationalizing students lies 
within the curriculum. The curriculum is the logical starting point to look for a change 
towards global education. Pacheco (2009a) underlines the need: The curriculum 
used to be abstract and without links to real life, students developed their aptitudes 
more in individual work than together, teachers and students do not connect with 
experts outside the classroom doors as part of their general learning process, and 
the majority of the academic institutions’ work is being separated from the 
communities’.  While Pacheco states the need of both internationalized curricula and 
an international environment, he puts emphasis on the curricula.  
 
De Wit et al. (2005) offers a variety of ideas for the revision of academics: new 
programs with international topics, an international dimension in already existing 
courses, language training, regional studies, joint programs, including international 
students with active roles into the class, virtual mobility, international professors, 
conferences and much more.  
 
Some topics of importance are mentioned below: 
 
Teaching in a second language 
Teaching in a second language trains linguistic abilities and brings a foreign point of 
view into the classroom because books in other languages usually have foreign 
authors. Especially in Latin America, students, professors and staff members lack in 
language preparation and are not always aware of their deficiencies in successfully 
expressing themselves in a second language (de Wit et al., 2005). Offering courses 
in another language invites students to learn about their limitations, trains linguistics 
and practices the class context in the specific language of the academic field. The 
limitation on finding bilingual teaching staff is a challenge. 
 
Visiting professors 
Visiting professors provide an excellent opportunity to bring the world to the 
classroom. Unfortunately the costs of teacher mobility are high and the lack of 
budget limits this option. Furthermore, the students remain in the same environment, 
with the same classmates, so the experience is reduced. 
 
 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

64 
 

Internationally trained professors and the international classroom 
You can create a proactive learning environment by combining elements. Teaching 
in a second language and using an international teaching body together with 
interculturally aware local professors and a correct use of diversity brought in by 
international students at the campus, offers a promising mix. The degree of 
internationalization of the curriculum always comes back to what is delivered by the 
professors who are directly in touch with the students and deliver their core 
education. It is therefore disturbing to see the lack of international training of our 
professors and in many cases the reluctance of the academy to embrace 
internationalization (Brandenburg & Federkeil, 2007; de Wit et al., 2005). You cannot 
expect the classroom to get internationally colored and ask teachers who themselves 
have never received the opportunity to study abroad and are used to a mono cultural 
teaching style to do otherwise (Teekens, 2000). Additional training is crucial. 
Investing in teacher training allows for the creation of real international classrooms 
as Teekens (2000) describes as the final goal. She uses the expression of the 
international classroom for an active diversity realized between domestic and 
international students guided by the professor to reflect on the topics from a variety 
of views. Exchange students from different parts of the world can create this 
enriching environment inside their universities (compare with Otten, 2000; Gibbs & 
Maringe, 2008). It must be said that it is not an easy task to nurture and raise 
students´ contributions. A high level of organization and sensibility is needed to offer 
such a discussion platform. By themselves, students do not participate. This has 
been shown in a research exercise in German universities, where more than 60% of 
the students did not show interest in getting together with foreign students even if a 
high number of foreigners existed. Only those who had previously participated in 
exchanges and international experiences were keenly interested in intercultural get 
together (Bargel, 1998). Because the majority of students will not pursue 
internationalization on their own, budgeting for intercultural teacher training is of 
great importance. 
 
The Global Classroom 
Taking again the idea to create a real intercultural environment within the classroom 
walls, new technologies can offer creative and sustainable solutions. 
 
On one hand ICT have taken away the barriers between countries and through cell 
phones, email or videoconference have minimized the cultural shock during an 
exchange, offering contact and escape to the known environment in any moment just 
a click away (Teekens, 2006). On the other hand, the same technologies support the 
internationalization of the curriculum, closing distances through easy, economic and 
sustainable communication.  
 
Online programs often suffer drop-outs, because studying online is a very lonely 
experience (Wächter, 2000). However, combining new technologies with traditional 
courses offers a wide scale of possible projects without boundaries (Gibbs & 
Maringe, 2008; de Wit et al., 2005). Of course it cannot be entirely the same 
experience as actually going on traditional mobility. The “touch and the smell” as 
Teekens (2006) calls it, is lacking, but of all the internationalization tools, the use of 
different ICT options seems to be the most comprehensive one.  
 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

65 
 

The initial program “Global Understanding” was created by East Carolina University 
in 2003 and offers education with real time direct personalized intercultural 
experiences between students who otherwise probably would not have gotten in 
contact with other cultures during their studies. Students from two or more countries 
exchange information using videoconference and chat. The videoconferencing 
program gives the international experience that students otherwise would not get. 
“Global Understanding” has shown that virtual cooperation between classes is 
possible with little effort and basic technology available throughout the planet. This 
initiative is currently followed by more than 50 universities around the world who 
joined the Global Partners of Education (GPE) organization and work on projects for 
intercultural cooperation. 
 
“We believe GPE has helped to accomplish our vision of creating a network where 
students from a wide range of countries have an opportunity to become global 
citizens and to function successfully in a global community. We believe that the 
global academic projects carried out among the GPE partners have indeed made 
progress on achieving our three fold goal of providing global awareness; enhancing 
positive global attitude; acquiring great global interactional experience through 
collaborative projects.” declare Chia, Poe and Yang (2011, p. 6), the founders of the 
project. 
 
While GPE has several Latin American partners, technology here is still used more 
to exchange information on a national level (Avila, 2007). The next step to fully 
immerse into the possibilities is yet to be done. The creation of international 
classrooms (either in the classical local way with on campus international students or 
using ICT and opening up the boundaries between universities of two or more 
countries) has to be planned and implemented.  
 
Pacheco (2009b) dreams: “Let´s imagine as well an educational environment that is 
no longer reduced to the four walls of the classroom, but that goes on to the homes, 
to the community and to the whole world, in a way that each element of society takes 
an active part in the decision making process of the academic sector as well as the 
financial, value-related and service devices to the different geographic regions. All 
this comes together to a real global village.” 
 

The Future of Internationalization within Universities 
 
Looking into the many internationalization possibilities, it is obvious that a strategy is 
needed to coordinate efforts. An academic institution must understand the 
importance of internationalization and implement actions from a higher level.  
 
The change cannot come only from the international offices. A wider vision is 
needed, including all the aspects and requirements of the information society. The 
majority of universities understand the need to show students how to work with new 
technologies, entrepreneurship, today´s labor market and international topics in one 
way or the other, but through separated points, not as a whole, combining those 
aspects.  It is duty of the universities to plant knowledge of 

- Society within a global context 
- The use of new technologies 
- Speaking several languages 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

66 
 

- The international experience (Leiva, as cited in Ramirez, 2011). 
 
How to reach this knowledge for students? It is clear that the questions about 
internationalization and the impact on the student in facing global challenges in real 
life are answered through global thinking within institutions of higher education. 
The opportunity to get the international message to the students lies within the 
university, especially in the curriculum.  
 
The primary goal is to improve the intercultural abilities of students and offer them 
better academic college training (Schröder & Sehl, 2010). In other words, graduates 
must have the abilities that employers look for: leadership, adaptability, teamwork 
skills, and efficient communication, to fit in different work environments. The majority 
(Teichler, 2012; Teekens, 2006; Smithee, 2012; Helemann, 2010;  Beelen, 2011; 
Lauterbach, 2010) agree with the idea of preparing students for a global world 
through internationalization. That means providing the future leaders with cognitive, 
emotional, ethical and multicultural skills. Deardoff (2004) analyzes: “Ultimately, 
though, a key benefit of internationalization is that institutions produce graduates 
with the skills, attitudes, and knowledge necessary to lead and serve effectively in a 
multinational and multicultural world.” (p. 12)  
 
To reach this goal, internationalization has to join forces with new technologies and 
employment in general. Combining this in practical applied studies, the 
entrepreneurs of tomorrow learn the use of modern technologies and the 
interconnection with a variety of people from different cultural backgrounds. Even if 
some think that virtual education makes it impossible to communicate emotions and 
harms education (Claes & Preston, 2010), the truth is that students need to get 
familiar with new technologies and intercultural diversity not only in their free time, 
but especially in a professional context. Including ICT and internationalization into 
daily coursework promises a real preparation. 
 

Conclusion 
 
The world today is more connected every day. For students, having an international 
experience increases professional abilities and intercultural awareness and creates 
more effective communicators better at working in teams. Above all, it creates a 
global workforce that is adaptable to different environments and has creative 
problem solving skills. The importance of internationalizing education is therefore 
undeniable.  
 
A comprehensive institutionalized strategy for including the entire student community 
into internationalization efforts has to be found. This international strategy must go 
further than just traditional mobility because of the limits that cannot be overcome for 
the majority of students. Finding the correct international tools guarantees that a 
student trained “at home” has no disadvantages because of exclusion or inequality 
from the mobility options.  
 
If the interest of the universities is the formation of competent professionals prepared 
to work in a labor market with cultural diversity, the university should think of the 
impact of teaching techniques on the student. In other words, universities have to 
identify the attributes of graduates to look for because companies search for it in 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

67 
 

graduates regarding adaptability to today´s challenges of globalization. Preparation 
of students should meet the needs of the employers. This means universities need to 
focus on modern teaching techniques. 
 
Universities of the future have to include internationalization and new technology use 
according to the mentioned real life needs. This way the internationalization of the 
academic world is no longer a theoretic construct and starts contributing to the 
formation of students. 
 
Research about these topics is still in its beginnings. As internationalization is 
traditionally understood as the mobility of individuals, most studies follow this line of 
thought. Reality within universities is different: Only a very insignificant number of 
students actually participate in mobility programs. It is now the task of the institutions 
to internationalize the campus, using tools that are able to reach all students without 
exception. Through the fusion of internationalization and new technology there are 
many opportunities. The question of its limitations and the outcomes need an answer 
in order to create international education and form global citizens. 
 
 
 

References 
 

Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). Internsationalization of higher education. Journal 
of Studies in International Education, 33(3/4), 290-306.   

Avila, J. (2007). A Latin American view. The process of internationalization of Latin 
American higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 
33(3/4), 400-410. 

Bargel, T. (1998). Deutsche Studierende und Ausländer: Kontakte und Haltungen. In 
A. Hosseinizadeh (Ed.)., Studium Internationale. Handbuch zum 
Ausländerstudium, (pp. 195-222). Marburg, Germany: Schüren. 

Beelen, J. (2011). Internationalisation at home in a global perspective: A critical 
survey of the 3rd Global Survey Report of IAU. Globalisation and 
Internationalisation of Higher Education, RUSC, Revista de Universidad y 
Sociedad del Conocimiento, 8(2), 249-264.  

Brandenburg, U., & Federkeil, G. (2007). Wie misst man Internationalität und 
Internationalisierung von Hochschulen? Indikatoren und Kennzahlenbildung, 
Centrum für Hochschulentwicklung, Arbeitspapier Nr. 83, Gütersloh, 
Germany. 

Chia, R., Poe, E., Yang, B. (2011). History of Global Partners in Education. Global 
Partners in Education Journal, 1, 3-7. 

Claes, T., & Preston, D. S. (Eds.). (2010). Frontiers in Higher Education. Amsterdam, 
Netherlands: Nova Science Publishers. 

Deardoff, D. K. (2004). Competencies as a student outcome of internationalization at 
institutions of higher education in the United States (Doctoral dissertation). 
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA. 

De Wit, H., Jaramillo, I. C., Knight, J. (Eds.). (2005). Higher education in Latin 
America: The international dimension. Herndon, VA, USA: World Bank 
Publications.  

Engle, L., & Engle, J. (2001). Study abroad levels: Classification of program types. 
Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 9, 1-20. 



Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

68 
 

Foskett, N., & Maringe, F. (Eds.). (2010). Globalisation and Internationalisation in 
Higher Education: Theoretical, Strategic and Management Perspectives. 
London, England: Continuum International Publishing Group.   

Gibbs, P., & Maringe, F. (2008). Marketing higher education: Theory and practice. 
Berkshire, England: Open University Press McGrawhill. 

Helemann, M. (2010). Das Akademische Auslandsamt als Motor der 
Internationalisierung der Hochschule. Internationalisierung von Hochschulen. 
Ergebnisse eines deutsch-österreichischen Benchmarking-Verfahrens, pp. 
49-62, Hannover, Germany: Hochschul Informations SystemGmBH.  

Kehm, B. M., & Teichler, U. (2007). Research on internationalization in higher 
education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3/4), 260-273. 

Knight, J. (2008). Higher Education in Turmoil. Boston, MA, USA: Sense Publishers.  
Lauterbach, S. (2010). Grenznähe als Faktor der Internationalisierung. Am Beispiel 

der Universität des Saarlandes Internationalisierung von Hochschulen. 
Ergebnisse eines deutsch-österreichischen Benchmarking-Verfahrens, (pp. 
63 – 74), Hannover, Germany Hochschul Informations SystemGmBH. 

Mikal, J. P., & Grace, K. (2012). Against abstinence-only education abroad: Viewing 
internet use during study abroad as a possible experience enhancement. 
Journal of Studies in International Education, 16(3), 287-306. 

Nilsson, B. (2000). Internationalising the curriculum. IaH Postion Paper, EAIE (pp. 
21-28). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Drukkerij Raddraaier.  

Otten, M. (2000). Impact of cultural diversity at home. IaH Postion Paper, EAIE (pp. 
15-20). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Drukkerij Raddraaier.     

Pacheco Filella, M. L. (2009a). Educando Creativamente: ¿Porqué las clases 
universitarias no pueden ser divertidas? La investigación reportada aquí fue 
patrocinada por la Universidad Regiomontana, Monterrey, Mexico. Retrieved 
from 
http://www.ur.mx/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=EGlTNuGC1Bw%3d&tabid=2792&
mid=7929. 

Pacheco Filella, M. L. (2009b). La escuela del futuro. La investigación reportada 
aquí fue patrocinada por la Universidad Regiomontana, Monterrey, Mexico. 
Retrieved from 
http://www.ur.mx/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=NN5KxV2gQr0%3d&tabid=2792&m
id=7929. 

Ramírez, A. A. (2011). Conditions for the internationalisation of higher education: 
Between inclusion and exclusion in a globalised world. Globalisation and 
Internationalisation of Higher Education, RUSC, Revista de Universidad y 
Sociedad del Conocimiento, 8(2), 313-325.  

Reichert, S., &  Wächter, B. (2000). The globalization of education and training. 
Recommendations for a coherent response of the European Union. Brussels, 
Belgium: Academic Cooperation Association.  Retrieved from http://www.aca-
secretariat.be/fileadmin/aca_docs/documents/reports/globalisation-oth-enl-
t07.pdf.  

Schröder, T., & Sehl, I. (2010). Benchmarking als Instrument der 
Hochschulentwicklung für den Bereich Internationalisierun.g 
Internationalisierung von Hochschulen. Ergebnisse eines deutsch-
österreichischen Benchmarking-Verfahrens, pp. 1-49, Hannover, Germany: 
Hochschul Informations SystemGmBH. 

 

http://www.ur.mx/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=EGlTNuGC1Bw%3d&tabid=2792&mid=7929
http://www.ur.mx/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=EGlTNuGC1Bw%3d&tabid=2792&mid=7929
http://www.ur.mx/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=NN5KxV2gQr0%3d&tabid=2792&mid=7929
http://www.ur.mx/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=NN5KxV2gQr0%3d&tabid=2792&mid=7929
http://www.aca-secretariat.be/fileadmin/aca_docs/documents/reports/globalisation-oth-enl-t07.pdf
http://www.aca-secretariat.be/fileadmin/aca_docs/documents/reports/globalisation-oth-enl-t07.pdf
http://www.aca-secretariat.be/fileadmin/aca_docs/documents/reports/globalisation-oth-enl-t07.pdf


Global Partners in Education Journal  April 2013, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 57-69 
www.gpejournal.org  ISSN 2163-758X 

 

69 
 

Siems, D., & Suermann, F. (2012, June 28). Jeder vierte deutsche student geht ins 
Ausland. Die Welt. Retrieved from 
http://www.welt.de/dieweltbewegen/article107282781/Jeder-vierte-deutsche-
Student-geht-ins-Ausland.html. 

Smithee, M. B. (2012). Finding leadership for the internationalization of U.S. higher 
education. Journal of International Education and Leadership, 2(1). Retrieved 
from http://www.jielusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Finding-Leadership-
Smithee-1-27.pdf.  

Teekens, H. (2000). Teaching and learning in the international classroom. IaH 
Postion Paper, EAIE (pp. 29-34). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Drukkerij 
Raddraaier. 

Teekens, H. (2006). Internationalization at home: A background paper. In H. 
Teekens (Ed.), Internationalization at home: A global perspective (pp 7-18). 
The Hague, Netherlands: Nuffic. 

Teichler, U. (2012). International student mobility in Europe in the context of the 
Bologna process. Journal of International Education and Leadership, 2(1), 1-
13. Retrieved from 
http://www.jielusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/International-Student-
Mobility-in-Europe-in-the-Context-of-the-Bologna-Process1.pdf.  

Van der Wende, M. (2007). Internationalization of higher education in the OECD 
countries: Challenges and opportunities for the coming decade. Journal of 
Studies in International Education, 33(3/4), 274-290.  

Wächter, B. (2000). Internationalization at home – the context. IaH Postion Paper, 
EAIE (pp. 5-15), Amsterdam, Netherlands: Drukkerij Raddraaier. 

Weber, P. (2010). Der Abbau von Mobilitätshemmnissen als Erfolgsfaktor für die 
Internationalisierung – Am Beispiel der Europa Universität Viadrina. en: 
Schröder & Sehl: Internationalisierung von Hochschulen. Ergebnisse eines 
deutsch-östereichischen Benchmarketing Verfahrens. HIS Forum Hochschule 
8, pp. 125-136. 

 
 

 

 

About the Author 

Kathrin Ullrich is the International Programs Coordinator at Universidad 
Regiomontana in Monterrey, Mexico. Being in charge of both traditional mobility 
programs and internationalization at home strategies, she focuses on elements of 
daily education allowing the majority of students to see their professional field in an 
international context. From the beginning, she brought live videoconferences to 
Universidad Regiomontana classrooms, accompanying the Global Understanding 
course with other Videoconference projects. She is convinced that Global Education 
using new technologies will support students’ personal and professional 
development. She can be reached at kullrich@mail.ur.mx.  

http://www.welt.de/dieweltbewegen/article107282781/Jeder-vierte-deutsche-Student-geht-ins-Ausland.html
http://www.welt.de/dieweltbewegen/article107282781/Jeder-vierte-deutsche-Student-geht-ins-Ausland.html
http://www.jielusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Finding-Leadership-Smithee-1-27.pdf
http://www.jielusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Finding-Leadership-Smithee-1-27.pdf
http://www.jielusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/International-Student-Mobility-in-Europe-in-the-Context-of-the-Bologna-Process1.pdf
http://www.jielusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/International-Student-Mobility-in-Europe-in-the-Context-of-the-Bologna-Process1.pdf
mailto:kullrich@mail.ur.mx

