Approving Study Abroad Programs

By Dr. Sandi Sm i t h, Di rect or of I nst i t ut i onal Rel at i ons, G l obal Learni ng Sem e st er s,
2009.

It is not effective for either the student, nor the program to ha ve a student
participating in a study abroad program that is not a good match for the
individual student. Thus, although a specific study abroad program may
have been a good fit for a previous student, even an outstanding program
is not necessarily appropriate for every student. Thus, the role in
advising students about study abroad programs is essential on any
ca mpus that encourages students to st udy abroad.

Effective advising must be based on st andards that allow us to apply

established criteria in matching individual student needs and study abroad
program options. It is i mportant that t he advisor has the tools and the
skills to guide a student in the process of finding a relevant and
meaningful study abroad program that fits the student’s needs and
characteristics. W e must ask if the advisor understands the criteria for
approving a relevant and meaningful study abroad program. I s it
important that a study abroad progra m has a minimu m gpa of 2.5? Is it
important that a study abroad progra m utilizes host family
acco mmodations? Is it important that all students are assigned a cell
phone during the program? I s it impor tant that the student earn a
transcript from the host institution? There are a lot of subtleties in
matching one of a dozen see mingly perfect programs and the student’s
individual academic and personal needs.

In this article I would like to discuss the need for standards and
professionalization of approving study abroad programs. Unfortunately,
too many U. S. colleges and universities do not hire qualified professionals
to provide advising services to students exploring study abroad options,
but more often utilizes a well-meaning staff me mber or professor [ who
loves to travel] to advise students about study abroad.

Because Global Learning Se mesters of fers pre miu m student support

services for study abroad, we take e xtr a steps to make sure students are
choosing to participate in a program th at is relevant to his/her academic
pursuits, and can be approved for transfer credit to the student’s ho me
institution. Less than 2% of students who have participated in a Global
Learning Semesters progra m has not r eceived transfer credit from the
student’s ho me institution. And so me of these cases have been because
we allow students up to one year after graduation from an undergraduate
degree to participate in our programs.

W hen Global Learning Semesters receives an application from a student

we che ck our institutional database to see if we have had previous
students fro m that s chool, check to see if we have study abroad

© 2 00 9, S an d i S mi th , G l ob al L ear n in g S em es t ers
advisor(s) from that school listed in our database, and look up the
school’s institutional policies and procedures for study abroad. If we do
not know fro m previous co mmunications with that institution if a student
will be allowed to transfer credit from our program, we contact the
student’s ho me institution and verify that the student will be allowed to
earn transfer credit after participating in our program. If we find that an
institution will not approve transfer credit, we reco mmend that the student
find another program that will earn credit toward the student’s degree at
the ho me institution.

I often speak with college and university personnel about institutional

policies and procedures for approving a study abroad program and I have
often heard the answer, “ we wait until a significant amount of our students
have participated in a particular program, and if we get good feedback
fro m the students, only then will we consider an affiliation agreement [or
“approving” a program for our students ].” I have heard this perspective
enough times to kno w that this practice is not co mpletely unusual for U.S.
colleges and universities.

There are several concerns I have about this oft used process. One, if we
based the offering of academic programs and courses solely on student
de mand, we would see fe w students ch oosing to take “liberal arts”
courses of their own accord. But doe s that mean that “liberal arts” courses
are not credible and relevant? Few U. S. institutions allow students to
choose only courses they want for an acade mic degree. Likewise, if
students expressed over whel ming and continued interest in a degree
program in skateboarding, would the institution establish that as a degree
option? Let’s face it, there are still a few things that acade me kno ws
better than the student. Every acade mic institution adheres to
established policies and procedures, whether those policies and
procedures are overwhel mingly cheered by students or not. Although a
certain program ma y be an outstanding international experience for an art
history ma jor, is it appropriate to allow a business ma jor to spend a full
se mester of study abroad at an art inst itute?

Second, what is the validity and credibility of the student feedback an

institution is collecting about a specific study abroad program. Are
students co mplaining about a certain program and will “not recommend” a
program becau se students were required to attend classes 4 or 5 days a
week instead of only 2 or 3 days which they would prefer? Are students
“highly recommending” programs in wh ich students are pretty much left to
party hearty and not challenged academically? Are students sufficiently
indicating the level of intercultural interactions they have with locals and
the level of influence to integrate into the co mmunity instead of living in
an “American student ghetto”? Are the criteria used in evaluating a study
abroad program si milar to the criteria used to evaluate any other
acade mic progra m or course on the ho me ca mpus? And be yond the

© 2 00 9, S an d i S mi th , G l ob al L ear n in g S em es t ers
acade mic evaluation, is there a credible evaluation of the “administration”
of the study abroad progra m as there would be on a ho me ca mpus looking
at the quality of administrative and student support services.

Third, it continues to amaze me that a university would rely on casual and

anecdotal student feedback to approve an acade mic progra m. Although I
could imagine a statistically significant evaluation model that could make
student evaluations valid and reliable, I more co mmonly see institutions
using unreliable, inappropriate, and/or casual feedback from students. It
see ms to be so mething si milar to hiring professors contingent upon a trial
basis and student feedback. But really, how many colleges and
universities use student feedback as the primary source of credibility for a
professor? Likewise, almost e very university in the U.S. gets “poor”
student ratings for Financial Aid services and Parking services. Does that
mean that we should not reco mmend a ll these universities because they
get consistently “poor” ratings in several categories of student
evaluations?

Adversely, there are institutions that use an “approved list” of study

abroad programs and only allow stude nts to participate in those pre-
vetted progra ms. Legal exa mination of this policy has determined that if
an institution has established criteria for approving programs, provides
relevant options for students with various acade mic needs, and adheres
consistently to reviews and approvals of programs, institutions have been
allowed to limit the study abroad options of their students.

I a m not sure that legal exa mination of a policy that entrusts trial-based
student participation in programs to establish approval for future students
would stand scrutiny. If a student wer e to return from a study abroad
program and sue the ho me institution because they reco mmended a
program in which the student feels wa s not acade mically sound, can the
ho me institution win the argument by s aying, “well, 15 previous students
said they loved the program and would highly recommend it to other
students”.

I reco mmend a list of questions an institution might consider when

reviewing and approving study abroad programs.

1. Do we allow students to participate in any study abroad progra m

they like, or do we individually approve student choices for study
abroad programs, or do we allow onl y participation in program on an
“approved list”?
2. Do we have criteria for reviewing and approving study abroad
programs?
If yes,
- is our criteria based on institutional distinctions and
characteristics, and/or general study abroad standards?

© 2 00 9, S an d i S mi th , G l ob al L ear n in g S em es t ers
 - what are/ were the professional qualifications of the person or
group that established these criteria?
- on what professional standards do we base our criteria
(exa mples: ht t p: / / gl obal ed. u s/ saf et i / audi t chkl st . ht ml
ht t p: / / www. f orum ea. org/ docum ent s/ F orum EASt andard sG o odPrct March 20
08. pdf
ht t ps: / / www. i e sabr oad. or g/ I ES/ Adv i sors_ and _F acul t y/ i esMap. ht m l )?
- how often are the criteria reviewed and approved?
- does the criteria take a comprehensive exa mination of a
program (acade mic, cultural, administrative, student support,
safety, etc.)?
- are the criteria approved, published, transparent, and
relevant?
- have we applied these criteria consistently in reviewing and
approving programs?
- have we denied approval to programs not meeting our criteria?
- have we denied approval to programs t hat do meet our
criteria?
- how often are progra ms reviewed?
- have programs ever changed approval status after subsequent
review if conditions have changed?
- is the criteria rated qualitatively and/or quantitatively?
If not,
- can we justify approving transfer credit toward a degree if we
do not have sufficient evidence of acade mic appropriateness?
- do we have parallel polices for transfer credit from other U. S.
institutions which may apply to study a broad?
- do we have parallel policies for accepting transfer credit or
degrees fro m foreign institutions when we enroll international
students?
3. W hat justification do we have for denying approval of certain
programs?
4. Do we have a broad portfolio of approved study abroad options to
meet the needs of various student char acteristics (ma jor, language,
upper/lower division, geography, progra m style, urban vs.
co mmunity based, immersion vs. intercultural adaptability, etc.)?
5. Do we have a published, transparent, and supported process for
students to petition for other relevant study abroad experiences?
6. Does our institution have any “special relationship” duty to review
study abroad programs beyond acade mic criteria?
7. Do we ma ke it mandatory or elective for students to provide us with
evaluations of study abroad programs after they co mplete a
program?
8. Is the data collected from student evaluations utilized in a
meaningful way?

© 2 00 9, S an d i S mi th , G l ob al L ear n in g S em es t ers
 9. Does our institution have funding available for professional staff to
conduct “due diligence” site visits of progra ms (for initial review and
for continued approval)?
10. Does our institution have a standardized and transparent
process for site visits and reviews?
11. Are there occasions that a specific progra m ma y be approved
for one student, but not for another?
12. Do we utilize professional resources such as NAFSA
(www.nafsa.org) and the Foru m on Ed ucation Abroad
(www.foru mea.org) to establish our study abroad professionalism?

W hy are most U.S. institutions not giving the sa me level of professional

review to international education as they would to any acade mic
depart ment on ca mpus? W ould you ask the wife of the History
Depart ment Chair to review, approve a nd advise pre-vet students about
going to Vet school? W ould you expect the secretary in the biology
depart ment to be advising students about financial aid? W ould you allow
an aging and retiring philosophy professor to do facilities inspections
ensuring the safety of students and e mployees? Not unless he/she was
otherwise over whel mingly qualified to do so. So why do institutions allow
secretaries and faculty wives to advise students about study abroad? W e
often find the most well-meaning and engaged staff advising students
about study abroad. Ho wever, unfortu nately for students, we also find
overwhel mingly those advising students about study abroad are in no way
professionally qualified to do so.

As we see support for study abroad more co mmonly espoused in

institutional dogma, unfortunately man y institutions are putting the cart
before the horse with internationalization. They begin to encourage
students to study abroad before the institution has built a foundation and
infrastructure for study abroad. W e see internationalization efforts rallied
by a fe w well-meaning and passionate staff and/or faculty, but the vague
project is then dropped into the hands of people who love travel, but may
not have the professional qualifications to build an effective study abroad
strategy. Unfortunately, it is not only those institutions new to study
abroad that are not utilizing appropriate standards for advising students
about relevant and meaningful international experiences.

Thus, I encourage every U.S. institution of higher education to convene

an audit of study abroad policies and procedures to ensure that your
students will not experience capricious, ill-informed, and/or irrelevant
obstacles to participation in quality international academic progra ms.

© 2 00 9, S an d i S mi th , G l ob al L ear n in g S em es t ers