International Internships for American Undergraduates...

International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(17): 242-263 (2010)

CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934

© InternationalJournal.org

242

International Internships for American Undergraduates: Assessment and Accreditation Challenges

Ruth M. Ediger, Seattle Pacific University, United States Kathleen Braden, Seattle Pacific University, United States

Abstract: The increasing numbers of students from United States higher education institutions

who choose to study abroad (262,416 in the 2007-08 academic year according to the Institute for

International Education of Students sponsored by U.S. Department of State) raise questions of

assessment of learning objectives and accreditation of programs. The popularity of internships

as part of the study abroad experience raises even further complications on oversight and

assessment. Two educators with experience in academic assessment, professional accreditation,

evaluation of exchange programs, and supervision of co-curricular educational programs discuss

challenges for international internships at the undergraduate level. A case study is briefly

presented on the development, approval process, and assessment of the new Guatemala Term

study and internship abroad program at Seattle Pacific University.

Keywords: Undergraduate, international, internship, assessment

Introduction A “perfect storm” of both opportunities and challenges appears to be approaching for American

undergraduates who want to experience internships in an international setting. Study abroad is an

increasingly popular option for students and the Institute for International Education in their

2009 “Open Doors” report notes that there was an 8.5% increase of U.S. students participating in

the 2007-08 academic year over the previous period (Institute for international Education, 2009).

Even students with fewer resources are able to take advantage of short-term programs, which

now take up 56.3% of study abroad trips (defined as eight weeks or less). Europe remains the

most popular object-destination, but China and India are showing fast-growing popularity.

Meanwhile, the inclusion of academic internships as part of undergraduate education is also

showing an upsurge. In 2008, the National Association of Colleges and Employers reported that

50% of graduating students had experienced internships, whereas the number was 35% in 1992

(Greenhouse, 2010).

Finally, a culture of combining travel with work experiences, often at the unpaid, volunteer

level, seems emergent among college-age students, many of whom have experienced “service

learning” trips in high school or associated with church activities. The term Voluntourism is

becoming prominent as an increasingly popular form of travel. The desire that travelers may

contribute to local economies and well-being by visiting a region indicates that a portion of the


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


243

public is not only interested in traveling internationally, but doing so in a socially-responsible

manner.

The convergence of these trends indicates that more students are interested in combining

traditional study abroad with an internship and many schools are offering internship credits as

part of international education (see Verweijen, 2001). The benefits for students’ education may

be significant, but we are interested in examining challenges to international internships, both in

terms of ensuring academic objectives are met (assessment) and accountability for programs

(accreditation).

Two recent events suggest that a cautious examination of these challenges is warranted. First, in

2007, the University of Washington was put in the press spotlight when a study abroad program

in Ghana raised questions about short-term, faculty-led trips that might be insufficiently

supervised by administrators who know the field of international education. The five-week

program in Northern Ghana was cut short and students evacuated when there were serious

complaints about lack of preparation and poor quality academic components. The University of

Washington has since adopted stricter guidelines (see Fischer, 2007). The second event was a

decision by the United States Department of Labor in 2010 to increase enforcement against

unpaid internships that violate minimum wage laws. The fear is that, especially in the recession

climate, unpaid student interns will displace paid employees and be engaged in work that is not

essential to their education or have an academic component (Greenhouse, 2010). This new

scrutiny creates issues within the United States due to national laws, but also raises questions

about internships in foreign settings for U.S. students.

Defining Concepts For purposes of this paper, we are limiting our discussion to internships for undergraduates and

focusing on those related to arts and sciences disciplines, as opposed to professional or technical

internships. But how do we define an internship, particularly versus service learning or

practicum?

At Seattle Pacific University, the Center for Career and Calling defines internship as a work

experience that integrates practical experience in the workplace with reflection, research, and

other academic work. It is a planned, structured, and supervised experience that enables students

to gain career related work experience before graduating. But we authors have adopted here a

modified version of the definition used by Ohio State University: An internship is an opportunity

to integrate career related experience into an undergraduate education by participating in work

that is complementary to the classroom and that is supervised both by an on-site mentor and an

academic instructor.

We differentiate internships from service learning in that the internships involve “a form of

experiential education in which students engage in activities that address human and community

needs together with structured opportunities intentionally designed to promote student learning

and development” (Sternberger, et al, 2005, p. 77, quoting Barbara Jacoby). Likewise, we do not


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


244

include in our internship definition a practicum, which is experiential education activities related

to a specific course and often related to professional training.

We argue here that what makes the internship experience special is its marriage of academic,

direct educational pursuit with work experience. Thus, internships have an evaluative function

with respect to learning outcomes, similar to a class.1 A recent article in the newspaper USA

Today indicated that international internships are becoming increasingly in demand by college

students.” Over the past three years, colleges have on average seen a 6% increase in the number

of students doing international internships, according to a 39-college survey in March by the

National Society for Experiential Education, an association of campus internship coordinators.

And the Institute for the International Education of Students says 25% of its 5,000 annual study-

abroad participants now do an internship component, up from 17% in the 1980s and 21% in the

1990s” (MacDonald, 2007).

Internships done as part of a study abroad program bring strong benefits to students, according to

Ruth Verweijen in a 2001 study on American students in Austria for the School of International

Training. She notes that students who engage in internships must go outside the “American

ghetto” of students studying abroad and truly into the host country community. Greater demands,

and therefore learning opportunities, are made on students in terms of language acquisition and

cross-cultural competencies.

But Verweijen (2001) also notes that greater complexities and stresses are evident and

worthwhile international internships put a stronger demand on program managers than a

classroom based study abroad program would do. She notes: “All the tasks involved, from

establishing contacts and administering the application process to conducting regular meetings

and evaluating individual assignments as well as the entire internship, are time-intensive” (p. 44).

We suggest in Table 1 a summary of both the benefits and challenges of arranging internships

abroad for American undergraduates.

Table 1: Benefits and Challenges of International Internships for U.S. Undergraduates Dimension of Experience Benefit Challenge

multicultural education Increased exposure to host culture need to properly prepare and orient

students

multicultural education increased exposure to various socioeconomic

groups in host country

students may not be prepared for

difficult material circumstances

personal skills increased opportunity for student to become

independent and more resourceful

demands emotional maturity in part of

students beyond more controlled

classroom setting;

liability and risk factors need

assessment-host country may have

different legal and cultural norms

personal skills acquisition of new skill set on the job communication on expectations with

host country employer

language acquisition potential increase of use of host country

language

students may be under-prepared on

language

1 A useful source for comparing various student experiences, such as internships, co-ops, practicum, and externships

may be found at the National Association of Colleges and Employers website: http://www.naceweb.org/.

http://www.naceweb.org/


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


245

post experience debriefing help students process learning from internship may be disequilibrium upon return if

insufficient debriefng

length of internship high quality even short-term internship

experiences may provide long-lasting

educational benefits

short-term study abroad internships may

be surface-level “volunteer” experiences

only; or need to work with host country

employer on semester-long internship

preparation

global interdependence improved student exposure to global issues;

impact on student attitudes (less insular) carried

over to U.S. workplace

need to help students process increased

social competency on global

interdependence upon return

Furthermore, international internships may be subject to the same dichotomies as internships at

the domestic level: how much of the experience is academic and therefore requiring close

supervision by a faculty member and how much is apprenticeship, with the learning taking place

through on-the-job activities? In the case of American students overseas, Vereijen’s (2001)

study of internships in Austria suggested that the following components are necessary to make

the internship successful:

• Timing and proper placement

• Continuity of partnerships

• Realistic student expectations

• Communication with internship partners

• Established evaluation procedures

Because the last point is especially pertinent to our paper, we now turn to the subject of assessing

international internships.

Assessment of International Internships for American

Students Similar to traditional academic programs, it can be said that assessing international internship

programs has two levels of assessment. The most basic level involves assessing the students; are

the students meeting the learning objectives of the program? For this “a well-constructed

assessment program should make clear to students what they can expect and what we can expect

from them” (Gillespie, 2002). The next level is assessment of the program itself. For this the

Council for Higher Education Accreditation (Council for Higher Education Accreditation, 2001)

highlights the challenges of working internationally when they emphasize in their Principles for

United States Accreditors Working Internationally: Accreditation of Non-United States

Institutions and Programs that communication of quality expectations be clear, thorough, and

culturally sensitive and involve all parties, US institutions, accrediting bodies, non-US

institutions and foreign programs. Is the international internship program meeting the academic

standards of the university where the student is attending?

Currently much of the data pertaining to international programs focuses either on study abroad

programs or on international service learning opportunities (the vast majority of these are

medical or educational). In this discussion the key questions then become “How might

assessment of international internships compare with the assessment of more traditional study


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


246

abroad programs?” and “How might assessment of international internships compare with

international service learning assessment?” In other words, in what ways can assessing

international internships simply follow the best practices laid down in the aforementioned areas

and where might international internship assessment need to break new ground? In Table 2 we

summarize the similarities and differences that study abroad programs and service learning have

with international internships at both the level of student assessment and the level of program

assessment.

Table 2: Comparing International Internship Assessment with the Assessment of Traditional

Study Abroad and International Service Learning

“How might assessment of

international internships compare with

the assessment of more traditional

study abroad programs?”

“How might assessment of

international internships compare with

international service learning

assessment?”

Are the students

meeting the learning

objectives of the

program?

Similarities: Many instruments and

techniques transferable

Differences: Internships involve more

than foreign culture encounter; also

need to assess learning resulting from

“on the job” training

Similarities: Where there are outside

disciplinary standards, internships can

compare with service learning

Differences: Standards vary wildly if

they exist at all for internships.

Is the international

internship program

meeting the academic

standards of the

university where the

student is attending?

Similarities: Challenges regarding

different foreign academic standards

Differences: In addition to potentially

different academic standards the

culture of the internship site

workplace may also be significantly

different beyond cultural differences.

Similarities: Service learning can

meet larger community needs.

Differences: Internships are designed

to be more focused on student job

experience rather than community

development.

There are numerous studies that show how one can successfully measure whether students are

meeting the learning objectives of the study abroad program. For example, Lewis and

Niesenbaum (2005) used an online survey of past participants in order to determine if the

learning objectives were being met while Poole and Davis (2006) employed the concept mapping

technique because it allowed for the use of qualitative and quantitative research designs

simultaneously. In contrast McLeod and Wainwright (2009) utilized social learning theory in

order to focus on psychological constructs instead of the traditional study-abroad related

outcomes. It is also not uncommon for researchers to use several instruments to tease out

multiple outcomes. For example, Rexeisen and Al-Khatib (2009) use three different instruments

to measure the impact of their study abroad program on the students’ ethical reasoning,

intercultural development, and environmental attitudes.

Of course if one is focusing on the “foreign culture encounter” aspect of the international

internship then the methods listed above can aid in assessing the student’s learning outcomes.


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


247

But they fall short when the researcher wants to determine if the “on the job training” learning

objectives are being met. This part of assessing student learning can be found in the research on

assessing service learning.

In their essay Sternberger, et al. (2005) highlight several model approaches for service learning

and found that inevitably best practices included one key assumption and two essential

components: reciprocity and reflection. First they suggest that a successful international service

learning program first begins by determining to meet the needs of the community as defined by

the community. Reciprocity then entails both students and community members acting

simultaneously as teachers and learners. This fosters mutual respect and everyone gets the

opportunity to change in the process. Finally, the second component, student reflection, was

deemed essential to connect the practical aspects of the service-learning with the student’s

academic experience. Often this involved the student keeping a journal or field notes. Sometimes

these were shared among the group during the experience and sometimes the student might be

asked to participate in an on-campus public presentation after the experience was over.2

Where the assessment of international internships can differ significantly is in the level of

academic rigor demanded by faculty of the student intern. Even on our own campus of Seattle

Pacific University the assessment of students on domestic internships differs across schools,

from department to department, and even among faculty in the same department. This

inconsistency only increases with the international internships that our students pursue. Of

course, some of this difference is to be expected when considering schools and departments that

have outside accrediting bodies such as nursing. Understandably it is in the disciplines where

there are no specific external internship standards that there is the most variation.

“To go into a workplace with limited language ability, and when you really don’t understand the

culture all that much, is pretty risky relative to taking an internship in the U.S.” according to

Mary Dwyer, of the Institute for the International Education of Students (as quoted in

MacDonald, 2007). Not only is the situation risky it compounds the difficulty of meaningful

assessment of student performance on the internship site. Add to that uneven academic demands

by faculty and you have one of the more significant challenges for assessing student learning

outcomes on international internships.

Gillespie (2002) hit upon a significant challenge to offering study abroad through foreign

institutions, specifically; do we accept the credits and grades from the foreign institution as the

equivalent of credits and grades as given by the home institution? This challenge can be

amplified for the international internship program in countries where students may have limited

language skills, the foreign organizations may not have meaningful work for the students, the

culture is not familiar with the idea of gaining work experience through part-time or short-term

internships, and the work environment on the foreign internship site may be influenced by a local

2 The idea of having students keep some form of journal of their experience and do a presentation of their experience

once back on campus was widespread throughout the literature both for study abroad and service learning programs.

See, for example, Sternberger, et al, (2005).


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


248

culture that allows for workplace behaviors (such as what in the US we might call sexual

harassment) that would be unacceptable on a job site in the US (MacDonald, 2007).

International service learning tends to have a couple of key advantages over international

internships in that service learning programs can offer some type of service needed by a

community, such as health services, teaching English, etc. and service learning often involves a

group experience (Sternberger, et al, 2005). Although the internship might be with an

organization focused on community development, the ultimate goal of the internship is to give

the student “on the job” training in a work environment and the student is often working “alone”

in the workplace apart from others in the group. Of course this “solitary” experience can also be

advantageous for learning but assessment can be more difficult.

Internship programs whether foreign or domestic struggle with questions such as who will

evaluate the student on the internship site and how? How is international internship supervision

different from domestic supervision? What is the faculty or university role in assessing the

workplace site? In a move to try and answer some of these questions we now turn to the process

of accreditation.

Accountability for Quality: the Process of Accrediting International Internships In 2006, then Secretary of the Department of Education for the United States federal

government, Margaret Spellings, held an Accreditation Forum in Washington D.C. after a

national commission on higher education had raised issues about the value of peer-to-peer

accreditation oversight for the country’s colleges and universities. 3 The apparent drift of

Secretary Spellings toward a more centralized accountability system and the goal of more

uniform learning outcomes and performance measures created a pushback from accrediting

bodies in the United States and put a new spotlight on the role of such oversight in higher

education.

External review of higher education institutions in the U.S. is not a government function, but is

done by non-profit, decentralized bodies, although some national accreditation standards have

been developed for professional and technical training programs. There are eighty accrediting

organizations in the U.S., most operating at the regional level and most dependent on peer-to-

peer evaluation done by volunteer labor. Both internships and study abroad programs are subject

to such review and accountability, but what special issues are raised by international internships?

How are quality and achievement of learning outcomes measured?

The focus here is defined as internships that deal less with technical training, such as dental-

medical or business fields, and more with traditional liberal arts courses in humanities, arts,

social sciences, and natural sciences. One of the authors is familiar with the Northwest

Commission on Colleges and Universities, having been trained as an accreditor for three

3 the report entitled “A Test of Leadership” is available at

http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/pre-pub-report.pdf.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/pre-pub-report.pdf


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


249

standards under the guidelines and served on several site-visit teams. The NWCCU may be

typical of a U.S. regional accrediting organization and deals with Study Abroad programs under

a policy (2.4- see Appendix A) but this policy does not differentiate any special guidelines for

internships abroad; at best, guideline “L” states that institutions should have “clearly defined

criteria and policies for judging performance and assigning credit in accordance with standards

and practices of the home institution.” Commercially-sponsored study-travel programs are asked

to be thoroughly investigated by the home institution before credit is granted through this

mechanism. This caution may be noteworthy in cases where separate, commercial vendors are

providing the internship experience for students as part of a study abroad program otherwise

sponsored and directed by the U.S. based institution.

Currently, CHEA, or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, that works with the

various regional and specialty accrediting bodies, has issued a set of principles for accreditation

of non-U.S. institutions and programs (see Appendix B). In 1972, the Federation of Regional

Accrediting Commissions of Higher Education, a forerunner of CHEA, examined study abroad

programs and noted some of the issues involved in the evaluation process. For example, there

might be an inherent contradiction in the accreditation of overseas educational programs for

American students because by their very nature, such programs are designed to give the students

a very different experience than they would have received from the home institution. At the

same time, certain standards have to be kept and students could not be disadvantaged in progress

toward degrees (see Pfnister, 1972).

A further issue is the fact that many accrediting bodies do not have the resources to review

sufficiently well study abroad programs when they conduct evaluation of institutions. One 2004

survey suggested that eighty percent of accrediting bodies do not formally review study abroad

as part of regular accreditation oversight (Levanthall, 2005, p. 19).

In looking at the soundness of international internships, accreditors may be faced with issues as

follows:

Whose standards are met? The home institution? The host country’s standards? The

workplace internship site’s?

What is the process for ensuring compliance with academic objectives and evaluation?

How does the assessment loop get closed by the home institution? What is evidence of

modification of international internship after feedback is obtained?

How are logistical and safety issues to be assessed?

What are legal and regulatory dimensions and who has liability for serious problems or

risks associated with internships?

What is the responsibility for oversight of vendors in the accreditation process?

Finally, the issue of whether there should be universal, international accreditation standards and

bodies may also bear on the quality assurance for internships abroad.

Particularly since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, the potential hazards of

traveling abroad have been underscored for Americans, but at the same time, there is increased


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


250

demand for international education. Leaving the comparative safety of the “American ghettos”

of some study abroad programs to venture out into an internship in the host country provides

many benefits for a student’s education, as noted above, but it also raises a new set of safety,

liability, and training concerns.

Because of incidents occurring with American students abroad, often resulting in families

bringing liability cases before universities, the question of legal responsibility has been raised

more acutely (see, for example, Marklein, 2009 and Fischer, 2007). Martin Schultz (1992), in a

1992 article, examined the issues of liability associated with sociology internships for

universities. He points out the complexity of liability laws, which may vary state-to-state within

the U.S. on such diverse questions as transportation safety to and from internship sites and

insurance policies. He warns faculty against establishing a service learning program on his or her

own initiative due to potential personal liability. Placement of students in health care facilities,

criminal justice work sites, and medical facilities may require proper training and warning to

students of potential risks and safety factors.

In turn, the question is raised about assuming liability for students’ actions if they are improperly

or insufficiently screened. Some of this liability may be mitigated by contracts in which the

students assume risk, but this may not be sufficient. Also, questions have occurred about the

liability of the actual internship site.

All these legal complexities may be exacerbated by moving the internship to an international

setting and accrediting processes need to be aware of such issues, far beyond typical safety and

risk questions inherent in any study abroad program. A case in the 1990s brought to a head the

question of whether student signatures on waiver of liability were enough to protect the interests

of the home institution.4 Applying complex and unclear standards to internships involving third

party vendors may raise the stakes even further. The organization, International Internships, for

example, notes on its web page: “International Internships will help to source a suitable

internship site and will do its best to support you during your time there. However, the actual

working agreement is between you and your internship site and International Internships does

not take responsibility for anything that happens while you are at your internship site.” 5

In some cases, institutions require students to purchase separate liability insurance or have

limited liability insurance for internship work within the United States, but this does not

necessarily carry over to study abroad. In fact, in some cases, such as sports medicine

internships, American professional liability insurance may not be recognized.

All this suggests that internships as part of a study abroad program carry a separate and more

complex set of oversight issues than mere course-based study abroad and accrediting bodies need

4 Cathy Owens Swift and Russell Kent (1999) note the case of an American student studying in Japan who filed a

suit against Earlham College after she was sexually harassed and raped. The case, which was settled in 1998, raised

questions about whether U.S. colleges and universities have to apply sexual harassment programs and standards

globally (Guernsey, 1997). 5 See http://www.internationalinternships.com.au/conditions, accessed 6

th of May, 2010.

http://www.internationalinternships.com.au/conditions


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


251

to ask questions of home institutions to ascertain whether they have considered all these factors.

In its release in 2008 of principles for internships, the Council for the Advancement of Standards

in Higher Education noted:

“With the proliferation of internships at the local, state/provincial, national and international

levels, administrators and faculty have a special obligation not only to ensure the high quality of

the learning environment for their students, but also to assess the risk management and safety of

students in these settings. Both faculty and staff need to be sufficiently trained to appropriately

oversee an internship, to recognize the warning signs, and to take appropriate action.

Increasingly, institutions work with third party organizations to place, supervise, and evaluate

students because these organizations have dedicated personnel who are expert in these areas.

Yet, similar diligence must be paid to the evaluation of their performance as well (Council for

the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education, 2008, p. 2).”

The guidelines point out that internship sites need to be aware of national laws on the privacy of

student records and also deal with any constraints of human subject review provisions. In

addition, “IP staff members must disclose to appropriate authorities information judged to be of

an emergency nature, especially when the safety of the individual or others is involved, or when

otherwise required by institutional policy or relevant law” (Council for the Advancement of

Standards in Higher Education, 2008, p. 10). Fulfilling such requirements may be problematic

when the internship is conducted overseas under a different regime of laws.

Various organizations are now examining the possibility of international standards for study

abroad. For example, the Forum on Education Abroad (a large consortium of academic and

organizational partnerships dealing with study abroad) has released a report subsequent to action

by the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission in 2005 to encourage development

of standards. Pilot projects were initiated in 2006. The standards are not meant to create a

universal; “one-size-fits-all” model, but do address both in and out-of-classroom activities.

Among the standards are provisions to ensure proper resourcing of study abroad and attention to

health, safety, and security. 6 Standard 3c is of particular interest for the topic of this paper since

it deals with internships and field research. Table 2 shows the Forum’s standards.

Other organizations that have a role in suggesting accreditation and evaluation standards include

the National Committee for International Trade in Education and the Center for Quality

Assurance in International Education. The U.S. Department of Commerce sponsored a May,

2002 forum on the topic, with various agencies and organizations represented, including the

World Bank.

6 See The Forum on Education Abroad, Standards of Good Practice for Education Abroad, 2008,

http://www.forumea.org/standards-standards.cfm particularly p. 10 on internships.

http://www.forumea.org/standards-standards.cfm


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


252

Table 3: Standards for internships and field research outlined by the Forum on Education Abroad

(2008, 3.c p. 10)

Internships and Field Research: When offered for credit, internships and field

opportunities have appropriate academic and field supervision.

i. Are internships or field research opportunities closely related to one or more other courses in the

program or to the program’s location, language, or theme(s)?

ii. Are any preparatory or parallel courses (e.g. field research methods or contextual studies in relevant

disciplines) required and/or provided in order to facilitate academic credit for an internship or a field

research project?

iii. Do qualified academics or other professionals regularly monitor internships or field research

components, and regularly evaluate and grade student performance in them?

iv. Is a research paper or other substantial final assignment required in order for students to synthesize

learning in internships or field research projects so that they may obtain academic credit?

v. Is the award of credit for internships or field research projects consistent with home institution?

Standards for awarding such credit?

vi. Does the organization adhere to appropriate ethics in its research and in its guidelines for student

research projects, particularly involving human subjects?

A special word should be given about the question of quality assurance when third-party vendors

or for-profit organizations are providing the internship placement and oversight. Sometimes, a

student may find such a company by a web search and then request academic credit from a home

institution in the U.S. (such as Internship.com., Next Step Connections, or InternDirect). While

many programs are legitimate, well-planned, and link to colleges and universities as partners,

others may be dubious. Online informal reviews sometimes warn of so-called unpaid internship

abroad programs that left students without the experience they contracted for.7 Appendix C

shows a sample country-listing of volunteer and internship abroad reviews from the website

“Abroad Reviews.com” and illustrates the plethora of organizations now engaged in this activity.

Finally, large international multi-state organizations such as UNESCO (United Nations

Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) and OECD (Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development) have also issued quality guidelines for “cross-border” education.

Their report addresses the uneven nature of quality assurance standards:

“While in some countries the national frameworks for quality assurance, accreditation and the

recognition of qualifications take into account cross-border higher education, in many countries

they are still not geared to addressing the challenges of cross-border provision. Furthermore, the

lack of comprehensive frameworks for coordinating various initiatives at the international level,

together with the diversity and unevenness of the quality assurance and accreditation systems at

the national level, create gaps in the quality assurance of cross-border higher education, leaving

some cross-border higher education provision outside any framework of quality assurance and

accreditation. This makes students and other stakeholders more vulnerable to low-quality

7 For example, Abroad Reviews.com (http://abroadreviews.com/index.php) or Rate Your Study Abroad

(http://rateyourstudyabroad.com/)

http://abroadreviews.com/index.php

http://rateyourstudyabroad.com/


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


253

provision and disreputable providers of cross-border higher education (United Nations, 2005, p.

8).”

The UNESCO report continues to argue that the challenge is to ensure the benefits that derive

from international education while cooperating on monitoring of quality, particularly in terms of

government oversight role. The Council of Europe’s criteria adopted in 2001 for assessment of

foreign qualifications is suggested as a good model.

Proposing Study Abroad with Internship Component: A Brief Case Study

A proposal put forth in 2009-2010 at Seattle Pacific University (SPU) to begin a study abroad in

Guatemala for undergraduate students is illustrative of challenges faced for assessment and

accreditation. At the time of this writing, the program still awaits final university approval with

a hoped-for start fall quarter, 2011.

Students International (SI), a faith-based organization headquartered in Visalia, California, has

done community development work and supervision of service-learning projects in Guatemala

since 1995. To supplement a spring term program with Bethel University in Minnesota, SI

approached the administration and faculty in Arts and Sciences at Seattle Pacific University

about initiating a fall term program that would involve coursework, Spanish language training,

and placement of student interns at various sites under SI staff supervision. Four faculty from

liberal arts and business disciplines traveled to Guatemala July of 2009 to meet with the SI

people and view all the internship sites.

The program proposal submitted was a test case for the university’s newly constituted study

away committee. Four learning objectives were specified, including the plan to have students

acquire applied skills through the internship locations in the city of Antigua and the villages of

Magdalena and El Gorrión, a refugee resettlement site. Internship experiences proposed included

work in microfinance, schools, health and mental health clinics, water projects, a children’s art

school, web design, a hospital, and various community development sites. Resumes for Students

International staff who would be supervising students at the work sites were submitted with the

proposal. Faculty envisioned offering several courses in Guatemala intensively over a month in

September while students also took Spanish language training at the Centro Linguístico Maya

school in Antigua. Faculty would then return to begin fall quarter teaching in Seattle while

students remained to do internships until early December, living in pairs with local Guatemalan

families.

A challenge for assessment was envisioned to be oversight of internships from the Seattle end.

The proposal called for students to have a faculty supervisor at the university who would keep in

touch electronically, review student work, and coordinate with the Students International site

supervisor. A philosophical difference on this aspect of the proposal became evident as the

faculty and dean from the School of Business and Economics envisioned the internship

experience in Guatemala to be akin to a work apprenticeship, requiring minimal faculty oversight

at SPU, while the Arts and Sciences faculty envisioned an ongoing academic component


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


254

(journals, readings, and papers). This variation in approach has yet to be worked out

successfully by the university and illustrates a challenge in conducting internships abroad amid a

general lack of consensus about the exact definition of internship.

Another challenge of oversight- staff to deal with logistics coordination with SI, student safety,

and student adherence to university behavioral norms- was solved by factoring into the proposed

budget a part-time on-site coordinator who would be hired by the university. Finally, the cross-

cultural aspect of the program called for enhancement by a pre-trip preparatory process and a de-

briefing after the experience.

Seattle Pacific University’s challenges in making this program happen in a way conducive to

student learning and satisfying of university requirements and budget considerations illustrates

some of the issues with foreign internships discussed in this paper. At the same time, great

enthusiasm on the part of university students, faculty, and Students International staff for the

value of this program should ensure its final approval and launch.

Conclusions Evidence has been presented in this paper that study abroad and international internships are a

growing phenomenon as American undergraduates seek to extend their education to foreign

platforms. But the authors have also suggested complexities in both assessment of student

learning and issues with accreditation standards and educational philosophy. At the same time,

the advent of the internet as a source of informal reviews and the plethora of commercial vendors

offering international internships have meant that university personnel will probably be under

increasing pressure by students to count non-sanctioned programs as part of their credit work.

We conclude that the very value of internships in a foreign setting is also what makes them more

complicated to evaluate. By their nature, international internships place students in a cross-

cultural context, but university faculty and officials also are nudged beyond their comfort zone

and forced to regard norms as flexible. Academic institutions may see an increasing call for

international standards on accreditation of study abroad and internships, but we have qualms

about whether this solution can be effective. The whole point of experiential education in a

foreign setting implies that the richness of cultural diversity may be diminished by any attempt to

impose a “one-size fits all” criterion for measuring success. While some international standards

of educational attainment and workplace safety are to be expected, the authors hope that the

challenges we suggest in this paper do not result in a sanitized and diluted study abroad

experience for our students.


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


255

References Cited in Paper Abroadreviews.com. (2010) Retrieved 5

th of May, 2010 from http://www.abroadreviews.com.

Anderson, P.H., Leigh, L., Rexeisen, R. J., and Hubbard, A.C. (2006). Short-term study abroad

and intercultural sensitivity: A Pilot study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol.

30, 457-469.

Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education. (2008). Role of Internship

Programs. In partnership with National Society for Experiential Education. Retrieved 29th of April, 2010 from http://www.cas.edu/getpdf.cfm?PDF=E86CFB4D-0B9E-4853-

6D82720BE0779895.

Council for Higher Education Accreditation. (2001). Principles For United States Accreditors

Working Internationally: Accreditation Of Non-United States Institutions And Programs,

September, 2001.

Fischer, K. (2007). Ghana Fiasco Shows Risk of Faculty-Led Study Trips. Chronicle of Higher

Education, vol. 54, A1, A26.

the Forum on Education Abroad. (2008). Standards of Good Practice for Education Abroad.

Retrieved 6th

of May, 2010 from http://www.forumea.org/standards-standards.cfm.

Gillespie, J. (2002). Colleges Need Better Ways to Assess Study-Abroad Programs. Chronicle of

Higher Education, vol. 48, issue 43.

Greenhouse, S. (2010). Growth of Unpaid Internships May Be Illegal, Officials Say. Posted

April 2, 2010 on New York Times website www.nytimes.com. Retrieved 6th

of April, 2010 from

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/03/business/03intern.html.

Guernsey. L. (1997). A Lawsuit Raises Difficult Questions About Liability in Study-Abroad

Programs. The Chronicle of Higher Education, April 11, 1997, p. A37-38.

Institute for International Education. (2009). Open Doors 2009: Report on International

Educational Exchange. IEE Network. Retrieved 2nd

of May, 2010 from

http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=150651.

Levanthall, M. (2005). Strategies and the Center for Quality Assurance in International

Education, Education Abroad Standards of US Accrediting Agencies: A Survey. The Forum on

Education Abroad, February, 2005.

http://www.abroadreviews.com/

http://www.forumea.org/standards-standards.cfm

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/03/business/03intern.html

http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=150651


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


256

Lewis, T.L. & Niesenbaum, R.A. (2005). Extending the Stay: Using Community-Based Research

and Service Learning to Enhance Short-Term Study Abroad. Journal of Studies in International

Education, vol. 9, 251-264.

MacDonald, G.J. (2007). International Internships Propel Students Up Career Ladder. USA

Today, April 24, 9D.

Marklein, M.B. (2009). Students Studying Abroad Face Dangers with Little Oversight. USA

Today, 5/28/2009.

McLeod, M. & Wainwright, P. (2009). Researching the Study Abroad Experience. Journal of

Studies in International Education, vol. 13, 66-71.

Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities. (2002) Policy 2.4 on Study Abroad.

NWCCU Accreditation Standards. Retrieved 4th

of May, 2010 from

http://www.nwccu.org/index.htm

Pfnister, A.O. (1972). The Evaluation of Study Abroad Programs Under the Auspices of

American Colleges and Universities: U.S. Regional Accrediting Agencies Look at Study Abroad.

Occasional Papers in Higher Education, Number 2, December, University of Denver.

Poole, D.L. & Davis, T.S. (2006). Concept Mapping to Measure Outcomes in Study Abroad

Programs. Social Work Education, vol. 25, 61-77.

Rexeisen, R.J. & Al-Khatib, J. (2009). Assurance of Learning and Study Abroad: A Case Study.

Journal of Teaching in International Business, vol. 20, 192-207.

Salisbury, M.H., Umbach, P.D., Paulsen, M.B., and Pascarella, E.T. (2009). Going Global:

Understanding the Choice Process of the Intent to Study Abroad. Research in Higher Education,

vol. 50, 119-143.

Schultz, M. (1992). Internships in Sociology: Liability Issues and Risk Management Measures.

Teaching Sociology, vol. 20, 183-191.

Sternberger, L.G., Ford, K.A., and Hale, D.C. (2005). International Service-Learning: Integrating

Academics and Active Learning in the World. The Journal of Public Affairs, vol. 8, 75-96.

Swift, C.O. & Kent, R. (1999). Business School Internships: Legal Concerns. Journal of

Education for Business, vol. 75, 23-26.

United Nations. (2005). United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization,

Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education. Paris, France.

http://www.nwccu.org/index.htm


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


257

Verweijen, R. (2001). Internships Abroad As Parts of Study Abroad Programs: Potentials and

Pitfalls, Brattleboro, Vermont: School of International Training.

Other Helpful References

Alsup, R., & Egginton, E. (2001). Major Obstacles and best Practices in International

Educational Exchanges, National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges,

Washington D.C., November, 2001.

Blumenstyk, G., & McMurtie, B. (2000). Educators Lament a Corporate Takeover of

International Accreditor, Chronicle of Higher Education, vol. 47, p. A55-7

Council for Higher Education Accreditation. (2002). International Quality Review and

Accreditation: The Role of U.S. Recognized Accrediting Organizations, August, 2002.

Donnelly-Smith, L. (2009). Global Learning Through Short-Term Study Abroad, AAC&U Peer

Review, Fall, 2009, pp. 12-15.

Eaton, J. (2009). Council for Higher Education Accreditation, An Overview of U.S.

Accreditation, May, 2009.

Hadis, B.F. (2005). Gauging the impact of study abroad: how to overcome the limitations of a

single-cell design, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 30, No. 1, February

2005, pp. 3-19.

Long, S.O., Akande, Y.S., Purdy, R.W., and Nakano, K. (2010). Deepening Learning and

Inspiring Rigor: Bridging Academic and Experiential Learning Using a Host Country Approach

to a Study Tour, Journal of Studies in International Education, Vol. 14, No. 1, February, 2010,

pp. 89-111.

Moore, J.C. (2009). Colleges Want Students to Go Abroad. Tribune Business News, Washington

D.C., November 29, 2009.

Norris, E.M., & Gillespie, J. (2009). How Study Abroad Shapes Global Careers: Evidence From

the United States. Journal of Studies in International Education, vol. 13, 382-397.

Pfnister, A.O. (1972a). The Evaluation of Overseas Study Programs: Two Case Studies (Central

America and Spain). Occasional Papers in Higher Education, Number 1, 1972, University of

Denver.


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


258

Rubin, K. (2009). Globalizing General Education. International Educator, Sep/Oct, 2009,p. 20-

29.

Stubbs, N. Safety and security issues and their impact on the study abroad field, AIFS

Foundation Study Abroad: A 21st Century Perspective – Volume 1,

http://www.aifsfoundation.org/stubbs.asp.

http://www.aifsfoundation.org/stubbs.asp


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


259

Appendix A: Policy 2.4 on Study Abroad of Northwest

Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU)

Policy 2.4 Study Abroad Programs

Study abroad can be an important phase of undergraduate and graduate programs in American

colleges and universities. Carefully planned and administered, foreign study may add significant

dimensions to a student’s educational experience. As guidelines for institutions which conduct

programs of foreign study or whose students participate in such programs, the Northwest

Commission on Colleges and Universities urges that a study abroad program should:

a. be clearly related to the mission and goals of the sponsoring or participating institution;

b. have a well-defined rationale stating the specific nature and purposes of the program,

and be accurately represented in the institution’s catalog and all promotional literature;

c. provide educational experiences related to the institution’s curriculum;

d. be available to students carefully selected according to ability and interest;

e. have a carefully articulated policy regarding the availability of financial assistance

to students for programs required by the institution;

f. have clearly specified language proficiency requirements when appropriate to the

program and place of study, and clearly defined methods of testing proficiency prior to

acceptance into the program;

g. provide extensive information to intended participants, honestly and specifically

describing the program’s opportunities and limitations, indicating how and where

instruction will be given and the relationship to the foreign institution, describing

grading practices, identifying especially significant differences between a home

campus experience and what can be expected abroad, including information about

local living conditions and the extent of responsibility assumed by the program for

housing participants;

h. provide extensive orientation for participants prior to departure for, and on arrival in,

the foreign country with respect to the matters in item g above, augmented with more

detailed information and instruction related to the specific program;

i. have a resident director carefully selected on the basis of professional competence

and interest, appointed for a minimum of two years with provision for overlapping

replacement appointments to allow for transition, and assured of the same professional

rights, privileges, and consideration as colleagues on the home campus, with due

respect for the responsibilities of the overseas assignment;

j. provide counseling and supervisory services at the foreign center, with special

attention to problems peculiar to the location and nature of the program;

k. guarantee adequate basic reference materials to offset any limitations of local libraries

or inaccessibility to them;

l. include clearly defined criteria and policies for judging performance and assigning


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


260

credit in accordance with prevailing standards and practices at the home institution;

where several institutions are involved with a single overseas institution or in a

consortium, a common basis or determining grade equivalents is essential;

m. stipulate that students will ordinarily not receive credit for foreign study undertaken

without prior planning or approval on the students’ home campuses;

n. include provisions for regular follow-up studies on the individual and institutional

benefits derived from such programs; and

o. ensure fair reimbursement to participants if the program is not delivered as promised

for reasons within the sponsor’s control.

Cooperative arrangements are urged among American institutions seeking to provide foreign

study opportunities for their students. In many cases, resident directors, faculty, and facilities

could be shared, resulting in significant improvement in the efficiency and economy of the

operation. One basic reference collection, for example, supported and used by students from

several programs is likely to be more satisfactory than several separate ones.

Travel programs per sé or commercially sponsored “study-travel programs” should be

thoroughly investigated by an institution before granting degree credit for these activities. The

regional accrediting commissions do not evaluate these activities as foreign study programs of

member institutions, nor will they evaluate independent foreign study programs which are not

related to the curricula of specific colleges or universities in the United States.


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


261

Appendix B: Principles for Accreditation of non-U.S.

Institutions and Programs under CHEA Guidelines (CHEA, 2001)

Purpose

These principles are to advise Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) accrediting

organizations and to provide a framework for U.S. accreditors undertaking reviews of non-

United States (U.S.) institutions and programs operating in countries outside the U.S. They are

intended to strengthen the working relationship among U.S. accreditors and international quality

assurance agencies and encourage and enhance ongoing cooperation and communication.

Principle 1. Considerations and Actions for U.S. Accreditors When Determining to Undertake

Accreditation of Non-U.S. Institutions and Programs in Another Country

U.S. accreditors will:

• Assure that they have the organizational capacity to undertake an international review (e.g.,

language, trained staff and evaluators, budget, experience, basic information about the

country);

• Promulgate a clear statement of the scope of the accreditation and the use of U.S. accredited

status by an institution or program in another country, especially with regard to transfer of

credit and degree and qualifications equivalency;

• Assure clear understanding of the relationship of the U.S. review to any international

agreements that address accreditation and quality assurance;

• Clarify the relationship of international review activity to the priorities of the accrediting

organization;

• Communicate with other U.S. accreditors about international review activity.

Principle 2. Expectations for Conduct of U.S. Accreditation Reviews of Non-U.S. Institutions

and Programs in Another Country


• Inform, consult and cooperate with national quality assurance agencies in countries where

reviews are undertaken and seek information and guidance from these agencies;

• Communicate with chancellors, presidents and rectors and other college and university

officials at institutions where reviews are undertaken;

• Assure that U.S. staff and evaluators are adequately informed about higher education and

quality assurance in the countries in which they are conducting reviews to preclude the

appearance of cultural insensitivity;

• Communicate fully and clearly about costs and currencies associated with a review.

Principle 3. Accreditor Expectations of Providers of U.S. Online and Web-based Instruction

and Programs Exporting to Another Country


• Work closely with U.S. institutional and programmatic exporters of online and Web-based

education to assure quality as offerings are made available in a variety of countries,


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


262

especially when Web-based and online offerings involve instructional strategies that are

unfamiliar to the host country;

• Work with U.S. exporters to inform potential students of the language expectations and

requirements associated with online and Web-based courses, programs and degrees;

• Work with U.S. exporters to review language, literacy and study skill levels of the target

audience for online and Web-based offerings, preparing separate or supplemental material to

meet special needs if appropriate.

Principle 4. Responsibilities of U.S. Accreditors Working with Non-U.S. Institutions and

Programs to Students and Colleagues in Another Country


• Work with other countries to provide the most comprehensive and accurate information

available about U.S. exports to avoid “accreditation mills” and “diploma mills”;

• Develop, working with international colleagues, an information protocol that can be used to

assist countries in reviewing imports from the U.S.

(Approved by CHEA Board of Directors September 25, 2001)


CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934


263

Appendix C: Informal reviews list for International Internship organizations in Guatemala from abroadreviews.com (2010) Guatemala Volunteer, Internship and Study Abroad Program Reviews:

Name Internship Volunteer Study Abroad Overall Rating # of Reviews

AmeriSpan Yes Yes Yes NA 0

Boston University International Programs Yes

NA 0

Bridge Abroad

Yes NA 0

Cactus Volunteers Abroad

Yes

1 1

Cross-Cultural Solutions

Yes

8.7 17

Cultural Embrace Yes Yes

0 1

Don Quijote

Yes 9.4 5

ELIabroad Experiential Learning

International

Yes Yes Yes 7.5 21

Eurolingua Institute

Yes NA 0

GCN - Global Citizens Network

Yes

NA 0

Global Crossroad Yes Yes

6.8 52

Global Vision International (GVI)

Yes

8.7 31

Habitat for Humanity

Yes

9.1 9

Institute for Field Research Expeditions Yes Yes

7.2 5

Madventurer

Yes

6.9 7

Original Volunteers

Yes

8 1

Real Gap Yes Yes Yes 2.3 3

Rustic Volunteer and Travel

Yes

9.5 2

Spanish Abroad

Yes NA 0

Travellers Worldwide

Yes

7.3 4

United Planet

Yes

NA 0

Volunteer Adventures

Yes

8 1

Volunteers for International Partnership

Yes

NA 0

Volunteers for Peace

Yes

NA 0

Walking Tree Travel

Yes

NA 0

Worldwide Helpers

Yes

NA 0

Youth Challenge International

Yes

NA 0

http://abroadreviews.com/list.php?&loc=Guatemala&order=name%20ASC

http://abroadreviews.com/list.php?&loc=Guatemala&order=Internship%20DESC

http://abroadreviews.com/list.php?&loc=Guatemala&order=Volunteer%20DESC

http://abroadreviews.com/list.php?&loc=Guatemala&order=Study%20DESC

http://abroadreviews.com/list.php?&loc=Guatemala&order=ovr%20DESC

http://abroadreviews.com/list.php?&loc=Guatemala&order=nor%20DESC

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=amerispan

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=boston-university-international-programs

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=bridgeabroad

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=cactus

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=cross-cultural-solutions

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=cultural-embrace

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=don-quijote

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=eli-abroad

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=eli-abroad

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=eurolingua-institute

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=gcn

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=global-crossroads

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=global-vision

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=habitat-humanity

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=institute-for-field-research-expeditions

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=madventurer

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=original-volunteers

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=real-gap

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=rustic-volunteer-travel

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=spanish-abroad

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=travellers-worldwide

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=united-planet

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=volunteer-adventures

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=vip

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=vfp

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=walking-tree

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=worldwide-helpers

http://abroadreviews.com/listing.php?id=yci

International Internships for American Undergraduates...

Documents

Transcript of International Internships for American Undergraduates...