Internationalization of the curriculum provides challenges and opportunities for academic staff and institutions. This article reports on research undertaken in 2010-2011, which engaged academic staff in different disciplines and universities in the process of exploring and making explicit the meaning of internationalization of the curriculum in their disciplines. One of the outcomes of the research was a five-stage model of the process of internationalization of the curriculum. A critical part of the process involved small groups of staff discussing existing paradigms within their disciplines, questioning “what we believe” in relation to the curriculum and student learning and imagining and negotiating new possibilities. The article argues that internationalization of the curriculum should be a planned, developmental, and cyclical process and that employing the imagination is an essential part of the process of internationalization of the curriculum in any discipline.
BarnettR.CoateK. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Maidenhead, UK: MacGraw-Hill.
2.
BarrieS. (2006). Understanding what we mean by the generic attributes of graduates. Higher Education, 51, 215-241.
3.
BartellM. (2003). Internationalisation of universities: A university culture-based framework. Higher Education, 45(1) 43-70.
4.
BecherT.TrowlerP. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of the disciplines. Buckingham, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
5.
BennetJ. (2008). On becoming a global soul: A path to engagement during study abroad. In SavickiV (Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation (pp. 13-31). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
6.
BreitR.ObijioforL.FitzgeraldR. (2013). Internationalisation as de-Westernisation of the curriculum: The case of journalism at an Australian university. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(2), 119-135.
7.
ChildressL. (2010). The twenty-first century university: Developing faculty engagement in internationalization. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
8.
CliffordV. (2009). Engaging the disciplines in internationalising the curriculum. International Journal for Academic Development, 14(2), 133-143.
9.
Egron-PolakE.HudsonR. (2010). IAU 3rd Global Survey Report: Internationalisation of higher education: Global trends, regional perspectives. Paris, France: International Association of Universities.
10.
FitchK. (2012). Industry perceptions of intercultural competence in Singapore and Perth. Public Relations Review, 38, 609-618.
11.
FitchK. (2013). A disciplinary perspective: The internationalisation of Australian public relations education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(2), 136-147.
12.
FitchK.DesaiR. (2012). Developing global practitioners: Addressing industry expectations of intercultural competence in public relations graduates in Singapore and Perth. Journal of International Communication, 18(1), 63-78.
GoodsonI. (1995). The making of curriculum: Collected essays. London, UK: Falmer.
15.
GreenW.WhitsedC. (2013). Reflections on an alternative approach to continuing professional learning for internationalisation of the curriculum across disciplines. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(2), 148-164.
16.
HudzikJ. (2004). Why internationalise NASULGC institutions? Challenge and opportunity. Association of Public and Land Grant Universities, Retrieved from http://www.aplu.org/NetCommunity/Document.Doc?id=38
17.
JonesE.KillickD. (2007). Internationalisation of the curriculum. In JonesE.BrownS (Eds.), Internationalising higher education (pp. 109-119). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
18.
JonesE.KillickD. (2013). Graduate attributes and the internationalized curriculum: Embedding a global outlook in disciplinary learning outcomes. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(2), 165-182.
19.
KnightJ. (2006). Internationalisation of higher education: New directions, new challenges 2005 IAU Global Survey Report. Paris, France: International Association of Universities.
20.
KuhnT. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions (50th Anniversary ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
21.
LeaskB. (2008). Teaching for learning in transnational courses and programs. In DunnL.WallaceM. (Eds.), Transnational teaching and learning (pp.120-132). Melbourne: Routledge.
22.
LeaskB. (2009). Using formal and informal curricula to improve interactions between home and international students. Journal of Studies in International Education, 13, 205-221.
23.
LeaskB.BeelenJ. (2010). Enhancing the engagement of academic staff in international education. In Proceedings of a joint IEAA-EAIE Symposium (pp. 28-40). Melbourne: International Education Association of Australia.
24.
LeaskB.BridgeC. (2013). Comparing internationalisation of the curriculum across the disciplines: theoretical and practical perspectives. Compare: a journal of comparative and international education Special Issue: Contemporary issues on the internationalisation of higher education: critical and comparative perspectives, 43(1), 79-101.
25.
LewinK. (1952). Group decision and social change. In SwansonG. E.NewcombT. M.HartleyE. L. (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 197-211). New York, NY: Henry Holt.
26.
NormanR. (2000, June4-6). Cultivating imagination in adult education. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Adult Education Research Conference, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
27.
NussbaumM. (2010). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanitiesPrinceton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28.
ReasonR. (1998). Three approaches to participative inquiry. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative research (pp. 261-291). London, UK: Sage.
29.
RhoadsR.SzelényiK. (2011). Global citizenship and the university: Advancing social life and relations in an interdependent world. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
SandersonG. (2008). A foundation for the internationalisation of the academic self. Journal of Studies in International Education, 12, 276-307.
32.
StakeR. (1994). Case studies. In DenzinNLincolnY (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 236-247). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
StohlM. (2007). We have met the enemy and he is us: The role of the faculty in the internationlization of higher education in the coming decade. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11, 359-372.
34.
TurnerY.RobsonS. (2008). Internationalising the university. London, UK: Continuum.
