Scotland’s U. of St. Andrews Will Review Ties to Syrian Government

April 28, 2011, 2:37 pm

The ripple effect of unrest in the Arab world is once again being felt in British higher education, where the University of St. Andrews will review the work done by its Centre for Syrian Studies, which received financing from the Syrian government, The Guardian reports. The Syrian government in recent weeks has engaged in a brutal crackdown of political activists in the country. The center’s board of advisers includes the British-based father-in-law of Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, who studied in Britain, and Syria’s ambassador to Britain. Last month the director of the London School of Economics and Political Science stepped down over his institution’s links with the Libyan government. As events in the Arab world have continued to unfold, with the leadership of several countries moving to brutally repress dissent, questions have continued to be raised about possible connections between higher-education institutions and those governments.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

E-mail

sallycv

This is a topic that some of us working on internationalization from the system perspective spend a lot of time
contemplating, but about which little has been written or presented
publically. I applaud our colleagues for launching the discussion in this
forum. For system level actors, the balance between
facilitating the engagement of the individual campus with overseas partners and
impeding the one-on-one bilateral collaboration is one we struggle with
regularly. It is essential that all of us who are charged with a system
level international role regularly examine our efforts through the lens of this
challenge.

At the State University of New York, Office of Global
Affairs, we discuss among ourselves and with our colleagues who represent the
international offices of the 64 constituent institutions that comprise SUNY, what contributions are most effectively made to internationalization at
the system level that are unique in nature or bring value not found in
single-institution efforts – and what activities are best left to individual
institutions to explore independently. We very much share the concern
conveyed by Professors Kinser and Lane, our SUNY colleagues, that each
institution be able to participate in the international sphere in the ways that
are most meaningful and beneficial to its unique mission.

Without a doubt, in order for a system international office
to be effective, a delicate balance needs to be struck between responsible
quality assurance and respect for unique institutional mission, between
facilitating program development and replacing or superseding individual campus
program development efforts. We certainly don’t see this as a
mission accomplished in our institution, but rather as a daily challenge.  Here
are some of the ways that we think a system effort can add value without
diminishing individual campus efforts:

·
Provide structures and services that facilitate
individual campus internationalization
·
Provide quality assurance mechanisms to protect
the interests of students and safeguard the reputation of the university in its
activities outside the U.S.

·
Offer professional development and networking
opportunities to campus personnel in the various professions related to
internationalization (ISSS, study abroad, recruitment, admissions, among
others)

·
Management of consortia of campuses for specific
international activities

·
Management of overseas offices for support of campus
engagement in specific regions