PIRE Physics program

Comments

Transcription

PIRE Physics program
Kristin Kutella
September 20, 2012
PIRE 2012 Conference
Inbound international students to the US
Business (21.5%)
Engineering (18.7%)
Math & CS (8.9%)
Physical & Life Sci. (8.8%)
Social Science (8.8%)
Fine & Applied Art (5.1%)
Health Professions (4.5%)
Intensive English (4.5%)
Education (2.3%)
Humanities (2.2%)
Agriculture (1.4%)
Other (10.5%)
Undeclared (2.8%)
Total students= 723,277
Outbound US students studying abroad
Social Sciences (22.3%)
Business & Mgmt (20.8%)
Humanities (12.1%)
Fine & Applied Arts (8.3%)
Physical & Life Sci. (7.5%)
Foreign Languages (5.8%)
Health Professions (4.7%)
Education (4.1%)
Engineering (3.9%)
Math & CS (1.5%)
Agriculture (1.3%)
Undeclared (3.2%)
Other (4.5%)
Total Students= 270,327
Inbound int’l students
AY10-11
Outbound study abroad
students AY09-10
STEM
(17%)
STEM
(41%)
Other
(59%)
Other
(83%)
“About 16% of all study abroad students
are in the STEM fields compared to about
26% of the general undergraduate
population.”
~IIE Study Abroad White Paper 5- March 2009
STEM= Science Technology Engineering Math
IIE Study Abroad White Paper 5- March 2009

STEM fields have more difficulty accommodating
new elements in already demanding programs


For example- introduction of foreign language
requirements
Faculty support
Faculty may not see value in sending students abroad
(esp. for fields with tightly focused technical skill set)
 Difficult to justify without pressure from employers or
gov’t agencies
 Accrediting agencies


Funding

Some believe that STEM field students would be more
hesitant to pay for an experience abroad when they
are accustomed to being paid for their work

General push for global competency in state-funded
institutions


By 2008, 22 states had passed legislation stressing importance
of international education
Faculty support

Exchange programs are faculty-driven


Collaboration, research, publication
Accrediting agencies
Some accrediting agencies have begun to incorporate “global
competence” in assessment criteria
 For example, ABET 2000 added: “the education necessary to
understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global &
societal context”


Funding
Scholarships & Grants are available
 Generally, students in STEM tend to fall in “underrepresented”
categories

 Race/Ethnic

Heritage
Caucasian students = 80.5%
 Gender

Female students = 64.2%
 Field

of Study
Social Sciences, Business + Humanities= 55%
 Location

Europe = 55%
 Term

8 weeks or less programs= 55%
Percentages are % of national population of study abroad students from
AY08-09
~Open Doors 2010
 Race/Ethnic
Heritage- varied
 Gender- high male population
 Field of Study- STEM field
 Location- Traditional location
 Term- summer, semester or academic year
 Language- German language exposure
 Program- Specifically related to students’
field of study & research component
 Funding
 PIRE
options are available
grant is very generous
 Experience
is worthwhile, even if complete
funding cannot be matched
 Is
it the case that science students need to
find funding sources to participate in great
numbers in study abroad or are there other
ways?
 How
do we best engage science faculty to
increase their involvement in study abroad
programs (aside from giving them research
funding)?

Similar documents