Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Globalization of a business school curriculum: the impact of short term study abroad on long term student learning
(USC Thesis Other)
Globalization of a business school curriculum: the impact of short term study abroad on long term student learning
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
1
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM:
THE
IMPACT
OF
SHORT
TERM
STUDY
ABROAD
ON
LONG
TERM
STUDENT
LEARNING
by
Suzanne
Strojny
A
Dissertation
Presented
to
the
FACULTY
OF
THE
USC
ROSSIER
SCHOOL
OF
EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY
OF
SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA
In
Partial
Fulfillment
of
the
Requirements
for
the
Degree
DOCTOR
OF
EDUCATION
December
2014
Copyright
2012
Suzanne
Strojny
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
2
Acknowledgments
First
and
foremost,
I
wish
to
thank
my
advisor,
Dr.
Mark
Robison,
without
whose
invaluable
insight,
patience
and
guidance,
I
would
not
have
been
able
to
complete
this
work.
I
also
wish
to
thank
Dr.
Sandra
Kaplan
for
her
inspirational
teaching
as
well
as
for
her
guidance,
support
and
feedback,
and
Dr.
Robert
Filback,
who
generously
and
graciously
stepped
in
to
give
fresh
insights.
Many
thanks
as
well
to
Dr.
Mike
Diamond
for
his
assistance
on
early
drafts.
On
a
personal
level,
I
wish
to
thank
my
family:
my
husband,
Mike,
who
has
given
me
so
much
support
throughout,
and
my
loving
children,
Martin
and
Margaret,
encouraged
me
greatly.
You
are
my
light.
Much
appreciation
and
love
goes,
of
course,
to
my
parents,
Bill
and
Judy
Strojny.
Thanks
as
well
to
the
remarkable
Dr.
Margaret
Steward,
whose
wisdom,
generous
heart,
and
wise
advice
is
always
greatly
appreciated
and
loved.
A
great
many
friends,
colleagues
and
fellow
students,
have
made
this
journey
a
delight.
In
particular,
I
would
like
to
mention
Dr.
John
Robinson
and
my
many
colleagues
at
Lincoln
High
School,
and
my
fellow
TEMS
cohort
members
for
timely
pep
talks.
I
must
also
thank
Ian
and
Noelle
Blakeslee
for
their
friendship
throughout.
Thank
you
for
listening
to
me.
Finally,
this
would
be
utterly
incomplete
without
mentioning
my
incredible
and
fabulous
students,
especially
my
former
students
at
Lincoln
High
School,
as
well
as
my
students
at
SAFA
and
Misbaah
school
in
Hyderabad,
India.
While
they
did
not
provide
any
ideas
for
this
dissertation,
they
are
wonderful
students
and
people,
whose
intelligence
and
spark
motivated
me
to
continue
studying
in
this
exciting
field.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
3
Table
of
Contents
Acknowledgments
2
Abstract
4
Chapter
One:
Introduction
5
Background
of
the
Problem
7
Statement
of
the
Problem
11
Purpose
of
the
Study
11
Research
Question
12
Significance
of
the
Study
13
Summary
14
Chapter
Two:
Literature
Review
15
Globalization
in
Higher
Education
16
Developing
Effective
Curriculum
in
a
Global
University
18
Determining
the
Goals
for
Learning
19
Experiential
Learning
and
Transformative
Learning
Theory
31
Chapter
Three:
Research
Methodology
48
Qualitative
Research
Orientation
49
Sample
and
Population
54
Instrumentation
56
The
Framework
58
Data
Collection
59
Data
Analysis
60
Validity
and
Reliability
62
Limitations
of
the
Research
Design
63
Chapter
Four:
Results
66
The
Population
Studied
66
Results
67
Conclusion
89
Chapter
Five:
Conclusions
And
Implications
92
Synthesis
of
Findings
92
Implications
for
Theory,
Policy,
and
Practice
95
Recommendations
for
Future
Research
105
Conclusion
106
References
109
Appendix
A:
Questions
asked
by
the
USC
Marshall
School
in
the
2010-‐2011
School
Year
GLP
and
LINC
Spring
2011
Post
–Trip
Survey
120
Appendix
B:
Matrix
for
Answering
Research
Questions
124
Appendix
C:
Questions
asked
by
Graduate
Student
in
the
Online
Survey
LINC
Follow-‐Up
Survey
126
Appendix
D:
Student
Survey
130
Appendix
E:
Additional
Tables
131
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
4
Abstract
While
a
great
deal
of
research
has
been
done
on
the
benefits
of
study
abroad
generally,
particularly
long-‐term
study
abroad,
far
less
has
been
done
on
the
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
on
student
learning.
This
qualitative
study
examines
the
long-‐term
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
by
surveying
students
two
years
after
they
return
from
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience.
The
researcher
found
that
(a)
students
retain
positive
memories
of
their
trip
two
years
later,
(b)
seemed
to
be
particularly
influenced
by
academic
relationships
developed
by
professors
on
the
trip,
as
well
as
by
other
personal
relationships,
and
(c)
had
difficulty
in
following
through
on
learning
goals
developed
as
result
of
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
without
additional
aid.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
5
CHAPTER
ONE:
INTRODUCTION
Globalization
and
internationalization
trends
in
higher
education
affect
a
wide
range
of
university
programs
and
activities
on
college
campuses.
One
popular
way
in
which
undergraduate
students
directly
engage
in
globalization
and
internationalization
is
through
study
abroad.
Students
are
studying
abroad
in
increasing
numbers,
although
less
than
10%
of
them
will
do
so
at
any
time
during
their
undergraduate
experience
(Institute
of
International
Education
[IIE],
2014).
In
the
late
1980s,
approximately
50,000
U.S.
students
traveled
abroad
each
year,
while,
in
2008-‐2009,
over
250,000
U.S.
students
participated
in
these
programs
(IIE,
2009).
In
2013,
the
number
increased
to
more
than
283,000
(IIE,
2014).
More
than
half
of
all
students
who
take
part
do
so
in
programs
that
are
less
than
eight
weeks
in
length
(IIE,
2009;
Rowan-‐Kenyon
&
Niehaus,
2011).
In
addition,
most
expansion
of
study
abroad
occurred
in
short-‐term
programs
(IIE,
2009).
Longer-‐term
programs
have
traditionally
been
valued
both
for
their
ability
to
engage
students
in
developing
new
knowledge
and
skills
(Ingraham
and
Peterson,
2004;
Martinsen,
2010)
as
well
as
new
attitudes
and
beliefs
in
areas
of
cross-‐cultural
competencies
(Black
&
Duhon,
2006).
While
existing
research
supports
the
effectiveness
of
long-‐
term
study
abroad
on
student
learning,
there
has
been
limited
research
into
the
effectiveness
of
short-‐term
experiences
(Donnelly-‐Smith,
2009),
and
the
research
that
has
been
conducted
had
mixed
results;
some
findings
indicate
the
possibility
for
rich
learning,
and
other
research
indicates
limited
value
(Jones,
S.,
Rowan-‐
Kenyon,
H.,
Ireland,
Niehaus,
&
Skendall,
2012;
Nam,
2011;
Rowan-‐Kenyon
&
Niehaus,
2011;
Zamondaris,
2013).
Issues
such
as
the
significance
of
the
design
of
a
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
6
particular
curriculum
or
the
influence
of
the
professor
on
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience
or
on
long-‐term
student
learning
have
not
been
explored.
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
recently
studied
the
impact
of
short-‐
term
study
abroad
experiences
on
longer-‐term
student
learning.
Specifically,
the
authors
examined
the
learning
of
eight
students
participating
in
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
program.
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus,
who
were
both
the
researchers
and
the
professors
leading
the
experience,
travelled
to
Prague,
in
the
Czech
Republic,
with
their
students.
The
professors
interviewed
the
students
before
the
trip,
again
immediately
after
the
trip’s
conclusion,
and,
finally,
one
year
later.
The
professors
analyzed
these
eight
students’
responses
using
a
theoretical
framework
of
transformative
learning
(Rowan-‐Kenyon
&
Niehaus,
2011).
Results
indicated
that
participation
in
additional
experiences
after
the
study
abroad
program
were
the
chief
determinant
of
whether
students
retained
the
knowledge
and
perspectives
learned
during
their
initial
experience
(Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus,
2011).
This
study
extended
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus’
work
by
studying
the
impact
of
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences
for
freshmen
provided
by
the
Marshall
School
of
Business
at
the
University
of
Southern
California
on
students’
longer-‐term
learning.
While
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
focused
on
in-‐
depth
interviews
of
students
they
travelled
with,
in
this
case,
a
survey
and
questionnaire
were
administered
to
participants
two
years
after
they
returned
from
their
short-‐term
trip.
The
present
study
extended
on
the
work
of
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
by
reaching
out
to
a
larger
number
of
students.
This
study
examined
existing
data
collected
by
the
Marshall
School,
and
looked
at
new
data
collected
in
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
7
the
form
of
surveys
and
a
questionnaire.
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
travelled
with
the
students
they
interviewed,
while,
in
the
present
study,
the
researcher
had
no
personal
connection
with
the
professors
or
the
course.
This
qualitative
study
examined
student
responses
to
learning
two
years
after
the
conclusion
of
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience.
Background
of
the
Problem
Currently,
globalization
is
one
of
the
phenomena
most
profoundly
sweeping
higher
education
(Wildavsky
2010),
as
it
is
often
viewed
as
a
key
to
the
success,
and
even
the
survival,
of
institutions
of
higher
education
(Wildavsky
2010).
Universities
responded
to
globalization
trends
in
a
variety
of
ways,
and
one
is
by
incorporating
international
experiences
throughout
the
undergraduate
curriculum.
In
particular,
globalization
is
often
considered
relevant
within
a
school
of
business
due
to
the
needs
of
students’
future
employers
(AACSB,
2010).
Globalization
refers
to
changes
that
occur
as
world
markets
attempt
to
rapidly
move
beyond
the
borders
of
the
nation-‐state
(Wildavsky,
2010).
In
a
globalized
world,
issues
of
knowledge,
research
and
development,
and
corporate
development
can
occur
not
only
within
the
same
company,
but
also
across
countries
(Wildavsky,
2010).
In
contrast
to
this
multi-‐national
approach
in
the
business
world,
in
the
United
States,
education
has
historically
been
viewed
as
a
primarily
local
concern
(Brock,
2011).
However,
from
the
K-‐12
through
the
university
level,
education
has
been
heavily
affected
by
globalization
(Boshamer
&
Brown,
2008).
Globalization
can
be
defined
as
“the
flow
of
technology,
economy,
knowledge,
people,
values
and
ideas....
across
borders.
Globalization
affects
each
country
in
a
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
8
different
way
due
to
each
nation’s
individual
history,
traditions,
cultures,
resources
and
priorities”
(Knight,
2006).
The
related
term,
internationalization,
is
frequently
used
at
the
university
level
in
addressing
issues
of
curriculum,
foreign
study
and
student
exchange
programs
(Knight).
International
study
abroad
programs
are
significant
and
growing:
according
to
a
1989
report
by
the
Institute
for
International
Education
(IIE),
during
the
1980s,
between
50,000
and
60,000
students
participated
each
year
in
international
study
abroad
programs.
By
2010,
that
number
had
increased
to
over
250,000
(IIE,
2010),
and
that
number
further
increased
to
over
283,000
in
2013
(IIE,
2013).
Many
universities
now
consider
awareness
of
global
issues
and
perspectives
an
important
learning
goal
for
students.
Particularly
in
business
education,
the
Association
to
Advance
Collegiate
Schools
of
Business
(AACSB,
2010)
requires
master’s
level
business
students
to
“understand
management
issues
from
a
global
perspective,”
and
concurrently
requires
colleges
and
universities
serving
those
students
to
“show
how
the
curriculum
.
.
.
demonstrates
a
global
perspective”
(AACSB,
2010).
The
AACSB
provided
new
accreditation
standards
for
business
schools
that
require
them
to,
“show
how
the
curriculum
across
the
dimensions
outlined
in
the
standard
demonstrates
a
global
perspective”
(AACSB
International,
2010).
In
addition,
undergraduate
business
programs
are
expected
to
address
the
global
economy
in
their
standards
(AACSB,
2010).
Perhaps
in
response,
47%
of
business
school
programs
surveyed
in
2009
reported
an
increased
emphasis
on
global
perspectives
(AACSB,
2010).
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
9
International
study
abroad
programs
are
one
important
means
of
pursuing
a
university’s
learning
goals
for
acquisition
of
global
perspectives.
This
study
sought
to
measure
some
of
those
learning
benefits,
particularly
those
that
occur
as
a
result
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
participation.
Short-‐term
study
abroad
is
generally
defined
as
a
study
abroad
program
that
is
less
than
eight
weeks
in
duration,
“usually
faculty-‐directed
and
sponsored
by
a
home
institution
or
consortium
(Nam,
2011,
p.
5;
Spencer
and
Tuma,
2002).
To
globalize
undergraduate
learning
experiences,
curricula
are
increasingly
redesigned
to
reflect
multiple
perspectives.
For
example,
there
is
emphasis
on
group
work
and
collaborative
assessments,
both
of
which
are
intended
to
engage
students
from
different
backgrounds
and
allow
for
multiple
views
of
knowledge.
Another
example
is
curriculum
that
includes
the
“pedagogies
of
encounter”
(Welikala,
2011,
p.
25).
In
this
type
of
globalized
curriculum,
the
students
engage
in
international
learning
experiences,
such
as
study
abroad,
that
incorporate
reflective
practices
and
assignments,
as
these
help
to
mediate
the
learning
experience
in
order
to
achieve
the
goals
and
outcomes
outlined
in
the
curriculum
(Welikala,
2011).
The
University
of
Southern
California
engaged
in
globalizing
many
of
its
students’
educational
experiences.
Every
school
within
the
university
provides
examples
on
its
website
of
global
and
international
opportunities.
In
addition,
there
are
majors
and
advanced
degrees
offered,
such
as
the
Master’s
in
Global
Health
(Keck
School
of
Medicine),
that
demonstrate
a
commitment
to
globalization
in
the
title.
In
particular,
the
business
school
offers
large
number
of
global
learning
experiences.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
10
The
Marshall
School
of
Business
offers
a
sequence
of
global
experiences
that
undergraduate
students
may
participate
in.
First,
there
is
the
freshman
year
spring-‐
semester
two-‐credit
Learning
in
International
Commerce
(LINC)
course,
subsidized
by
the
school,
that
is
the
focus
of
this
study.
Seventy-‐six
percent
of
the
school’s
freshmen
enrolled
in
this
course
during
the
Spring
2011
semester.
The
course
meets
eight
times
on
campus,
and
then
the
students
travel
together
overseas
to
engage
in
various
projects
relevant
to
the
discipline.
In
the
class,
students
examine
the
culture
and
economics
of
a
specific
country,
and
the
school
offered
ten
travel
locations
on
three
continents
in
the
spring
2011
semester.
After
studying
a
selected
country,
particularly
its
business
culture,
on
campus,
students
and
professors
travel
to
that
country
for
eight
to
ten
days.
While
in
the
host
country,
the
students
engage
in
an
intensive
study
of
economic
life
and
visit
with
a
wide
variety
of
organizations,
government
offices
and
corporations
relevant
to
international
commerce.
For
example,
students
might
visit
local
and
international
retail
chains,
banks,
embassy
offices,
or
production
facilities
and
interact
with
local
university
business
students.
At
the
conclusion
of
the
course,
the
class
meets
once
more
to
make
final
presentations.
In
short,
students
study,
and
then
travel
to,
a
specific
country
to
understand
the
impact
of
globalization
on
business
(LINC
Syllabus
2011,
p.
1).
Next,
students
may
apply
for
summer
internships
between
freshman
and
sophomore
year.
Summer
internships
through
the
business
school
are
offered
in
Spain,
Australia,
England,
Italy,
India,
and
Malaysia
(USC
Marshall
School
of
Business,
2014).
Honors
students
may
also
participate
in
internships
in
Beijing
and
Shanghai.
In
subsequent
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
11
years,
students
can
participate
in
an
additional
10-‐day
study
abroad
trip,
called
ExCEL,
or
study
at
a
variety
of
business
schools
overseas
for
a
semester.
Finally,
upper
level
students
can
take
business
electives
that
include
global
and
international
perspectives
on
business
(USC
Marshall
School
of
Business,
2014).
Statement
of
the
Problem
While
long-‐term
study
abroad
programs
are
associated
with
a
number
of
positive
student
outcomes,
including
increased
independence,
increased
cross-‐
cultural
sensitivity,
and
increases
in
areas
of
cognitive
complexity,
the
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
is
less
well
studied
(Black
and
Duhon
2006;
Ingraham
&
Peterson,
2004;
Rowan-‐Kenyon
&
Niehaus,
2011).
The
results
of
the
studies
were
mixed:
some
studies
showed
relatively
poor
acquisition
of
skills,
and
others
showed
a
more
positive
impact
(Jones,
S,
Rowan-‐Kenyon,
H.,
Ireland,
S.,
Niehaus,
E.,
&
Skendall,
K.C.,
2012;
Medina-‐Lopez-‐Portillo,
2004;
Nam,
2011;
Rowan-‐
Kenyon
and
Niehaus,
2011;
Zamondaris
2013).
Many
universities
expanded
their
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
in
order
to
meet
increased
demand
for
globalization
of
their
curricula
and
to
meet
changing
standards.
While
colleges
and
universities
heavily
invested
in
these
programs,
uncertainty
exists
around
whether
students
meet
the
learning
goals
set
forth
(Jones,
2012).
There
is
further
uncertainty
over
the
particular
elements
that
lead
to
more
or
less
successful
outcomes
in
student
learning.
Purpose
of
the
Study
The
purpose
of
this
study
was
to
examine
the
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
on
long-‐term
learning
in
undergraduates.
In
addition,
the
study
examined
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
12
the
potential
influence
of
certain
factors
on
the
achievement
of
long-‐term
student
learning
outcomes
for
short-‐term
study
abroad.
The
study
used
the
same
framework
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
utilized
in
their
previous
study
(2011).
This
study,
however,
expanded
the
time
period.
Whereas
the
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
examined
data
collected
one
year
after
return
from
the
trip,
this
study
looked
at
student
learning
results
two
years
after
return.
Increasing
the
time
between
the
initial
data
collection,
immediately
post-‐trip,
and
later
data
collection,
from
one
year
to
two
years,
provided
more
opportunities
to
examine
how
students
incorporated
different
aspects
of
learning
into
their
educational
and
future
career
plans.
Research
Question
Are
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
able
to
significantly
guide
development
of
perspectives
and
skills
in
undergraduate
students?
Sub-‐Question
(1)
What
meaning
do
students
make
of
their
participation
in
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience,
both
immediately
after
the
experience
and
two
years
later?
Sub-‐Question
(2)
How
do
students
attempt
to
integrate
this
meaning
into
their
lives?
Sub-‐Question
(3)
To
what
extent
do
students
follow
through
on
new
commitments
or
intentions
developed
as
a
result
of
program
participation?
In
order
to
answer
the
above
questions,
student
surveys
were
collected,
compared
and
analyzed
using
the
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
article
as
a
framework.
Student
attitudes
were
compared
between
their
return
from
the
LINC
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
13
and
GLP
course
trips
and
two
years
after
their
return.
This
was
done
in
order
to
better
understand
long-‐term
student
outcomes
and
the
transfer
of
student
knowledge
gained
through
short-‐term
study
abroad
to
subsequent
learning.
Using
this
framework,
student
beliefs
and
attitudes
two
years
later
were
examined.
Additionally,
in
looking
at
student
beliefs
and
attitudes
two
years
later,
the
researcher
sought
to
glean
factors
that
may
be
important
in
designing
an
effective
short-‐term
study
abroad
program.
Significance
of
the
Study
As
universities
seek
to
provide
thoughtful
and
sophisticated
ways
of
globalizing
their
curriculum,
one
method
to
emerge
is
providing
students
with
courses
that
center
around
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences.
More
than
half
of
all
students
participating
in
study-‐abroad
programs
do
so
in
short-‐term
programs
of
eight
weeks
or
fewer
(IIE
2009;
Rowan-‐Kenyon
&
Niehaus,
2011).
While
the
number
of
students
who
attend
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
increased
four-‐
fold
over
the
past
twenty
years
(IIE,
2009),
there
is
limited
data
that
considers
the
impact
of
this
curriculum
on
long-‐term
student
learning.
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
recently
sought
to
examine
this
in
a
limited,
qualitative
study
of
a
fewer
than
ten
students.
This
study
both
replicated
the
framework
of
questions
and
extended
that
study.
The
study
considered
the
same
questions
as
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011),
but
(a)
evaluated
data
that
covered
a
larger
number
of
students
and
(b)
considered
retention
of
student
learning
and
perspectives
over
a
longer
period
of
time.
This
study,
thus,
gathered
more
qualitative
data,
allowing
for
additional
analysis
and
results.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
14
Universities
and
colleges
work
to
position
themselves
globally,
to
provide
unique
learning
opportunities
for
students,
and
to
develop
global
mindsets
in
their
graduates.
Those
who
can
benefit
from
this
study
are
professors
and
other
professionals
working
at
institutions
of
higher
education
who
seek
both
to
maximize
the
potential
and
to
better
understand
the
limitations
of
such
a
course
and
learning
experience.
Implications
of
the
research
will
better
allow
universities
and
professors
to
design
curricula
in
such
ways
so
that
powerful
learning
occurs
and
that
opportunities
for
transformative
learning
are
maximized
for
student
participants.
Summary
There
is
limited
research
on
the
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
courses
on
student
learning.
Additionally,
there
is
a
relative
absence
of
literature
that
focuses
on
the
sustainability
and
long-‐term
results
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences.
In
a
recent
study,
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
interviewed
eight
students
in
an
in-‐depth,
qualitative
review.
They
knew
their
subjects
and
travelled
with
them,
which
made
them
uniquely
placed
to
evaluate
student
learning
during
the
trip,
but
which
may
also
have
biased
student
responses.
The
present
study
includes
an
anonymous
survey
collected
and
analyzed
by
a
researcher
who
did
not
travelled
with
the
students
in
question.
In
addition,
it
was
administered
to
a
larger
number
of
students,
and
student
learning
was
examined
over
a
longer
period
of
time.
Further
analysis
focused
on
the
goals
of
transformative
learning
as
adopted
in
the
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
study.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
15
CHAPTER
TWO:
LITERATURE
REVIEW
This
literature
review
explores
topics
relevant
to
the
globalization
of
curriculum
and
its
effect
on
student
learning.
It
examines
the
intersection
of
the
current
movement
towards
globalization
in
higher
education
and
undergraduate
curriculum
(Leask,
2008);
in
particular,
trends
in
globalization
in
higher
education
provide
background
(Altbach,
2010;
Wildavsky,
2010,).
Next,
learning
theory
as
it
relates
to
study
abroad
is
examined
(Waks,
2003).
In
particular,
transformative
learning
theory
(Mezirow,
2003),
and
intercultural
development
and
sensitivity
(Lopez-‐Portillo,
2004;
Olson,
2001;
Williams
2009)
are
important
topics
for
exploration
in
examining
study-‐abroad
programs.
After
reviewing
globalization,
curriculum
and
learning
theory,
this
chapter
includes
a
two-‐part
discussion
of
the
empirical
literature
connected
with
study
abroad.
First,
a
general
overview
of
the
literature
on
study
abroad
generally
is
provided,
including
both
long
and
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences.
The
benefits
and
goals
of
study
abroad
as
a
part
of
the
undergraduate
experience
and
curriculum
will
be
reviewed
(Ingraham
and
Peterson,
2004).
Next,
the
limited
but
quickly
emerging
literature
connected
with
short-‐term
study
abroad
is
examined
(Donnelly-‐Smith
2009;
Gibson,
Oseto,
&
Adams,
2012;
Jackson
2008;
Jones,
S.,
Rowan-‐Kenyon,
H.,
Ireland,
S.,
Niehaus,
E.,
&
Skendall,
K.C.
2012;
Nam,
2012;
Rowan-‐
Kenyon
and
Niehaus,
2011).
Particular
attention
is
paid
to
long-‐term
student
learning
that
results
from
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences,
as
recently
analyzed
by
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011).
Finally,
this
literature
review
concludes
by
considering
the
goals
and
purposes
that
universities,
particularly
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
16
business
schools,
may
wish
to
consider
when
developing
learning
experiences,
particularly
international
or
globalized
learning
experiences
taking
place
in
the
context
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
(AACSB,
2010;
Jones,
Redd
and
Yoon,
2009;
Norris
and
Gillespie
2009;
Scherer,
Beaton,
Ainina,
&
Meyer,
2000).
Globalization
in
Higher
Education
Globalization
is
a
significant
movement
sweeping
higher
education
(Wildovsky,
2010).
As
the
world
and
its
economies
become
more
interconnected,
universities
become
increasingly
globalized
as
well
(Altbach,
Reisberg,
&
Rumbley,
2010).
In
order
to
successfully
compete
in
the
global
marketplace,
many
universities
embraced
globalization
as
a
key
to
growth
and
success
(Armstrong,
2007)
by
engaging
in
such
activities
as
establishing
branch
campuses,
entering
into
research
partnerships,
and
developing
offices
of
globalization
within
larger
administrative
offices.
While
globalization
is
not
new-‐-‐universities
have
had
international
components
as
long
ago
as
medieval
times
(Altbach,
2007)
-‐-‐
the
degree
of
globalization
at
universities
increased
dramatically
(Altbach,
2007)
over
the
past
twenty
years.
According
to
Wildovsky,
today,
the
survival
of
a
university
could
be
based
on
its
level
of
globalization.
Further,
“[i]nternationalization
of
higher
education,
including
study
abroad,
is
no
longer
merely
desirable,
it
is
a
necessity”
(,
1988,
p.
21).
Several
trends
pushed
institutions
of
higher
education
towards
globalization:
massification
of
higher
education,
economic
globalization,
and
the
rise
of
the
information
society
and
its
significance
to
research
universities.
Massification
refers
to
the
very
high
demand
for
higher
education,
which
the
Organisation
for
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
17
Economic
Cooperation
and
Development
(2009)
determined
increased
dramatically
worldwide
since
2000,
as
well
as
the
need
for
more
teachers
to
meet
said
demand
(Altbach,
2010).
Research
institutions
no
longer
limit
themselves
to
the
local
communities
they
traditionally
served.
Instead,
institutions
of
higher
education
are
now
a
part
of
the
“global
academic
marketplace”
(Wildovsky,
2008).
“Economic
globalization”
refers
to
the
economic
reasons
that
are
partly
responsible
for
this
shift.
These
reasons
range
from
the
economic
viability
of
the
university
itself
to
providing
a
competitive
advantage
for
local
businesses
(Qiang,
2003).
Aside
from
economic
rationales,
there
are
academic
rationales
connected
with
the
rise
of
the
information
society
and
its
significance
to
universities,
including
achieving
international
standards
in
teaching
and
research,
addressing
global
interdependence
through
scholarship
and
research,
and
preparing
students
to
be
global
citizens
(Qiang,
2003).
Achieving
these
goals
can
occur,
at
least
in
part,
through
multiple
facets
of
a
university’s
academic
program.
Qiang
(2003)
identifies
twelve
different
ways
that
universities
can
achieve
these
goals
by
using
the
academic
programs
of
the
university.
Two
of
the
significant
ways
that
academic
goals
can
be
achieved
are,
first,
by
offering
a
globalized
or
international
curriculum
and,
secondly,
through
the
process
of
teaching
and
learning
itself
(Qiang,
2003).
With
institutional
changes
have
also
come
changes
in
pedagogy
and
curricula.
New
or
different
teaching
strategies
now
employed
are
believed
to
increase
student
engagement
and
lead
to
more
lasting
learning
outcomes.
These
new
strategies
range
from
distance
learning
and
online
learning
options
to
Mexico’s
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
18
“intercultural”
universities,
which
seek
to
engage
students
through
creating
universities
that
are
extremely
local—grounded
in
indigenous
philosophy,
beliefs
language
and
history
(Altbach
2010).
There
is
a
recognition
that
curricula
must
change
and
must
be
relevant
to
local
needs,
yet
must
also
respond
to
the
new
global
economy.
This
requires
pedagogical
flexibility,
development
of
higher
order
thinking
skills
and
international
leadership
skills
(Altbach,
2010).
Developing
Effective
Curriculum
in
a
Global
University
To
“globalize”
a
curriculum,
means
more
than
simply
adding
international
experiences
to
an
existing
program
(Leask,
2008).
In
the
context
of
curriculum,
globalization
has
been
called
a
powerful
force
for
destabilizing
the
curriculum.
(Waks
2003,
p.
405).
There
are
several
features
that
mark
curriculum
as
globalized
or
internationalized:
an
international
dimension
and
scope
to
the
course,
including
its
educational
objectives;
innovative
teaching
and
learning
methods;
and
faculty
or
students
with
a
high
degree
of
international
experience
(Bremer
&
ven
der
Wende,
1995).
First,
a
globalized
or
internationalized
curriculum
typically
includes
an
international
dimension
and
scope
to
the
course.
This
scope
should
be
included
in
the
educational
objectives
of
the
course
in
one
of
three
ways
(Bremer
&
van
der
Wende,
1995):
(1)
an
educational
objective
that
enhances
student
knowledge
or
skills
in
an
area
of
specific
international
interest
(i.e.,
a
foreign
language
class
increases
a
specific
skill,
as
does
a
law
class
on
principles
in
international
law);
(2)
an
educational
objective
that
helps
students
compare
a
home
system
(such
as
an
economic
or
legal
system)
to
its
foreign
counterpart;
or
(3)
an
educational
objective
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
19
that
helps
students
analyze
and
evaluate
problems
within
the
context
of
different
systems,
using
an
international
perspective
(Bremer
&
van
der
Wende).
Next,
an
international
or
globalized
curriculum
may
often
be
innovative
in
the
teaching
methods
employed,
the
learning
process,
and/or
the
assessment
of
students.
Finally,
a
globalized
curriculum
can
involve
staff
or
students
with
high
mobility
or
knowledge
of
foreign
institutions,
and/or
involve
partnerships
with
educational
institutions
abroad.
These
common
traits
within
globalized
curricula
were
found
whether
the
program
took
place
in
a
very
small
or
a
very
large
course
or
program
of
study,
whether
the
institution
was
located
in
a
rural
or
urban
area,
and
regardless
of
differences
in
institutional
goals
and
policies
or
the
area
of
study
pursued
(Bremer
&
van
der
Wende,
1995).
The
study
examined
five
different
courses
of
study:
teacher
training,
international
law,
the
study
of
European
culture
and
history
(humanities),
a
business
school
program,
and
a
program
that
studied
problems
of
relationships
commonly
found
in
globalized
curriculum.
Determining
the
Goals
for
Learning
This
section
of
the
literature
review
considers
factors
that
should
be
relevant
in
establishing
the
goals
for
student
learning.
Due
to
the
rapid
increase
of
interest
and
activity
in
globalization,
there
is
recent
scholarly
interest
in
the
goals
institutions
should
set
for
student
learning.
This
section
first
discusses
the
general
goals
for
developing
a
student
as
a
global
citizen.
Next,
it
discusses
the
specific
goals
and
frameworks
suggested
for
business
schools.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
20
Learning
Goals
for
the
Student
as
a
Global
Citizen
As
the
significance
of
globalization
rose,
so,
too,
did
the
idea
of
the
“global
citizen.”
Since
Dewey,
we
have
recognized
that
schools
are
places
in
which
curriculum
and
the
ideals
of
citizenship
interact
(Kennedy,
2009).
Globalization
is
“at
the
center”
of
current
debates
about
curriculum
and
citizenship,
while
Kennedy
(2009)
recognizes
that
the
curriculum
is
“never
neutral”
in
developing
the
ideas
and
responsibilities
of
the
citizen.
Thus,
in
an
increasingly
globalized
world,
one
of
the
academic
goals
of
many
universities
is
to
prepare
students
to
be
academic
global
citizens
(Qiang,
2003).
However,
this
term
is
nebulous.
Some
research
indicates
that
study
of
citizenship
and
globalization
is
divided
along
partisan
lines:
some
focus
on
“free
market”
global
citizenship
and
others
debate
the
relevance
of
the
nation-‐
state
(Kennedy,
2007).
Braskamp
(2008),
however,
suggests
that
developing
a
global
citizen
centers
on
helping
the
student
answer
three
questions:
Who
am
I?
How
do
I
know?
How
do
I
relate
to
others?
Braskamp
argues
that
the
paradigm
of
global
citizenship
is
an
appropriate
vehicle
for
universities
to
choose
when
asking
students
to
answer
these
questions
and
states
that
encouraging
students
to
examine
themselves
in
this
light
will
help
ready
them
for
a
global
world,
as
they
are
currently
“woefully”
lacking
in
preparation.
Furthermore,
Braskamp
notes
that
questions
of
global
citizenship
lend
themselves
to
experiential
learning,
a
“pedagogy
of
active
engagement,”
to
which
students
have
been
responsive
(Braskamp,
2008).
Global
perspectives
often
call
for
students
to
develop
awareness
of
multiple
historical
and
cultural
viewpoints
and
to
develop
awareness
of
economic
and
social
issues
affecting
the
globe
(Bennett,
1992).
According
to
Le
Loup
(2009),
the
concept
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
21
of
the
global
citizen
in
higher
education
has
been
focused
on
how
students
define
themselves
and
their
citizenship
in
a
global
world.
According
to
Parker,
Ninomiya
and
Cogan
(1999),
the
new
global
citizenship
called
for
by
economic
realities
should
be
a
“multidimensional”
citizenship
in
which
the
citizen
is
called
to
participate
in
several
levels
of
citizenship
simultaneously,
from
local
and
national
political
commitment,
and
respect
for
rule
of
law,
to
global-‐level
sensitivity
to
the
rights
of
minorities,
appreciation
for
tensions
between
developed
and
undeveloped
nations
and
acknowledgment
that,
in
today’s
world,
national
identity
alone
is
insufficient.
According
to
Parker,
Ninomiya
and
Cogan,
educational
institutions
should
work
to
develop
global
competencies
in
students,
and
he
recommends
sixteen
areas
of
focus.
In
particular,
however,
these
researchers
suggest
that
schools
should
organize
curriculum
around
six
recurring
ethical
themes
in
order
to
develop
a
global
citizen:
(1)
What
should
be
done
to
promote
equity
and
fairness?
(2)
What
is
the
balance
between
the
right
to
privacy
and
open
access
to
information?
(3)
What
is
the
balance
between
protecting
the
environment
and
meeting
human
needs?
(4)
How
do
we
address
issues
of
children
in
poverty,
genetic
engineering
and
population
growth?
(5)
How
do
we
develop
shared
universal
values
while
respecting
local
values?
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
22
(6)
What
should
be
done
to
empower
learners
to
act
upon
the
above,
in
their
schools
and
in
their
larger
communities?
(Parker,
W.
C.,
Ninomiya,
A.,
&
Cogan,
J.,
1999,
p.
129).
In
addition,
these
researchers
(1999)
espouses
that
teachers
should
be
exemplars
of
teaching
this
deliberative
form
of
thinking.
The
study
of
these
six
questions
throughout
the
curriculum
will
lead
to
true
multidimensional
global
citizenship.
When
establishing
goals
for
student
learning,
then,
a
global
university
should
consider
the
above
questions
and
tensions.
Business
Schools,
Student
Learning
and
Globalization
The
research
above
considers
the
role
that
universities
should
play
in
developing
students
as
global
citizens
as
well
as
the
issues
that
some
believe
universities
should
ask
students
to
consider.
Within
the
overall
university,
business
schools
grapple
with
the
dimensions
of
global
learning
they
want
their
students
to
develop.
This
section
of
the
literature
review
briefly
addresses
the
ethical
concerns
of
business
schools
and
the
background
of
business
schools
in
developing
global
citizens.
Next,
it
looks
at
ideas
about
infusing
curriculum
with
global
goals,
and,
finally,
it
examines
in
detail
some
of
the
matrices
currently
suggested
as
most
important
for
setting
goals
in
student
learning.
The
role
of
the
economy
and
business
in
globalization
and
citizenship
is
sometimes
viewed
with
ambiguity
(Johnson
2008):
some
lead
a
movement
for
increased
corporate
responsibility
while
others
are
skeptical.
These
tensions
and
unresolved
ambiguities
in
the
business
world
make
for
an
especially
fertile
place
for
business
schools
to
consider
and
to
engage
students
in
developing
global
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
23
perspectives.
Indeed,
some
call
for
a
new
era
in
the
corporate
world
so
that
the
mechanisms
of
the
market
and
free
enterprise
are
married
to
a
strong
sense
of
“corporate
social
responsibility”
and
ethical
norms
of
behavior
and
professional
attitudes
make
it
unacceptable
to
abuse
economic
freedoms
(Cremer,
2010).
Some
consider
the
development
of
strong
ethical
norms
in
business
a
necessary
part
of
maintaining
economic
freedom
and
reducing
local
protectionist
attitudes
so
that
the
benefits
of
globalization
can
be
pursued
(Cremer,
2010).
For
their
part,
business
schools
have
long
had
an
interest
in
providing
their
students
with
knowledge
and
learning
in
the
areas
of
international
business.
The
recent
AACSB
(2011)
report
notes
that
the
Portuguese
Aula
de
Comercio
provided
instruction
in
“study
of
weights
and
measures
of
different
countries
and
[methods]
for
the
exchange
of
different
currencies”
as
far
back
as
the
eighteenth
century
(p.
33).
In
modern
business
schools,
internationalizing
and
globalizing
the
curriculum
has
been
a
concern
for
over
twenty
years
(Bedore,
1991;
Keating
&
Byles
1991).
Concerns
around
globalizing
business
school
curricula
centered
on
globalizing
of
the
institution
itself,
building
the
education
and
capacity
of
faculty
around
issues
of
internationalization
and
globalization,
and
development
of
student
attitudes
and
skills
around
globalization,
particularly
through
coursework
(Keating
&
Byles,
1991).
Since
the
general
mission
of
business
schools
is
to
educate
and
prepare
talent
to
serve
customers,
firms
and
markets
(AACSB,2011)
as
globalization
becomes
increasingly
important
to
the
business
community,
it
is
increasingly
important
to
business
schools
as
well.
A
business
school
is
considered
global
based
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
24
on
“the
outcomes
it
achieves,
the
processes
it
engages
and
the
place
it
inhabits”
(AACSB,
2011,
p.
7.).
As
business
schools
sought
to
globalize,
however,
the
learning
experiences
for
students
in
this
area
often
consisted
of
independent
and
fragmented
activities
(AACSB,
2011).
Therefore,
there
is
a
need
for
curriculum
that
is
“more
deliberate,
less
fragmented
and
better
aligned
with
the
intended
student
population
and
program
objectives”
(AACSB,
p.
108).
This
need
for
alignment
seems
to
directly
reference
Tyler’s
(1994)
Basic
Principles
of
Curriculum
and
Instruction
and
the
need
for
classical
curricular
organization.
Indeed,
according
to
the
AACSB’s
(2011)
recent
report,
curricular
efforts
should
be
the
main
focus
for
business
schools
as
they
seek
to
globalize
their
programs
(p.
105).
First,
globalization
needs
to
be
integrated
throughout
the
curriculum.
This
should
encompass
both
individual
courses
and
the
overall
design
of
the
program.
Businesses
seek
graduates
of
programs
that
both
incorporate
global
perspectives
into
the
core
curriculum
and
offer
supplemental
training
and
experiential
learning
experiences
(AACSB,
2011,
p.
106).
The
different
methods
of
globalizing
curriculum
are
referred
to
as
“insertion,”
“infusion”
and
“interlock.”
Insertion
refers
to
the
practice
of
inserting
a
stand-‐alone
course
into
the
overall
business
school
curriculum.
Infusion
refers
to
the
process
of
adding
globalized
curriculum
into
different
existing
core
courses.
“Interlock”
has
been
suggested
as
the
ideal
model,
as
it
draws
upon
the
strengths
of
both
insertion
and
infusion.
In
“interlock,”
a
required
course
or
unit
is
used
to
provide
a
baseline
of
globalization
knowledge
followed
by
integration
of
globalized
material
into
core
coursework
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
25
(AACSB
2011;
Vernon,
1994).
The
globalized
course
should
occur
at
the
beginning
of
the
sequence
of
courses
in
order
to
establish
a
baseline
vision
for
students
upon
which
to
build
later
knowledge.
Aside
from
the
sequencing
of
material,
another
important
consideration
is
the
type
of
material
that
needs
to
be
covered
in
order
to
globalize
a
course.
This
topic
should
be
addressed
in
a
thorough
and
deliberate
way.
Despite
the
quick
pace
of
globalization,
many
business
leaders
believe
they
underutilize
the
global
or
international
potential
for
their
businesses
due
to
a
lack
of
fully
trained
personnel
to
undertake
globalization
efforts
(Kedia
&
Daniel,
2003).
The
types
of
skills
needed
by
businesses
fall
into
two
categories:
(a)
specific
knowledge
and
skills
which
employers
wish
employees
to
have,
and
(b)
the
cultivation
of
a
“global
mindset”
in
student
attitudes
and
values.
An
example
of
the
type
of
specific
knowledge
and
skills
that
needs
to
be
cultivated
is
learning
the
International
Financial
Reporting
Standards
(IFRS),
a
skill
which
Big
Four
accounting
firms,
in
particular
Pricewaterhouse
Coopers,
requested
from
business
schools.
Despite
this
need,
62%
of
business
schools
report
that
they
have
not
incorporated
the
IFRS
into
their
accounting
classes
(AACSB,
2011;
Jones,
C.
G.,
Vedd,
R.
&
Yoon,
S.W.,
2009).
However,
although
larger
corporations
cited
increased
need
for
globalization
in
their
hires,
there
is
a
dual
mindset—not
all
recruiters
highly
value
study
abroad
experiences
in
the
recruiting
process
(Pernsteiner,
2013),
and
students
in
business
majors
often
need
to
be
taught
to
describe
how
their
international
study
abroad
experiences
are
relevant
and
valuable
to
their
future
employers
(Pernsteiner,
2013).
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
26
In
addition
to
particular
knowledge
and
skills,
employers
also
would
like
for
business
schools
to
provide
students
with
a
“global
mindset”
of
cultural
attitudes
and
values
that
embrace
globalization,
as
the
business
community
is
much
more
likely
than
the
population
at
large
to
value
globalization.
While
professors
in
business
schools
are
likely
to
skip
over
the
attitudes
and
beliefs
that
support
globalization
of
the
economy,
believing
they
should
spend
more
time
on
more
practical
or
focused
pursuits,
this
failure
leaves
students
with
a
gap
in
knowledge.
When
students
must
deal
with
those
who
have
reservations
or
hesitations
about
globalization
and
do
not
receive
an
education
that
enables
a
global
mindset,
they
are
ill
equipped
to
deal
with
the
interactions
and
attitudes
they
are
likely
to
encounter
(AACSB,
2011).
The
methods
for
measuring
and
developing
attitudes
and
beliefs
of
global
mindsets
within
business
schools
are
varied,
and
at
least
six
different
frameworks
have
been
proposed
(AACSB,
2011;
Datar,
Garvin,
&
Cullin,
2010;
Edwards,
Crosling,
Petrovic-‐Lazarovic,
&
O’Neill,
2003;
Gregerson,
Morrison,
&
Black
(1998);
Javidan,
2010;
Scherer
et
al.,
2000;
Toyne,
1992).
The
first
significant
model
proposed
by
Toyne
(1992),
the
“pyramid”
model,
proposed
that
students
should
progress
up
several
levels—from
global
awareness,
to
global
understanding
to
global
competency.
In
contrast
to
these
nebulous
levels
of
awareness,
Scherer
et
al.
(2000)
are
specific
in
proposing
items
such
as
fluency
in
a
second
language
and
well-‐defined
international
business
skills.
The
Thunderbird
Global
Mindset
(Javidan,
2010)
provides
an
intriguing
model,
proposing
that
students
need
to
develop
three
types
of
capital
in
order
to
become
globally
aware:
“intellectual,
social
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
27
and
psychological
capital.”
Intellectual
capital
consists
three
specific
skill
sets
that
students
must
develop:
global
business
savvy,
a
cosmopolitan
outlook,
and
cognitive
complexity
(Javidan,
2010).
Each
of
these
skill
sets
is
further
outlined.
For
example,
“global
business
savvy”
includes
such
items
as
knowing
how
to
manage
risk,
transact
business
and
develop
competitive
strategies
in
various
parts
of
the
world.
A
cosmopolitan
attitude
includes
up-‐to-‐date
knowledge
of
current
events,
knowledge
of
geography,
and
knowledge
about
cultures
in
different
parts
of
the
world.
Cognitive
complexity
includes
such
items
as
strong
analytical
and
problem
solving
skills
as
well
as
the
ability
to
grasp
complex
concepts
quickly
and
explain
them
well
in
simple
terms.
The
AACSB
recently
developed
its
own
matrix
by
developing
six
“environmental”
groups
which
students
should
be
aware
of
in
a
number
of
different
categories:
(1)
cultural,
(2)
legal
and
regulatory,
(3)
political,
(4)
economic,
(5)
financial,
and
(6)
other.
These
six
categories
can
then
be
applied
over
eight
different
areas
such
as
accounting
and
management
strategy
in
order
to
create
a
detailed
chart.
According
to
the
AACSB,
a
business
school
can
use
this
model
to
develop
competencies
in
the
six
core
environmental
groups
across
the
curricula
so
that
undergraduates
with
an
emphasis
in
accounting,
for
example,
receive
global
curricula
in
ways
different
than
those
for
someone
in
marketing.
They
also
propose
scaling
different
levels
of
expertise
based
on
whether
the
student
is
an
undergraduate
or
a
graduate
student.
Given
the
many
cultures
to
which
a
student
can
be
exposed
and
the
many
different
ways
in
which
a
global
perspective
can
be
developed,
however,
it
is
short-‐sighted
to
not
emphasize
the
Thunderbird
Global
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
28
Mindset
matrix.
The
AACSB
criticizes
the
Thunderbird
Global
Mindset
model
as
being
insufficiently
specific
in
some
ways,
yet
overly
specific
in
others
like
geography
and
knowledge
of
current
events.
Yet,
the
inclusion
of
creative,
flexible
cognitive
skills
is
both
valuable
and
transferable
across
a
wide
set
of
cultures
and
disciplines.
Further,
the
AACSB
criticizes
the
Thunderbird
Global
Mindset
for
having
too
many
domains,
yet
the
AACSB
model
has
potentially
up
to
54
different
subgroups
of
knowledge.
The
list
is
viewed
as
flexible,
and
not
all
students
are
expected
to
become
proficient
in
all
54
subgroups,
yet
the
sheer
number
of
them
indicates
some
of
the
problems
inherent
in
developing
a
“global
mindset”
for
students
that
is
sufficiently
specific
to
be
valuable
as
well
as
broad
enough
to
provide
a
base
of
knowledge.
Finally,
globalized
curriculum
must
be
integrated.
Often,
international
students
with
a
previously
existing
interest
in
globalization
will
self-‐select
into
courses
and
experiences
or
gravitate
towards
professors
who
offer
strong
globalization
experiences
to
create
a
kind
of
“global
ghetto”
(AACSB,
p.
118).
Because
other
students
in
the
program
may
not
choose
to
participate,
these
experiences
should
be
disseminated
evenly
throughout
the
program
(AACSB).
Faculty
members
have
sometimes
represented
a
troublesome
area
for
globalizing
schools,
as
they
receive
tenure
based
on
a
specific
area
of
expertise
that
may
not
be
related
to
globalization.
Partly
because
of
this,
globalizing
of
coursework
has
often
relied
on
the
specific
interests
or
expertise
of
a
professor,
often
leading
to
a
“haphazard”
development
of
curricula
for
business
schools
(Keating
&
Byles,
1991).
International
study
abroad
for
students
has
also
been
seen
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
29
as
a
means
of
providing
professional
development
for
business
faculty
(Festervand
&
Tillery,
2001).
Yet,
according
to
Keating
and
Byles,
before
students
can
be
expected
to
understand
how
sophisticated
business
frameworks
might
play
out
in
different
global
and
international
situations,
they
must
be
taught
to
develop
global
perspectives
and
awareness.
This
goal
calls
for
a
more
carefully
developed
sequence
of
courses
in
the
major.
Indeed,
Bedore
(1991)
states
that
as
long
ago
as
1991,
“major
change
in
curricula
is
indicated”
in
order
to
implement
the
needs
of
a
new,
more
global
workplace
(p.
70).
As
mentioned
above,
faculty
members
have
not
uniformly
created
business
school
curriculum
that
is
consistently
well-‐developed,
covers
both
skills
and
knowledge,
develops
a
global
mindset
in
students
and
is
well-‐integrated
into
the
overall
curriculum,
even
though
business
leaders
consistently
called
for
such
outcomes
over
the
last
twenty
years
(AACSB,
2010;
Porter,
McKibben,
&
The
American
Assembly
of
Collegiate
Schools
of
Business,
Management,
1998).
In
order
to
implement
this
type
of
experience,
professors
need
to
fully
develop
these
capacities
in
themselves.
To
do
so,
support
in
three
areas
is
recommended:
development
of
pedagogical
expertise,
immersion
experiences,
and
support
for
research
in
global
and
international
areas
relevant
to
their
field.
Pedagogical
expertise
can
be
developed
through
professional
development
opportunities
that
help
professors
revise
syllabi
to
reflect
more
international
content
and
to
develop
different
types
of
learning
experiences
for
students.
Pedagogical
support
can
take
the
form
of
ongoing
support,
in-‐house
seminars,
or
away
institutes
(Cort,
Das,
&
Sin,
2004).
Another
form
of
support
can
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
30
come
through
faculty
and
staff
members’
having
their
own
study
abroad
type
of
experiences
(Fisher,
2008).
These
learning
experiences
can
range
from
short
term
“learning
expeditions”
for
groups
of
faculty
and
staff
to
travel
together
to
different
relevant
places
at
an
overseas
location,
subsidies
for
all
teaching
faculty
to
go
abroad,
or
requirements
for
faculty
to
maintain
two
“footprints”,
a
“light
footprint”
at
an
international
site
and
a
“heavy
footprint”
at
their
home
campus
(AABSC,
p.
186).
The
third
way
in
which
faculty
members
can
learn
to
engage
students
in
global
concerns
is
through
developing
and
supporting
faculty
research
in
global
areas.
This
may
or
may
not
involve
faculty
travelling
overseas,
but
should
involve
international
collaboration
on
research
projects
(Festervand,
2001).
All
three
of
these
activities
can
help
develop
faculty
capacity
to
both
develop
and
then
implement
and
sustain
a
globalized
curriculum.
This
curriculum
should
be
integrated,
thorough,
and
help
students
develop
the
knowledge,
skills
and
global
mindset
requested
by
businesses.
In
order
to
increase
the
effectiveness
of
globalizing
a
course,
some
factors
that
may
be
significant
are
the
position
of
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
within
the
course,
whether
it
seeks
to
engage
students
in
issues
of
global
citizenship
and/or
practical
skills,
and
whether
professors
have
been
given
sufficient
training
and
support.
Another
factor
may
be
whether
students
have
sufficient
opportunities
to
integrate
their
knowledge
and
experiences
into
subsequent
learning.
The
above
section
discussed
the
goals
that
should
be
set
by
universities
before
determining
appropriate
learning
experiences.
In
setting
goals,
both
the
general
goals
of
creating
“global
citizens”
as
well
as
the
specific
goals
and
issues
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
31
within
the
business
schools
were
discussed.
The
next
section
presents
the
types
of
learning
experiences
that
might
be
selected
in
order
to
help
the
university
and
the
business
school
meet
the
goal
of
developing
students
with
global
mindsets.
Experiential
Learning
and
Transformative
Learning
Theory
In
choosing
study
abroad
experiences,
including
short-‐term
ones,
as
appropriate
learning
experiences,
business
schools
and
others
choose
practices
based
in
experiential
learning.
This
final
section
of
the
literature
review
briefly
reviews
experiential
learning
and
focuses
on
a
particular
the
type
of
experiential
learning
based
in
transformative
learning
theory.
Experiential
learning
and
transformative
learning
theory
may
be
considered
effective
choices
for
learning
experiences
when
goals
for
student
learning
are
complex
and
involve
long-‐term
transformation
of
an
individual’s
goals,
beliefs
and
attitudes
towards
the
world.
Thus,
this
type
of
learning
and
this
theory
are
potentially
helpful
in
attaining
goals
such
as
helping
students
better
develop
a
global
mindset.
Experiential
Learning.
Experiential
learning
means
students
acquire
knowledge
through
the
transformation
of
experience.
Experiential
learning
is
a
fundamentally
different
view
of
the
learning
process,
which
“rests
on
a
different
philosophical
and
epistemological
base”
then
traditional
learning
theories
(Kolb,
1984,
p.
28).
Learning
is
viewed
as
a
continual
process
of
development
through
experience.
It
involves
the
interaction
between
personal
knowledge
and
social
knowledge
and
expects
that
creativity
and
the
creation
of
new
knowledge
is
a
part
of
learning
(Kolb,
1984).
Experiential
learning
can
change
attitudes
and
beliefs
of
both
students
and
professors
(Celsi
&
Wolfinbarger,
2002;
Li,
Greenberg,
&
Nicholls,
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
32
2007).
Business
schools
increasingly
pay
attention
to
experiential
education
as
a
method
of
teaching
courses,
as
businesses
demand
greater
engagement
and
different
types
of
skills
from
their
students,
and
the
current
generation
of
business
students
expects
a
learning
environment
that
is
more
stimulating
than
the
traditional
lecture
model
(Li
et
al.,
2007;
Pfeffer
&
Fong,
2002;
Ueltschy,
2001).
In
order
to
be
effective,
experiential
learning
should
expose
the
student
to
concrete
new
experiences,
engage
him/her
in
reflection
based
on
those
new
experiences,
allow
him/her
to
form
abstract
concepts
and
generalizations
based
upon
those
experiences
and
reflections,
and
provide
him/her
the
ability
to
experiment
and
test
those
concepts
and
generalizations
in
sets
of
new
experiences
(Kolb,
1984).
This
mode
of
learning
is
potentially
an
important
way
of
learning
about
globalization.
Experiential
learning
that
includes
cross-‐cultural
contacts
is
particularly
important
for
developing
the
knowledge,
skills
and
attitudes
of
world-‐
mindedness
(Merryfield,
2003).
Transformative
Learning
Theory.
Transformative
learning
theory,
the
theory
used
by
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus,
as
their
framework
espouses
taking
advantage
of
new
experiential
learning
courses
and.
is
aimed
chiefly
at
the
adult
learner.
Transformative
learning
theory
states
that
developmental
growth
does
not
stop
for
students
once
they
pass
adolescence,
but
learning
experiences
can
be
designed
to
provoke
deep
levels
of
learning
in
adults.
It
is
a
theory
based
in
a
Freireian
concept
of
the
world
that
finds
students
can
learn
to
be
active
agents
of
change
through
radical
participation
within
systems
and
institutions
so
that
they
can
change,
or
transform,
their
world
(Mayo,
2003).
Transformative
learning
theory
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
33
can
be
useful
since
it
espouses
that
students
can
be
taught
to
change
fixed
beliefs,
mindsets
or
assumptions,
including
ideas
about
personal
identity
and
perspectives
on
others,
rendering
people
more
inclusive,
adaptable
and
open
to
change
(Mezirow,
2003).
According
to
Mezirow,
transformative
learning
occurs
when
students
are
exposed
to
disorienting
or
disequilibriating
experiences,
are
taught
ways
to
reflect
and
analyze
on
those
experiences,
and
then
have
the
opportunity
to
form
a
new
plan
of
action
which
both
tests
the
new
theories
and
beliefs
and
allows
them
to
integrate
new
ideas
about
identity
of
self
and
others
(Mezirow,
2003).
Analysis,
reflection
and
the
opportunity
to
make
meaning
and
integrate
one’s
experiences
are
all
important
aspects
of
transformative
learning
theory.
Transformative
learning
theory
argues
that
there
are
three
different
results
of
transformational
learning:
(1)
changes
in
the
understanding
of
one’s
self,
(2)
changes
in
belief
systems
about
the
world
and,
finally,
(3)
changes
in
behavior
(Mezirow,
2003).
Mezirow
argues
that
this
transformation
occurs
in
a
ten-‐step
sequence
that
begins
with
a
disorienting
dilemma,
continues
through
a
process
of
self-‐reflection
and
sharing
one’s
experiences
and
reflections
with
others.
It
leads
to
new
understandings
and
explanation
for
self
and
for
belief
systems,
and,
finally,
also
leads
to
specific
actions
carried
out
from
this
reflection,
which
result
in
a
reintegration
of
self
(Mezirow,
2003).
True
transformative
learning
causes
a
shift
in
consciousness,
as
demonstrated
through
changes
in
action
(Mezirow,
2003).
Study
Abroad
Experiences
and
Student
Learning
International
study
abroad
experiences
are
a
category
of
learning
experience,
and
“the
stakes
involved
in
study
abroad
are
.
.
.simple.
.
.
straightforward.
.
.
and
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
34
important.
For
their
own
future
and
that
of
the
nation,
college
graduates
today
must
be
internationally
competent”
(Lederman,
2007,
p.
2).
This
section
of
the
literature
review
discusses
study
abroad
experiences
generally
and
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences
in
particular.
Previous
research
suggests
that
study
abroad
programs
have
an
impact
on
student
experiences
at
the
university
(Williams,
2005).
The
impact
on
students
attending
traditional
international
study
abroad
programs
has
been
measured
in
terms
of
academic
or
intellectual
growth
of
the
student,
professional
development
of
the
student,
personal
growth,
including
self-‐awareness
and
awareness
of
other
cultures,
and
contribution
of
the
student
to
globalization
or
internationalization
within
the
university
once
the
student
returned
(Ingraham,
&
Peterson,
2004).
Means
of
measurement
include
surveys
of
students
as
well
as
interviews
with
professors
familiar
with
those
students.
Olsen
and
Kroeger
(2001)
argued
that
experiences
that
correlate
most
strongly
with
a
high
level
of
globalized
attitudes
and
awareness
are
fluency
in
a
second
language
and
a
lengthy
time
of
study
abroad,
with
“lengthy”
defined
as
more
than
three
months
abroad
(Olsen,
&
Kroeger,
2001).
Unlike
longer-‐term
stays,
the
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
in
achieving
university
and
departmental
goals
for
student
learning
has
not
been
as
well
documented.
There
is
some
evidence
to
suggest,
however,
that
the
motivation
for
students
to
attending
short-‐term
and
long-‐
term
learning
is
different,
and
that
there
are
differences
in
outcomes
for
short-‐term
study
abroad
students
compared
to
those
of
students
who
choose
long-‐term
study
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
35
abroad
options
(Allen,
2010;
Anderson,
Lawton,
Rexeisen,
&
Hubbard,
2006;
Chieffo
&
Griffiths,
2004;
Kehl
&
Morris,
2008).
Short
Term
Study
Abroad
and
Student
Learning
Although
the
research
is
mixed,
short-‐term
study
abroad
may
meet
institutional
goals
for
student
learning.
Short-‐term
study
abroad
is
typically
defined
as
study
abroad
that
occurs
over
a
period
of
eight
weeks
or
fewer,
and
there
are
several
models
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
(Sachau,
Brasher,
&
Fee,
2010).
This
section
reviews
the
existing,
limited,
research
in
this
area,
and
examines
the
factors
that
most
closely
associated
with
strong
student
learning
(Donnelly-‐Smith,
2009;
Gibson,
Oseto,
&
Adams
2012;
Jackson
2008;
Jones,
S.,
Rowan-‐Kenyon,
H.,
Ireland,
S.,
Niehaus,
E.,
&
Skendall,
K.C.,
2012;
Nam
2012;
Rowan-‐Kenyon
&
Niehaus,
2011).
Students
who
engaged
in
long-‐term
study
abroad
often
experience
“changes
in
their
professional
growth
and
personal
development
in
the
themes
of
international,
global
and
intercultural
perspectives,”
relating
to
the
individual
participant
and
the
program
design.
(Hutchins,
1996,
p.
iii)
and
exhibit
increased
levels
of
adaptability,
and
intercultural
competence
(Williams,
2005).
However,
participants
in
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences
do
not
always
exhibit
such
characteristics
with
the
consistency
of
longer-‐term
study
abroad
participants.
For
example,
while
Medina-‐Lopez-‐Portillo
(2004)
did
not
find
gains
in
intercultural
sensitivity
for
short-‐term
stays,
de
Neppel
(2005)
found
that
short-‐
term
study
abroad
students
showed
gains
in
areas
such
as
cognitive
complexity
and
interpersonal
self-‐confidence
at
almost
the
same
rates
(though
not
quite
as
great)
as
longer-‐term
participants.
Anderson
et
al.
(2006),
Chieffo
and
Griffiths
(2004),
and
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
36
Kehl
and
Morris
(2008)
all
found
some
similarities
in
the
types
of
gains
in
student
learning
for
short-‐term
study
abroad,
but
the
impact
was
overall
lesser
than
for
those
who
participated
in
long-‐term
study
abroad.
Some
of
this
may
be
due
to
the
initial
difference
in
motivation
for
students
who
choose
short-‐term
study
abroad
over
long-‐term
study
abroad
(Allen,
2010).
Olson
and
Kroeger
(2001)
found
that
intercultural
proficiency
was
correlated
with
higher
levels
of
linguistic
competence.
However,
their
study
was
focused
on
long-‐term
(three
months
or
longer)
stays.
Interestingly,
however,
Medina-‐Lopez-‐
Portillo
(2004)
found
that,
while
this
association
could
be
found
with
long-‐term
study
abroad
(a
program
of
more
than
16
weeks
in
Mexico
City),
students
who
studied
in
shorter-‐term
study
abroad
(a
program
of
7
weeks
in
Taxco,
Mexico)
did
improve
in
linguistic
proficiency,
but
fared
poorly
in
surveys
measuring
intercultural
competence.
Instead
of
increasing
actual
levels
of
intercultural
competence
while
participating
in
short
term
study
abroad,
students
actually
greatly
over-‐estimated
their
level
of
intercultural
competence,
and
comments
showed
a
great
increase
in
the
preference
for
the
cultural
customs
of
their
own
country.
Students
who
were
in
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
experienced
an
increased
attachment
to
and
preference
for
the
cultural
constructs
of
their
home
country
while
overestimating
their
own
levels
of
intercultural
competence.
Engels
and
Engels
(2004)
also
showed
that
beneficial
effects
tend
to
increase
over
time;
students
who
were
in
France
for
16
weeks
did
not
fare
as
well
in
levels
of
either
linguistic
development
or
intercultural
competence
as
students
who
were
in
France
for
32
weeks.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
37
An
additional
recent
study
by
Zamandanis
(2013)
followed
students
immediately
after
returning
and
then
checked
in
again
with
them
one
semester
later.
This
research
showed
that
students
showed
a
short-‐term
decline
on
the
Intercultural
Development
Index
(IDI)
immediately
after
completing
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
(relative
to
their
scores
prior
to
the
trip).
After
one
semester,
the
student’s
IDI
score
was
again
close
to
its
pre-‐trip
baseline.
Interestingly,
students
who
had
previously
had
a
high
IDI
index
prior
to
travel
showed
the
highest
regression
on
the
Index
immediately
post-‐trip.
Thus,
if
one
learning
goal
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
is
to
increase
student
levels
of
intercultural
development,
that
goal
may
not
be
reached
in
at
least
some
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences.
In
some
cases,
short-‐term
study
abroad
may
be
detrimental
to
student
intercultural
competence
as
measured
by
the
IDI.
It
appears
that
the
role
that
short-‐
term
study
abroad
programs
play
in
student
intercultural
development
is
not
yet
fully
understood.
Jackson
(2008)
also
reached
some
similar
findings
to
Medina-‐Lopez-‐Portillo
when
examining
students
traveling
to
main
land
China
for
5
weeks.
This
study
sought
correlation
between
linguistic
ability
and
intercultural
competence.
She
found,
however,
that
some
students
with
a
high
language
proficiency
fared
poorly
on
measures
of
intercultural
competence,
particularly
students
who
studied
in
Hong
Kong,
many
of
whom
also
had
extensive
Western
(U.S.)
exposure.
Findings
for
short-‐
term
study
abroad
participants
echoed
those
of
Medina-‐Lopez-‐Portillo
in
that
students
consistently
rated
their
levels
of
intercultural
competence
as
higher
than
they
actually
were
and
tended
to
reinforce
their
beliefs
about
their
home
(Western)
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
38
culture’s
superiority.
Some
students
did
show
real
gains
in
levels
of
intercultural
competence;
those
students
who
progressed
the
most
in
measures
of
intercultural
competence
in
this
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
were
students
who
were
already
possessed
of
globalized
attitudes
and
mindsets
(Jackson,
2008).
Not
all
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
research
showed
students
exhibiting
inflated
views
of
their
levels
of
intercultural
competence.
Anderson
et
al.
(2006)
studied
American
business
students
traveling
to
Europe,
and,
in
that
case,
students
did
show
increased
levels
of
intercultural
competence
and
understanding.
One
recent
mixed-‐methods
dissertation
(Nam,
2011)
looked
at
whether
measures
of
student
intercultural
competence
increase
depending
on
the
culture
the
American
student
travels
to
by
comparing
student
outcomes
on
short-‐term
study
abroad
in
the
Netherlands
with
short-‐term
study
abroad
in
Bangkok,
Thailand,
and
in
Laos.
In
this
study,
both
groups
of
students
travelled
for
three
weeks;
one
program
was
called
“Ethical
Understanding
in
Amsterdam,”
and
the
other
program
was
called
“Understanding
Southeast
Asia.”
The
students
traveling
to
Amsterdam
stayed
together
in
a
hotel
in
a
residential
section
of
Amsterdam.
The
students
traveling
to
Thailand
and
Laos
stayed
with
each
other
at
times,
and
they
spent
some
nights
with
various
native
families
in
rural
regions.
Both
programs
included
thematically
grouped
field
trips
and
guest
speakers
and
extensive
opportunities
for
reflection
as
well
as
well-‐trained
professors
who
moderated
the
experience.
Students
in
both
groups
experienced
growth
in
their
intercultural
competence
scores
with
statistical
similarity
(56%
showed
growth).
Students
who
travelled
to
the
culture
that
was
more
different
from
that
of
the
United
States
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
39
(Southeast
Asia)
experienced
a
higher
average
gain
(16%)
than
did
students
who
traveled
to
Amsterdam
(10%).
In
both
groups,
students
cited
the
well-‐planned
nature
of
the
many
speakers,
field
trips,
and
the
interaction
with
the
lead
professor,
suggesting
that
the
quality
of
the
design
of
the
program
is
critical
to
helping
students
mediate
their
experiences
in
short-‐term
study
abroad.
Students
showed
a
marked
interest
in
incorporating
additional
global
experiences
into
their
lives
and
college
careers
upon
completing
the
three-‐week
study
abroad
programs.
Nam
(2011)
concluded
that
there
was
a
necessity
for
more
study
in
the
area
of
the
long-‐
term
impact
on
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
and
a
need
to
increase
the
number
of
participants
who
were
studied
in
order
to
better
evaluate
the
data.
Nam
also
concluded
that
the
design
of
the
program
and
the
support
and
mediation
of
professors
is
particularly
important
in
helping
students
experience
meaningful
learning
as
a
result
of
short-‐term
study
abroad.
The
Georgetown
Consortium
(Van
der
Berge,
2009)
also
looked
at
students
who
participated
in
both
long
and
short-‐term
study
abroad
and
the
impact
on
students’
oral
language
proficiency
and
intercultural
competence.
The
study
found
that,
while
students
showed
overall
gains
in
intercultural
competence,
a
large
number
of
students
experienced
no
gains
in
intercultural
competence
and
some
students
actually
moved
backwards.
In
the
conclusion,
Van
der
Berge
argues
that,
while
many
students
are
able
to
“learn
on
their
own”
while
thrust
into
an
overseas
study
abroad
program,
many
students
cannot
and
retreat
into
their
own
American
peer
groups
when
placed
in
an
intercultural
experience.
For
those
students,
it
is
particularly
important
that
the
experience
is
well-‐designed
for
thoughtful
and
rich
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
40
learning
experiences
and
that
the
learning
is
mediated
by
professors
who
are
well-‐
equipped
to
guide
students
in
making
meaning
of
their
study
abroad
(Van
der
Berge,
2009).
Black
and
Duhon
(2006)
surveyed
students
participating
in
a
British
Studies
Business
School
concentration
who
participated
in
a
month-‐long
study
abroad
program
in
the
United
Kingdom
through
the
University
of
Southern
Mississippi.
This
program,
which
has
been
operational
for
25
years,
occurs
within
a
consortium
of
ten
Southern
schools.
The
consortium
sends
approximately
200
students
to
the
United
Kingdom
for
a
month
each
summer.
The
program
is
aimed
at
business
students
and
offers
a
variety
of
courses.
In
order
to
determine
whether
students
attained
desired
outcomes,
the
school
surveyed
them
in
the
realms
of
cross-‐cultural
tolerance
and
empathy,
personal
independence
and
self-‐confidence
(Black
&
Duhon,
2006).
To
measure
effectiveness,
these
traits
were
measured
using
the
Cross-‐
Cultural
Adaptability
Inventory
both
immediately
before
and
after
their
trip.
Students
were
not
notified
when
they
took
the
first
inventory
that
they
would
take
the
same
inventory
again
at
the
conclusion
of
the
trip.
The
research
showed
statistically
significant
gains
in
the
cross-‐cultural
awareness,
independence
and
self-‐
confidence
of
students
immediately
post-‐trip.
No
research
was
undertaken,
however,
to
measure
how
lasting
or
integrated
the
student
learning
was.
Recently,
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
studied
the
long-‐term
effect
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs.
The
researchers
looked
specifically
at
study
trips
of
ten
days,
and
this
research
suggests
that
the
mediation
of
the
experience
for
the
student
in
shorter-‐term
stays,
particularly
post-‐travel,
combined
with
the
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
41
individual
characteristics
of
the
student,
may
be
particularly
important
in
determining
the
long-‐term
success
of
the
experience.
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
studied
a
group
of
eight
undergraduate
students
(sophomores
and
juniors)
who
had
never
previously
had
a
study-‐abroad
experience
and
participated
together
in
a
ten-‐
day
trip
to
the
Czech
Republic.
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
travelled
with
the
students
and
conducted
in-‐depth
post-‐trip
interviews
both
immediately
after
the
trip
and,
again,
one
year
later.
A
year
later,
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
followed
up
with
seven
of
the
students
(the
eighth
declined
to
participate
in
the
follow-‐up
interview)
to
determine
what
the
students
had
retained
of
their
learning.
They
found
that
crossing
boundaries
and
personalization
of
the
learning
experience,
led
to
all
students’
finding
the
experience
meaningful
immediately
after
the
trip.
However,
one
year
later,
only
students
who
had
engaged
in
subsequent
study
abroad
or
other
integrated
international
learning
experiences,
such
as
an
internship,
continued
to
find
the
initial
experience
meaningful
rather
than
a
pleasant,
but
distant,
memory.
Interestingly,
the
researchers
found
no
significant
difference
in
how
different
students
experienced
the
trip
at
the
time,
how
they
described
cultural
differences,
their
reasons
for
going
on
the
trip
and
their
expectations
about
it
or
their
openness
or
resistance
to
change.
The
differences
in
reaction
to
the
trip
appear
to
occur
after
the
trip
in
the
way
that
students
were,
or
were
not,
able
to
integrate
that
transformation
into
their
longer-‐term
learning
and
identity.
Three
of
the
students
expressed
interest
in
a
more
globalized
experience
immediately
after
the
trip.
However,
they
were
later
deterred
from
pursuing
their
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
42
interest
due
to
previously
existing
community
ties
such
as
familial
ties,
boyfriend
or
girlfriend,
and
peer
groups.
These
three
students
regarded
the
trip
as
just
a
pleasant
memory
one
year
later,
and
their
earlier
learning
and
attitudes,
as
recorded
at
the
time
of
the
trip
and
within
one
month
of
it,
had
vanished
at
the
follow-‐up
interview.
In
comparison,
the
other
four
students
built
enough
support
after
the
experience
to
translate
their
learning
into
subsequent
courses
and
longer-‐term
study-‐abroad
experiences;
these
students
viewed
their
initial
trip
as
a
catalyst
for
personal
transformation
(Rowan-‐Kenyon
&
Niehaus,
2011).
Three
of
the
students
subsequently
entered
year-‐long
study-‐abroad
programs
and
the
fourth
entered
an
internship
at
the
U.S.
Department
of
State
where
he
was
further
pursued
his
global
interests.
These
students,
thus,
experienced
a
greater
impact
because
they
were
better
able
to
integrate
their
learning
into
a
longer-‐term
aspect
of
their
lives.
Facilitation
by
the
professors
during
the
course
helped
all
students
exhibit
positive
attitudes
and
ideas
about
their
learning
during
and
one
month
after
their
trip.
However,
the
results
of
the
follow-‐up
interviews
at
one
year
suggests
that
what
happens
after
a
short-‐term
study-‐abroad
experience
concludes
and
students
return
home
is
actually
the
most
critical
determinant
of
whether
the
learning
will
be
retained
and
valued
by
students.
If
students
do
not
receive
sufficient
support
in
integrating
their
learning
experiences
into
their
subsequent
learning
over
the
next
year,
by,
for
example,
receiving
additional
opportunities
to
further
their
global
learning,
the
experience
and
changes
in
outlook
will
likely
fade
more
quickly
instead
of
being
integrated
into
identity
in
the
way
that
a
longer-‐term
stay
often
does.
A
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
43
similar
study
was
recently
undertaken
at
Temple
University,
where
a
professor
studied
a
group
of
journalism
students
undertaking
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
trip
to
South
Africa
(Bhayroo,
2012).
Students
studied
South
Africa
for
a
week
in
their
home
country
(the
United
States)
before
travelling
to
South
Africa
for
a
4-‐week
intensive
study
of
journalism
and
social
justice
issues.
Students
then
debriefed
back
at
their
home
campus
for
a
week
before
the
conclusion
of
the
program.
A
semester
later,
a
significant
number
of
students
continued
to
be
concerned
and
aware
about
issues
of
South
African
journalism
and
social
justice
(Bhayroo,
2012).
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
also
joined
forces
with
other
researchers
(Jones,
S.,
Rowan-‐Kenyon,
H.,
Ireland,
S.,
Niehaus,
E.,
&
Skendall,
K.C.
(2012)
to
look
at
short-‐term
immersion
programs.
Comparing
four
one-‐week
short-‐term
study
programs
in
Peru,
the
Czech
Republic,
New
York
City
and
Chicago,
all
with
social
justice
themes,
the
researchers
looked
at
the
potential
impact
of
short-‐term
immersion
and
study
abroad
experiences
and
concluded
that
careful
and
thoughtful
mediation
is
critical
to
success
of
the
program
and
impact
on
student
learning.
While
there
is
limited
research
on
the
long-‐term
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs,
one
other
very
promising
study
(Adams,
Benjamin,
Gibson
&
Oseto,
2012)
was
recently
conducted.
In
this
study,
19
students
from
Purdue
University
participated
in
a
15-‐day
study
abroad
program
in
Tropical
Agriculture
in
Costa
Rica.
As
part
of
their
study
abroad
program,
students
were
deeply
immersed
in
experiential
learning.
In
this
course,
students
first
participated
in
a
1-‐credit
course
in
which
they
studied
tropical
agriculture,
tropical
ecosystems,
and
the
history
and
culture
of
Costa
Rica.
In
addition
to
material
presented
by
the
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
44
professors,
students
were
expected
to
work
in
small
groups
to
present
on
the
above
topics
as
well
as
to
submit
a
group
15-‐page
paper.
Following
the
course,
students
travelled
together
with
their
professors
to
Costa
Rica.
There,
students
were
expected
to
participate
in
field
sampling,
and
they
met
with
a
wide
variety
of
farmers,
from
those
in
coffee
collectives,
to
organic
farmers,
to
those
who
run
larger
farms,
and
they
viewed
the
farm
sites
and
asked
questions
of
the
farmers
(fluency
in
Spanish
was
not
a
pre-‐requisite,
and
many
students
relied
on
their
professors
for
translation
of
questions
and
answers).
They
also
engaged
in
written
assignments
and
group
discussions.
Immediately
after
completing
the
course,
almost
all
students
agreed
that
the
experience
increased
their
desire
to
participate
in
further
international
study
abroad
experiences
while
in
college.
Almost
all
students
agreed
that
the
trip
increased
their
knowledge
of
Costa
Rican
culture.
Over
90%
agreed
that
the
experience
increased
their
interest
in
tropical
agriculture
and
increased
their
knowledge
in
areas
of
biodiversity
in
agriculture.
The
19
students
were
followed,
and
seven
(37%)
subsequently
participated
in
another
short-‐term
study
abroad
program,
a
semester
study
abroad
program,
or
an
international
internship
later
in
their
college
career.
This
research
is
particularly
helpful
because
it
provides
a
concrete
example
of
students
followed
through
on
their
good
feelings
about
the
course
immediately
upon
return
and
incorporated
the
international
or
global
awareness
aspect
of
their
study-‐abroad
experience
into
long-‐term
learning
through
additional
course-‐work
or
internships
overseas.
Unfortunately,
this
research
does
not
compare
results
to
the
overall
number
of
students
at
Purdue
who
study
abroad
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
45
during
their
college
career.
It
also
deals
with
a
very
limited
number
of
students,
which
lowers
subsequent
researchers’
ability
to
extrapolate
from
the
data.
In
2012,
a
qualitative
study
presented
findings
obtained
from
17
first-‐year
medical
students
who
went
on
a
one-‐week
short
term
study
abroad
program
to
perform
service
learning
in
Latin
American
and
the
Caribbean
(Abedini,
Gruppen,
Kolars,
&
Kumagai,
2012).
This
strongly
qualitative
study
interviewed
the
first-‐year
students
multiple
times
in
order
to
gain
their
perspectives
before,
during,
and
immediately
post-‐trip.
Most
of
the
students
(12
out
of
14)
had
prior
study
abroad
or
other
international
experience.
While
many
students
articulated
primarily
practical
purposes
in
traveling
abroad
(i.e.,
development
of
clinical
skills),
student
concern
for
the
ethics
of
surrounding
international
medical
care,
provision
of
services
and
the
need
for
reflection
in
order
to
process
student
learning
experiences
were
highlighted.
The
researchers
also
concluded
that
there
was
a
significant
possibility
that
experiential
learning
transforms
student
learning
in
short-‐term
study
abroad,
but
that
there
was
a
need
for
reflection
and
for
the
critical
perspectives
gained
by
students
to
be
used
(Abedini
et
al.,
2012).
Short-‐term
international
experiences
were
also
recently
studied
in
the
form
of
a
dissertation
concerned
with
“Alternative
Break”
learning
experiences
(Niehaus
2012).
“Alternative
Break”
experiences
refer
to
learning
experiences
that
occur
during
the
student’s
Spring
Break.
In
this
dissertation,
Niehaus
recognizes
that
little
in
the
literature
deals
with
the
long-‐term
impact
of
short-‐term
experiences
such
as
Alternative
Break,
and
attempts
to
look
at
what
the
long-‐term
impact
of
these
experiences
focus
on
student
intent
immediately
after
return
from
an
Alternative
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
46
Break
experience.
The
Alternative
Break
students
included
students
who
studied
both
internationally
and
domestically.
In
this
study,
students
who
studied
internationally
were
more
likely
than
those
who
studied
domestically
to
believe
that
their
Alternative
Break
experience
influenced
their
future
study
abroad
plans.
However,
they
did
not
differ
in
terms
of
their
impact
on
issues
such
as
how
they
viewed
future
course
selection.
This
study
also
looked
at
group
reflection
and
found
that,
while
group
reflection
during
the
study
abroad
experience
did
not
appear
to
significantly
influence
outcomes,
a
strong
re-‐orientation
program
back
at
the
university
did
have
an
impact
on
student
learning
(Niehaus
2012).
The
study
also
noted
the
need
for
additional
longitudinal
research
in
the
area
of
short-‐term
immersion
learning
activities
(Niehaus,
2012).
An
additional
recent
dissertation
(Dykens,
2013)
examined
the
impact
of
professors
on
student
choice
about
whether
to
participate
in
short
term
study
abroad
and
found
that
interaction
with
professors
had
an
important
influence
on
whether
students
chose
to
initially
participate
in
a
short
term
study
abroad
experience.
Overall,
however,
despite
this
research,
there
is
a
great
deal
more
that
is
unknown
about
short-‐term
study
abroad.
As
shown
above,
many
gaps
and
contradictions
in
the
literature
still
exist.
Recently,
Renn,
Brazelton
and
Holmes
(2014)
performed
a
review
of
eight
higher
education
and
student
affairs
journals,
both
in
the
United
States
and
in
Europe,
examining
what
research
examined
international
topics
related
to
student
learning
and
development.
That
review
found
there
has
not
been
enough
research
into
student
development,
learning
and
experiences
in
short-‐term
study
abroad.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
47
Summary
In
summary,
this
study
sought
to
use
the
framework
set
forth
by
Rowan-‐
Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
to
study
the
effect
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
on
long-‐
term
learning.
Thus
far,
the
research
established
that
globalization
of
curriculum
is
happening
throughout
the
university.
Universities
embrace
globalization,
and
many
adopted
goals
for
developing
their
students
into
global
citizens.
One
popular
method
of
globalizing
is
promoting
study
abroad
programs,
as
these
have
generally
been
found
to
build
specific
skills,
such
as
foreign-‐language
skills,
and
lead
to
an
increase
in
global
mindset,
which
would
appear
to
support
university
goals.
Universities,
however,
have
been
increasingly
adopting
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
as
their
learning
experience
of
choice,
and
these
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
have
been
growing
at
a
more
rapid
rate
than
have
longer-‐term
programs.
Despite
this
trend,
the
research
supporting
short-‐term
study
abroad
as
an
effective
learning
experience
for
meeting
university
goals
is
limited.
Using
the
research
outlined
above,
this
study
sought
to
add
to
the
available
research
on
short-‐term
study
abroad
by
investigating
which
factors
are
most
significant
in
promoting
successful
long-‐term
learning
experiences
for
students
who
participate
in
short-‐
term
study
abroad
as
the
centerpiece
of
a
course’s
learning
experience.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
48
CHAPTER
THREE:
RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
The
purpose
of
the
study
was
to
examine
the
LINC
and
GLP
curriculum
and
its
impact
on
long-‐term
student
learning
outcomes.
In
this
study,
student
responses
were
explored
in
depth
in
order
to
evaluate
the
extent
of
long-‐term
learning
as
a
result
of
an
intensive
immersion
in
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience.
Although
“well-‐planned,
intensive
summer
programs
of
at
least
6
weeks
duration
can
have
a
significant
impact
on
student
growth
across
a
variety
of
important
outcomes,”
it
is
unclear
”[w]hether
these
results
would
hold
for
the
increasingly
popular
1-‐5
week
programs
is
unknown”
(Dwyer,
2004,
p.
163).
A
focus
of
this
research
was
the
extent
to
which
students
were
able
to
build
on
and
incorporate
their
experiences
in
short-‐term
study
abroad
into
further
studies
and
interests
in
their
college
career
was.
Data
was
gathered
from
students
participating
in
short-‐term
study
abroad
approximately
two
years
after
they
returned
in
order
to
evaluate
how,
and
to
what
extent,
they
followed
up
on
their
intentions
and
to
provide
an
indicator
of
how
or
whether
they
incorporated
knowledge
gained
on
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
session
into
long-‐term
learning.
These
data
were
evaluated
in
order
to
better
understand
the
impact
of
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
study
abroad
experience
on
student
learning
over
time.
This
study,
thus,
answers
the
following
research
question:
Are
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
able
to
significantly
guide
development
of
perspectives
and
skills
in
undergraduate
students?
In
answering
the
above
question,
the
study
answered
the
following
three
sub-‐
questions:
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
49
Sub-‐Question
(1)
What
meaning
do
students
make
of
their
participation
in
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience,
both
immediately
after
the
experience
and
two
years
later?
Sub-‐Question
(2)
How
do
students
attempt
to
integrate
this
meaning
into
their
lives?
Sub-‐Question
(3)
To
what
extent
do
students
follow
through
on
new
commitments
or
intentions
developed
as
a
result
of
program
participation?
(Appendix
B)
This
chapter
describes
the
methods
used
in
this
study.
The
methodology
used
includes
the
research
orientation,
sample
selection,
instrumentation,
data
collection,
and
data
analysis.
This
study
examined
data
from
two
separate
sets
of
student
surveys,
one
previously
administered
in
a
separate
study
and
a
second
survey
designed
for
this
study.
Both
were
analyzed
to
gain
different
levels
and
types
of
qualitative
data.
Qualitative
Research
Orientation
Primarily
qualitative
methods
were
used
in
collecting
and
contextualizing
student
responses.
Qualitative
methods
were
used
in
evaluating
longer
answers
given
in
the
questionnaires
administered
with
the
second
of
the
two
sets
of
student
surveys.
Very
limited
quantitative
methods
were
used
when
the
two
sets
of
student
surveys
were
reviewed
and
analyzed
in
order
to
contextualize
and
verify
the
qualitative
data
of
the
student
surveys.
The
USC
Marshall
School
of
Business
maintains
a
list
of
all
students
who
participated
in
the
LINC
course,
and
the
first
student
survey
utilized
(“Survey
I”)
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
50
was
designed
by
the
Marshall
School
for
these
students
immediately
after
they
returned
from
the
LINC
course.
Data
collected
from
this
study
was
used
by
the
researcher
primarily
to
supplement
and
buttress
the
primary
research
tool,
which
was
the
second,
2013,
survey,
and
its
accompanying
questionnaire.
The
2013
survey
(also
referred
to
herein
as
the
“Survey
II”)
was
a
modified
version
of
the
original
survey
given
to
students
who
returned
from
a
LINC
course
two
years
prior
to
this
study.
This
second,
2013
survey,
coupled
with
the
questionnaire,
were
the
main
data
sources
for
this
research.
This
2013
survey
measured
the
degree
to
which
the
learning
and
attitudes
exhibited
by
the
students
immediately
after
returning
from
the
LINC
or
GLP
course
were
retained.
The
two
surveys
relate
because
they
ask
similar
questions
and,
thus,
collect
similar
data,
which
is
useful
for
comparison.
However,
because
a
much
smaller
subset
of
students
responded
to
the
second
survey,
the
data
from
the
2011
survey
set
is
not
congruent
with
the
2013
data
set,
and,
thus,
comparisons
between
them
must
necessarily
be
conditional
in
nature.
Additionally,
the
2013
survey
also
included
a
questionnaire
that
collected
additional
student
information
that
is
not
available
from
the
2011
data.
Qualitative
Data
Qualitative
data
can
come
from
in-‐depth,
open-‐ended
interviews,
direct
observation
and
written
documents
(Patton,
2001).
In
this
study,
qualitative
data
came
from
open-‐ended
survey
questions.
The
completed
surveys
are
documents,
and
document
analysis
can
also
involve
analysis
of
open-‐ended
written
responses
to
questionnaires
and
surveys
(Patton,
2001).
In
this
instance,
the
answers
to
the
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
51
open-‐ended
questions
can
help
develop
the
ideas,
themes
and
“stories”
inherent
in
the
quantitative
survey
responses
(Bryman,
2006).
Qualitative
data
allows
the
researcher
to
look
at
specific
issues
with
depth
and
detail
(Patton,
2001).
Qualitative
data
can
provide
more
detailed,
personal
experiences
that
allow
those
reviewing
the
research
a
greater
level
of
context
and
understanding
of
the
numerical
data
collected.
Comments
and
statements
obtained
through
qualitative
data
collection
flesh
out
the
numbers,
allowing
for
greater
validity
in
interpretation
of
data
points
(Patton,
2001).
In
this
study,
the
qualitative
data
came
from
open-‐
ended
response
questions
at
the
end
of
a
survey.
Kenyon-‐Rowan
and
Niehaus
(2011)
chose
a
qualitative
approach
as
well
when
evaluating
a
small
cohort
of
students
who
travelled
abroad
in
order
to
provide
rich,
thick
descriptions
of
the
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
on
a
small
group
of
students.
Quantitative
Data
In
this
study,
very
basic
quantitative
data
came
from
the
results
of
two
surveys.
This
data
was
limited
and
was
used
primarily
to
contextualize
and
supplement
the
findings
of
the
qualitative
data.
Both
the
2011
and
2013
surveys
asked
students
for
information
about
their
experiences
on
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
trip
and
also
asked
students
questions
regarding
how
this
experience
might
change
their
collegiate
plans.
Quantitative
studies
have
frequently
been
performed
to
help
measure
changes
in
student
attitudes
and
beliefs
as
a
result
of
long-‐term
study
abroad.
For
example,
Clarke,
Flaherty,
Wright
and
McMillan
(2009)
analyzed
survey
results
to
determine
different
levels
of
intercultural
competency
in
cohorts
of
marketing
students
who
participated
in
study
abroad
programs.
Williams
(2005)
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
52
also
used
quantitative
data
when
comparing
students
who
stayed
on
campus
to
students
studied
abroad
for
a
semester
when
measuring
intercultural
sensitivity
and
adaptability.
In
this
instance,
the
quantitative
data
was
used
to
help
interpret
or
buttress
the
qualitative
data.
In
addition,
the
2011
and
2013
surveys
are
interesting
to
compare,
and
they
are
compared
in
limited
ways
below.
However,
ultimately,
the
data
sets
are
not
congruent,
so
the
comparison
is
used
primarily
to
better
interpret
the
qualitative
data.
Discussion
In
this
study,
analysis
of
the
qualitative
data
was
the
primary
method
of
analysis;
this,
along
with
the
very
basic
quantitative
analysis
being
used
to
contextualize
and
supplement
the
qualitative
information,
served
to
answer
the
research
question
(Creswell,
2009).
According
to
Patton
(2003),
a
“questionnaire
that
asks
both
fixed-‐choice
(closed)
questions
and
open-‐ended
questions
is
an
example
of
how
quantitative
measurement
and
qualitative
inquiry
are
often
combined”
(p.
5).
Since
both
quantitative
and
qualitative
methods
of
data
collection
are
imperfect,
combining
the
two
in
a
study
helps
to
compensate
for
the
weaknesses
of
each
to
provide
for
a
rich
and
grounded
study
(Bryman,
2006).
Combining
methods
allows
for
greater
illustration,
clarification,
and
development
of
those
results
(Bryman,
2006).
Ingraham
and
Peterson
(2004)
used
a
mixed-‐methods
approach
when
evaluating
the
impact
of
study
abroad
on
student
learning
at
Michigan
State
University.
In
particular,
they
used
quantitative
data
from
self-‐
reporting
student
surveys
as
well
as
qualitative
data
from
student
reflections
about
their
previous
study
abroad
as
well
as
reflections
from
professors
on
student
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
53
experiences.
This
survey
looked
at
student
growth
in
such
areas
as
intercultural
awareness,
personal
growth
and
intellectual
growth.
While
acknowledging
the
limitation
that
student
pre-‐
and
post-‐trip
surveys
were
not
paired,
they
were
nonetheless
able
to
use
the
quantitative
data
from
the
surveys
as
well
as
qualitative
data
from
students’
and
professors’
reflective
writings
to
provide
a
detailed
analysis
of
student
performance
in
several
areas.
Medina-‐Lopez-‐Portillo
(2004)
also
used
student
surveys
and
reflective
comments
by
students
when
comparing
students
who
travelled
to
Mexico
on
study-‐
abroad
programs
of
different
duration
(7
weeks
and
16
weeks)
using
quantitative
data
from
the
surveys
to
provide
some
information
while
utilizing
remarks
from
the
students
as
an
important
way
to
provide
context
that
revealed
differences
that
the
quantitative
data
alone
was
unable
to
provide.
In
that
case,
having
both
qualitative
and
quantitative
data
was
significant,
as
it
influenced
the
conclusions
reached.
There,
Medina-‐Lopez-‐Portillo
(2004)
concluded
that
students
on
the
shorter-‐term
study
abroad
program
believed
they
were
more
inter-‐culturally
competent,
but
also
returned
home
somewhat
more
nationalistic
than
before
they
left.
Students
in
the
longer-‐term
study
abroad
program
also
over-‐rated
their
own
actual
level
of
intercultural
competence,
but
returned
with
a
more
nuanced
and
critical
approach
towards
certain
issues
in
their
home
country.
In
this
study,
the
qualitative
data
provided
the
richest
source
of
data
for
understanding
and
analysis,
and
this
study
relies
chiefly
on
the
qualitative
data
for
its
conclusions.
Quantitative
data
was
used
in
very
limited
ways
for
the
purpose
of
contextualizing
the
rich
qualitative
data
set.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
54
Sample
and
Population
Population
The
University
of
Southern
California
(USC)
is
a
selective,
private,
not-‐for
profit,
non-‐sectarian
research
university
located
in
Los
Angeles,
California.
It
has
over
18,000
undergraduate
students
(USC,
2014).
The
l
the
LINC
and
GLP
programs
are
part
of
the
USC
Marshall
School
of
Business,
which
is
the
largest
of
USC’s
seventeen
professional
schools.
The
undergraduate
program
of
the
Marshall
school
has
approximately
3,500
students
and
offers
degrees
in
Accounting
and
Business
Administration.
The
Marshall
School
ranks
in
the
top
fifteen
undergraduate
business
programs
by
U.S.
News
and
World
Report
(2014).
The
LINC/GLP
program
is
offered
to
undergraduate
students
in
the
second
semester
of
their
freshman
year
of
the
business
program
and
has
a
high
rate
of
student
participation
(Marshall
School
of
Business,
2014).
If
students
wish
to
pursue
additional
study-‐abroad,
global
or
international
experiences
after
participating
in
LINC,
the
University
provides
a
number
of
opportunities
to
do
so,
including
international
internships,
additional
short
and
long-‐term
study
abroad
programs,
and
a
choice
of
business
classes
that
include
international
and
global
components
to
the
curriculum
(Marshall
School
of
Business,
2014).
The
LINC
program
is
an
appropriate
candidate
for
study
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
for
several
reasons.
Business
schools,
in
general,
have
been
tasked
with
increasing
their
level
of
globalization.
Moreover,
the
university’s
overall
mission
and
the
particular
interest
of
the
Marshall
School
in
global
education
are
evident
from
examination
of
the
goals
and
mission
of
the
School.
This
leading
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
55
undergraduate
business
school
provides
numerous
opportunities
for
students
to
integrate
knowledge
from
short-‐term
study
abroad
into
longer-‐term
experiences.
The
university
also
has
a
large,
well-‐organized
and
well-‐established
program,
offering
the
opportunity
for
a
substantial
number
of
students
to
be
studied.
Sample:
Participants
in
the
LINC
Program
There
were
two
different
groups
included
in
this
study.
The
first
population
group,
or
unit
of
analysis,
was
the
original
group
of
students
surveyed
immediately
after
taking
the
LINC
course
(respondents
to
the
original
survey).
The
second
unit
of
analysis
was
drawn
entirely
from
the
first
population
group,
and
was
made
up
of
the
students
who
responded
to
the
second
2013
survey
and
questionnaire.
These
were
all
students
who
had
previously
taken
the
LINC
course
in
2011.
The
follow-‐up
surveys
and
questionnaire
were
administered
two
years
later,
in
2013.
Although
the
original
survey
asks
for
the
student’s
USC
identification
number,
the
student
information
gathered
was
not
correlated
to
individual
students.
This
study
looks
only
at
the
aggregated
data
from
the
second
group
of
students.
The
first
group
consisted
of
freshmen,
all
of
who
had
recently
completed
the
LINC
course
at
the
time
they
took
the
survey,
and
results
revealed
their
attitudes,
knowledge
and
beliefs
immediately
post-‐trip.
The
second
(and
most
significant)
unit
of
analysis
consists
of
students
who
completed
the
LINC
course
at
least
two
years
prior
to
this
study.
All
those
students
who
were
listed
with
the
Marshall
School
as
having
completed
the
LINC
course
within
that
time
frame,
received
an
e-‐mail
requesting
their
participation.
Answering
the
e-‐mail
and
completing
the
survey
caused
students
from
the
second
sample
to
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
56
self-‐select
into
a
follow-‐up
questionnaire
and
survey
about
both
short
and
long-‐
term
undergraduate
study-‐abroad
experiences.
The
Marshall
School
collected
the
2011
surveys.
The
2013
survey
and
questionnaire
were
developed
by
this
researcher
and
were
administered
electronically,
although
the
business
school
sent
a
reminder
notice.
Instrumentation
Three
instruments
were
used.
The
first
was
a
survey
administered
to
students
who
had
just
returned
from
participation
in
a
LINC
course
in
2011
(hereafter
referred
to
as
“Survey
I”).
The
second
instrument
was
a
survey
administered
in
2013
to
students
who
participated
in
the
2011
LINC
course
(hereafter
referred
to
as
“Survey
II”).
The
third
instrument
was
a
questionnaire
also
given
in
2013,
at
the
same
time
as
Survey
II,
to
students
who
participated
in
the
2011
LINC
program
(hereafter
referred
to
as
the
“Questionnaire”).
The
first
and
second
surveys
consisted
of
a
series
of
Likert
scale
questions
to
provide
quantitative
data.
The
questionnaire
consisted
of
a
short
series
of
open-‐
ended
questions
that
allowed
participants
to
provide
qualitative
data
in
the
form
of
detailed
personal
responses
(Appendices
B,
C
&
D).
As
stated
earlier,
collection
of
quantitative
data
was
intended
to
supplement
and
buttress
qualitative
data,
and
the
two
surveys
do
not
represent
congruous
data
sets.
Answering
Sub-‐Question
I
Sub-‐Question
I
of
the
Research
Question
is:
What
meaning
do
students
make
of
their
participation
in
short-‐term
study
abroad
immediately
after
returning,
and
two
years
after
returning?
To
answer
this
question,
the
researcher
analyzed
the
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
57
responses
to
Survey
I.
In
particular,
responses
to
Part
I,
Questions
1-‐9;
Part
II,
Questions
1-‐7;
Part
III,
Questions
1-‐5;
and
Part
IV,
Questions
1-‐6
were
analyzed
to
answer
this
question.
Answering
Sub-‐Question
II:
Sub
Question
II
of
the
Research
Question
is
“How
do
students
integrate
this
new
information
into
their
lives?
To
answer
this
question,
the
research
analyzed
responses
to
Survey
I:
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12;
Survey
II:
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12,
and
the
Questionnaire.
Answering
Sub-‐Question
III:
Sub-‐Question
III
of
the
Research
Question
is,
“To
what
extent
do
students
follow
through
on
new
commitments
or
intentions
developed,
as
a
result
of
program
participation?”
In
order
to
answer
this
question,
the
researcher
analyzed
the
data
found
in
Survey
II:
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12
and
the
Questionnaire.
All
of
these
three
questions
were
addressed
through
the
framework
of
Rowan-‐
Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011),
as
the
same
questions
were
asked
in
both
surveys.
The
researcher
looked
at
the
global
or
international
learning
and
personal
experiences
in
which
students
intended
to
participate
immediately
after
completing
the
LINC
course
by
examining
their
response
to
Part
VI
of
the
original
survey.
Next,
that
data
was
compared
to
the
global
or
international
learning
in
which
students
actually
report
having
participated
when
responding
to
Part
VI
of
the
second
survey.
Additionally,
this
comparison
between
actual
and
intended
participation
can
be
cross-‐referenced
within
the
second
survey.
How,
and
to
what
extent,
students
integrated
this
new
learning
into
their
lives
can
be
measured
by
student
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
58
participation
in
subsequent
courses
with
international
content,
foreign
language
courses,
or
additional
study
abroad
programs
or
internships
utilizing
global
knowledge
acquired
on
the
trip.
The
Framework
In
order
to
evaluate
whether
a
learning
experience
was
effective
and
the
learning
was
retained
over
time,
the
research
can
profit
from
utilizing
the
framework
provided
by
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011).
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
used
theories
of
transformational
learning
(Mezirow,
2000)
in
order
to
examine
how
students
made
meaning
of
their
short-‐term
learning
experiences
and
how
that
meaning
was
integrated
into
their
lives
over
the
course
of
the
next
year.
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
specifically
sought
to
determine
whether
the
short-‐
term
study
abroad
had
been
transformative
for
student
learning.
When
evaluating
the
effectiveness
of
the
student
experiences,
the
researchers
looked
at
theories
of
transformative
learning.
In
transformative
learning,
a
student
is
confronted
with
a
disorienting
dilemma
that
challenges
notions
of
self.
The
student
reflects
upon
that
experience
to
make
meaning
of
it
and
analyze
it,
and
integrates
new
knowledge
permanently
by
implementing
a
plan
of
action
adjusting
the
plan
of
action,
and
using
those
experiences
to
reintegrate
his/her
knowledge
into
life
using
the
new
perspectives.
Similarly
to
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus’s
approach
(2011),
this
study
sought
to
examine
the
ways
in
which
students
made
meaning
out
of
their
short-‐term
study
abroad.
This
study
also
looks
at
how
students
sought
to
integrate
this
new
meaning
into
their
lives.
The
questions
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
59
developed
by
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
provide
the
framework
for
the
study
and
are
the
same
questions
addressed
here.
Data
Collection
Three
forms
of
data
were
collected
in
this
study.
Two
student
surveys
were
analyzed
in
order
to
provide
answers
to
questions
regarding
the
long-‐term
effectiveness
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
and
those
factors
most
associated
with
positive
retention
of
knowledge,
skills
and
abilities.
Survey
I
(2011)
The
answers
given
by
students
on
the
original
survey
revealed
self-‐reported
levels
of
global
attitudes,
skills
and
abilities
as
well
as
stated
interests
in
further
developing
those
attributes
at
the
time
immediately
subsequent
to
taking
the
course.
The
curriculum
and
its
impact
were
at
their
most
fresh
for
students
during
this
survey.
Survey
II
(2013)
The
second
survey
revealed
the
level
of
change,
if
any,
in
the
baseline
level
of
self-‐assessment
of
their
knowledge,
skills
and
abilities
in
the
same
areas
over
time
for
the
group
of
students
who
responded
to
the
second
survey.
Answers
given
to
the
first
five
sections
of
questions,
in
particular,
helped
understand
the
degree
to
which
students
fully
integrated
the
learning
gained
during
the
course
(Appendix
A,
Parts
I-‐V).
Questionnaire
(2013)
Thirdly,
an
open-‐ended
questionnaire
was
given
along
with
the
second
survey
to
allow
students
to
reflect
upon
their
previous
study
abroad
experience
and
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
60
to
place
that
experience
in
the
larger
context
of
their
overall
university
experience,
personal
development
and
long-‐term
personal
goals.
The
first
question
asked
students
to
remember
their
overall
strongest
impressions.
This
helped
to
answer
the
first
sub-‐question,
regarding
what
meaning
students
made
of
their
study
abroad
experience.
The
second
and
third
questions
both
asked
students
for
specific
information
about
the
ways
in
which
they
integrated
that
meaning
into
their
lives
in
terms
of
academic
pursuits
and
other
career-‐planning
choices
they
made.
In
addition,
the
second
and
third
questions
provided
additional
data
on
how
well
students
followed
through
on
their
intentions
to
integrate
and
develop
further
knowledge.
The
fourth
question
asked
how
students
made
meaning
of
their
experiences
and
integrated
it
into
their
personal
lives.
The
fifth
question
gave
students
an
opportunity
to
reflect
and
add
data
they
may
have
considered
important
and
which
may
serve
to
answer
any
of
the
three
sub-‐questions.
The
surveys
do
not
represent
congruous
data
sets
due
to
the
different
collection
methods,
and,
as
such,
cannot
be
viewed
as
supplemental
to
the
qualitative
data
collected.
Data
Analysis
This
data
was
analyzed
through
a
primarily
qualitative
lens.
The
Marshall
School
of
Business
created
a
student
survey
for
its
own
purposes,
and
this
was
administered
immediately
after
student
trips.
This
original
survey
had
a
Likert
scale
series
of
46
questions
which
ask
about
identity,
the
impact
on
student
learning
and
beliefs
surrounding
globalization,
and
the
likelihood
that
the
student
will
participate
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
61
in
further
study
abroad
or
other
global
experiences
while
continuing
at
university.
The
surveys
were
given
to
all
students
at
the
conclusion
of
the
LINC/GLP
course.
In
the
present
study,
surveys
were
analyzed
for
the
year
2010-‐2011,
and
the
data
collected
in
that
survey
was
quantitative.
The
independent
variable
across
the
questionnaires
was
time.
The
dependent
variables,
such
as
cultural
integration
and
additional
course-‐work,
were
established
through
item
clusters
of
the
questions.
Responses
to
the
first
set
of
surveys
were
analyzed.
In
the
second
set
of
surveys
administered,
former
students
in
the
LINC
course
were
again
asked
the
same
questions
on
student
attitudes,
beliefs
and
learning.
However,
the
last
set
of
questions
(Appendix
B,
Part
VI)
was
modified
to
allow
students
to
provide
specific
information
regarding
their
subsequent
experiences.
The
data
were
then
aggregated
and
compared
to
previously
aggregated
data
on
student
attitudes,
beliefs
and
learning
to
allow
this
researcher
to
capture
some
of
the
long-‐term
effectiveness
of
student
learning.
The
student
questionnaires
were
also
evaluated
to
determine
student
intent
to
participate
in
additional
study-‐abroad
experiences,
versus
the
actual
number
who
followed
through
with
this
intent.
In
addition,
the
study
examined
which,
if
any,
experiences
correlated
with
retention
and
integration
of
learning
into
the
long-‐term
student
experience.
The
student
commentary,
in
particular,
provided
interesting
insight
into
the
student’s
long-‐term
learning
as
a
result
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs,
particularly
as
related
to
the
GLP/LINC
course.
The
analysis
of
student
responses
was
a
critical
part
of
understanding
and
making
meaning
from
this
data.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
62
A
better
understanding
of
long-‐term
student
perceptions
of
their
short
term
study
abroad,
and
those
factors
that
seem
to
have
contributed
to
longer-‐term
learning
outcomes,
should
help
professors
and
administrators
better
plan
for
experiences
that
maximize
student
learning.
Validity
and
Reliability
The
researcher
attempted
to
look
at
the
research
collected
to
determine
whether
it
was
internally
consistent
and
appeared
to
be
logical
and
consistent
with
other
findings.
Here,
different
strategies
were
utilized
to
provide
research
that
is
both
reliable
and
valid.
Construct
validity
means
that
the
operation
and
design
of
a
study
has
been
organized
in
a
way
that
makes
it
likely
to
yield
valid
and
credible
results.
Triangulation
of
data,
or
the
collection
of
data
from
three
different
sources,
can
help
to
ensure
that
the
data
received
is
consistent.
In
this
case,
data
were
collected
from
multiple
sources,
two
different
surveys
and
a
questionnaire
(Patton,
2003).
Internal
validity
means
that
the
research
makes
sense
and
that
the
results
and
interpretations
are
plausible
and
believable
to
other
readers.
Internal
validity
can
be
assured
by
sharing
information
with
colleagues
and/or
academic
peers,
by
discussing
and
developing
the
study
design
in
collaboration
with
participants
of
the
study,
and
by
checking
for
the
personal
biases
of
the
researcher
(Patton,
2003).
External
validity
means
that
the
findings
of
the
study
are
not
only
internally
consistent,
but
they
can
also
be
generalized
beyond
the
single
study
conducted
(Patton
2003).
Using
a
survey
and
questionnaires
and
through
analyzing
the
data
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
63
collected
via
the
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
framework
allow
this
study
to
build
effectively
upon
existing
research.
In
order
for
a
study
to
be
reliable,
it
must
be
able
to
be
replicated,
so
others
can
achieve
the
same
results
(Patton,
2003).
The
researcher
documented
all
techniques
used
carefully.
Survey
samples
were
created
and
retained.
Careful
documentation
of
all
of
the
steps
in
the
study
allows
others
to
conduct
similar
research.
The
researcher
complied
with
all
ethical
boundaries
and
outlines
provided
by
the
University
of
Southern
California’s
Institutional
Review
Board.
Because
the
studies
were
completed
anonymously,
there
is
a
very
low
risk
of
harm
to
participants.
Limitations
of
the
Research
Design
While
the
survey
and
questionnaire
approach
to
provide
qualitative
data
is
frequently
used
to
evaluate
the
efficacy
or
results
of
study
abroad
programs
for
students
(Ingraham
&
Pederson,
2009;
Medina-‐Lopez-‐Portillo
2004),
there
were
limits
to
this
study’s
design.
For
example,
the
data
could
not
be
paired
student-‐to-‐
student.
This
strongly
limited
the
ability
to
use
a
more
quantitative
approach.
The
aggregate
data
looked
at
students
from
the
same
school
year
who
travelled
on
the
LINC
program,
but
did
not
pair
a
student’s
original
survey
responses
with
his
or
her
second
survey
and
questionnaire
responses.
In
addition,
outside
sources
of
data
(such
as
student
G.P.A.
records
and
data
from
participating
professors)
could
have
been
used.
These
sources
of
data
could
have
provided
additional
reference
points.
Instead,
this
research
focused
on
students’
understanding
and
impressions
of
their
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
64
own
experiences
and
learning.
Students
may
have
accorded
greater
or
lesser
significance
to
their
trip
than
is
actually
warranted.
More
detailed
questionnaires
or
metrics
that
are
standardly
used
in
measuring
student
intercultural
proficiency,
such
as
the
Intercultural
Development
Inventory
(IDI)
at
the
time
of
travel,
and
again
two
years
later,
in
addition
to
a
program-‐specific
questionnaire,
would
have
yielded
additional
useful
information.
This
study
was
also
limited
by
a
number
of
factors
inherent
in
its
design.
The
qualitative
questionnaire
was
given
to
all
students
two
years
post-‐trip
only.
In
addition,
while
students
were
expected
to
fill
out
the
immediate
pre-‐
and
post-‐trip
surveys
in
class,
and
there
was
a
very
high
response
rate,
the
response
rate
two
years
later
was
much
lower.
Thus,
the
possibility
exists
that
students
with
unusual
or
extreme
reactions
to
the
course
may
have
skewed
or
affected
the
results
gathered.
The
researcher
looked
for
a
mix
of
positive,
negative
and
neutral
experiences
to
ascertain
some
balance
in
data.
For
this
type
of
research,
ideally,
a
strong
set
of
both
quantitative
and
qualitative
data
should
have
been
collected
at
the
time
of
the
course
and
then,
again,
two
years
later.
In
addition
to
utilizing
only
the
selected
methods
of
gathering
data,
the
study
was
limited
by
representing
one
group
of
students
in
one
particular
program
(undergraduate
business)
at
one
type
of
university
(large,
private
research
university).
In
order
to
provide
more
generalizable
data,
it
would
be
helpful
to
conduct
a
survey
of
similarly
constructed
programs
across
more
than
one
department
and
program,
and/or
more
than
one
university
setting.
However,
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
65
designing
and
implementing
such
a
study
was
beyond
the
time
frame
of
this
doctoral
course
of
study.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
66
CHAPTER
FOUR:
RESULTS
This
chapter
consists
of
three
parts:
(1)
an
introduction
detailing
the
population
studied,
(2)
data
analysis
for
each
research
sub-‐question
and
(3)
additional
analysis
and
results.
The
first
section
uses
data
collected
from
the
university
regarding
the
program
participants.
The
second
section
uses
quantitative
analysis
of
the
data
collected
through
Qualtrics.
The
third
section
uses
the
qualitative
data
collected
in
the
comments
section
of
the
survey.
The
Population
Studied
Before
examining
the
answers
to
the
research
questions,
this
chapter
examines
the
population
for
the
study.
In
2011,
a
total
of
382
freshmen
in
the
Marshall
School
of
Business
participated
in
the
GLP
or
LINC
study
abroad.
Students
were
surveyed
both
pre-‐
and
post-‐trip
in
2011
in
order
to
measure
their
gains
in
international
experience.
Three
hundred
and
thirty-‐seven
students
completed
both
2011
trip
surveys.
These
same
students
were
then
re-‐surveyed
in
2013
by
the
researcher.
Thirty-‐one
students
fully
completed
the
2013
survey
and
questionnaire.
The
research
subjects
attended
GLP
or
LINC
programs
in
10
different
locations:
Beijing,
Buenos
Aires,
Hong
Kong,
Mumbai,
Santiago,
Shanghai,
Singapore,
Sydney,
Taipei
and
Tokyo.
Of
the
students
for
whom
pre-‐
and
post-‐data
were
collected,
53%
were
male
and
47%
were
female.
Eighty-‐four
percent
of
students
were
domestic
students
while
the
remaining
16%
were
international
students.
Twenty-‐three
percent
were
students
enrolled
in
the
GLP
course,
and
72%
were
enrolled
in
the
LINC
course.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
67
Of
the
students
surveyed,
41%
percent
travelled
out
of
the
country
ten
or
more
times
prior
to
the
program,
and
46%
percent
of
them
were
fluent
in
at
least
one
foreign
language
prior
to
travel.
Such
study
abroad
is
associated
with
a
number
of
outcomes
often
termed
global
behavior,
such
as
stronger
intercultural
communication
skills,
greater
respect
and
understanding
of
global
issues,
and
increased
foreign
language
skills
(Salisbury,
Umbach,
Paulsen
&
Pascarella,
2009).
Due
to
the
global
exposure
of
the
2011
GLP
and
LINC
course
participants
prior
to
the
course,
students
exhibited
high
overall
levels
of
global
awareness
prior
to
travel
(USC
Marshall
School
of
Business,
2011).
Results
This
study
addressed
the
following
research
question:
“Are
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
able
to
significantly
influence
development
of
perspectives
and
skills
in
undergraduate
students?”
The
study
examines
this
question
in
three
parts,
and
the
results
for
each
sub-‐question
are
included
below.
Sub-‐Question
I:
What
meaning
do
students
make
of
their
participation
in
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience,
both
immediately
after
the
experience
and
two
to
three
years
later?
This
question
was
answered
through
analysis
of
the
responses
to
Survey
I
and
Survey
II.
Survey
I
was
taken
in
2011
immediately
after
students
returned
from
their
overseas
GLP
or
LINC
trip.
Survey
II
was
taken
two
years
later,
in
2013.
The
two
Surveys
were
essentially
the
same.
However,
at
the
end
of
Survey
II,
an
additional
short
questionnaire
designed
to
elicit
qualitative
data,
was
added.
In
particular,
responses
to
Part
I,
Questions
1-‐9;
Part
II,
Questions
1-‐7;
Part
III,
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
68
Questions
1-‐4;
and
Part
IV,
Questions
1-‐6
of
both
Surveys
were
used
to
answer
this
question.
Students
self-‐assessed
that,
two
years
post-‐travel,
they
retained
higher
levels
of
international
business
awareness,
a
higher
comfort
level
with
international
business
and
an
understanding
of
how
it
operated;
however,
they
did
not
retain
the
full
level
of
confidence
they
had
immediately
post-‐trip
two
years
earlier.
Students
did
retain
an
understanding
of
international
business
as
an
important
factor
in
their
future
careers
and
as
an
important
part
of
the
business
world.
Students
retained
the
increased
levels
of
self-‐efficacy
and
self-‐confidence
that
they
reported
post-‐trip
and
a
very
high
level
of
feeling
connected
with
fellow
students
and
staff.
Part
I:
Questions
1-‐9:
Self-‐assessing
international
business
awareness
In
Part
I
of
the
survey,
questions
1
through
9,
included
questions
which
ask
the
student
to
self-‐assess
their
increased
levels
of
understanding
of
the
business,
political,
technological
and
regulatory
environments
overseas
both
generally
and
in
the
host
country
in
particular.
In
2011,
immediately
post-‐trip,
students
reported
a
high
degree
of
understanding
of
such
environments:
depending
on
the
particular
questions,
between
45.9%
and
63.2%
of
students
“strongly
agreed”
that
they
were
familiar
with
global
and
international
environments.
Immediately
post-‐trip,
students
felt
most
comfortable
stating
that
they
came
away
from
the
trip
with
an
increased
generalized
understanding
of
conducting
international
business.
For
example,
94.7%
of
students
“strongly
agreed”
or
“agreed”
that
they
had
“greater
familiarity
with
globalization
and
its
impact
on
international
business”
and
91.7%
either
strongly
agreed
or
agreed
that
they
had
a
greater
familiarity
with
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
69
international
global
and
business
strategy.
Students
were
slightly
less
confident
about
the
skills
they
acquired
for
doing
business
in
the
host
country,
but
still
displayed
a
high
degree
of
confidence
in
their
acquired
skills.
For
example,
85.7%
either
strongly
agreed
or
agreed
that
they
had
increased
familiarity
with
the
technological
environment
of
the
host
country,
while
80.4%
declared
they
either
strongly
agreed
or
agreed
with
the
statement
that
they
had
greater
familiarity
about
how
to
find
data
about
the
business
environment
in
the
visited
country.
Two
years
later,
68%
of
students
either
strongly
agreed
or
agreed
that
they
had
a
greater
understanding
of
globalization
and
its
impact
on
international
business,
and
81%
responded
that
they
had
a
greater
familiarity
with
how
to
do
business
outside
of
the
United
States.
However,
unlike
in
2011,
when
the
majority
of
students
“strongly
agreed”
(56%)
and
a
smaller
portion
(33.15%)
“agreed,”
in
2013,
50%
of
students
felt
slightly
less
strongly
about
this,
“agreeing”
with
the
statement
while
only
31%
strongly
agreed.
Part
II:
Questions
1-‐7:
Student
Self-‐Efficacy,
Self-‐Confidence
and
Campus
Relationships
In
Part
II,
Questions
1through
5
of
the
survey
ask
students
to
self-‐assess
regarding
changes
in
the
way
they
view
themselves,
their
understanding
of
self,
changes
in
their
world
view-‐point,
and
their
independence
and
self-‐confidence.
Questions
6
and
7
ask
the
students
to
self-‐assess
levels
of
connectedness
to
faculty,
staff
and
fellow
students.
In
2011,
48.1%
of
students
agreed
or
strongly
agreed
that
the
LINC
or
GLP
course
changed
the
way
they
viewed
themselves,
and
69.6%
agreed
or
strongly
agreed
it
changed
the
way
in
which
they
viewed
the
world.
Sixty-‐eight
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
70
percent
felt
they
had
a
greater
level
of
self-‐confidence
and
74.2%
felt
an
increased
sense
of
independence.
Perhaps
unsurprisingly
for
a
group
of
students
traveling
in
a
cohort
on
long
plane
rides,
the
greatest
levels
of
connection
were
felt
with
the
university
after
the
experience.
In
2013,
two
years
later,
81.08%
of
the
students
agreed,
when
reflecting
upon
their
LINC/GLP
experience,
that
their
experience
changed
the
way
they
viewed
themselves
and
also
agreed
that
it
changed
the
way
they
viewed
the
world.
They
also
reported
much
greater
levels
of
self-‐confidence
and
independence.
It
is
possible
that
the
experience
meant
more
over
time.
However,
it
is
also
possible
that
students
misread
the
question
and
simply
responded
that
their
own
view
of
themselves
had
changed.
To
examine
this,
the
researcher
analyzed
the
number
of
students
who
felt
connected
with
faculty
or
staff,
since
this
question
(in
the
same
section)
was
quite
clear.
To
explain
their
self-‐confidence
and
independence,
students
were
asked
to
agree
or
disagree
with
the
statements,
“I
have
a
greater
sense
of
independence,”
and
“I
have
a
greater
sense
of
self-‐confidence.”
Although
students
were
asked
to
assess
this
in
relationship
to
the
GLP/LINC
experience
at
the
beginning
of
the
trip,
some
students
may
have
responded
in
relationship
to
how
they
felt
previously.
However,
the
relationship
with
faculty
query
specifically
asked,
“I
feel
connected
with
faculty
and
staff
who
lead
the
course,”
which
may
have
led
to
a
more
targeted
answer.
In
2011,
79.2%
of
students
agreed
or
strongly
agreed
that
they
felt
connected
with
faculty
and
staff
who
led
the
course.
Two
years
later,
in
2013,
81.08%
continued
to
report
that
they
either
strongly
agreed
or
agreed
that
they
felt
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
71
connected
with
faculty
and
staff
who
led
the
course,
representing
a
slight
increase.
Therefore,
the
course
seems
to
have
been
the
precipitating
event
in
creating
a
strong
student-‐faculty
bond
that,
for
many
participants,
was
maintained
over
time.
It
may
be
that
students
also
came
to
view
the
initial
trip
with
greater
significance
than
they
originally
attached
to
it
in
terms
of
their
own
personal
growth.
Again,
these
data
do
not
represent
congruous
sets.
Part
III:
Questions
1-‐4:
Understanding
of
Diverse
Cultures
In
Part
III,
questions
revolved
around
students’
comfort
level
in
their
possession
and
use
of
knowledge
and
skills
in
working
with
others.
For
example,
Question
1
in
Part
III
asked
students
to
assess
how
much
they
valued
understanding
cultures
other
than
their
own.
Seventy-‐six
percent
of
students
rated
this
as
extremely
important
or
very
important
immediately
post-‐trip.
Two
years
later,
in
2013,
this
number
had
increased,
with
92%
of
students
believing
that
understanding
cultures
other
than
their
own
was
very
important
or
extremely
important.
In
addition,
in
2013,
96%
of
students
also
agreed
that
understanding
international
issues,
having
the
ability
to
work
with
people
with
beliefs
or
values
different
from
their
own,
and
being
able
to
tolerate
uncertainty
were
all
very
important
or
extremely
important
skills.
This
represented
a
small
increase
from
2011,
when
94%
of
students
found
it
was
extremely
important
or
very
important
to
have
the
ability
to
work
with
people
who
have
different
beliefs
or
values
then
their
own,
92%
believed
it
was
important
to
possess
knowledge
of
international
issues,
and
90%
that
believed
it
was
important
to
tolerate
uncertainty.
This
was
important
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
72
because
the
pre-‐
to
post-‐
trip
gains
seen
in
2011
were
not
lost,
but,
instead,
were
reinforced
and
even
gained
upon
in
the
two
years
at
the
college
post-‐trip.
Figure
1.
Changes
in
Students’
View
of
Self
Part
IV:
Questions
1-‐6:
Importance
of
International
Engagement
and
Globalized
Perspective
in
Future
Career
In
Part
IV,
Questions
1
through
6,
students
were
asked
to
rate
levels
of
international
engagement
and
of
a
globalized
perspective
as
important
to
their
future
career
success.
Prior
to
going
on
the
2011
trip,
87%
of
students
rated
this
as
extremely
important
or
very
important,
and
60%
rated
it
“extremely”
important,
the
highest
possible
rating.
After
the
trip,
in
2011,
92%
of
students
rated
this
as
extremely
or
very
important,
and
67%
rated
it
“extremely”
important.
In
2013,
when
re-‐surveyed,
an
even
higher
percentage,
97%,
viewed
this
as
extremely
important
or
very
important.
However,
the
total
gauging
it
“extremely”
importance
was
lower
at
57%.
This
high
rating
immediately
post-‐trip
demonstrates
that
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
2011
2013
Students
who
Agree
or
Strongly
Agree
that
trip
changed
view
of
themselves
(percent)
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
73
students
had
a
rich
appreciation
for
the
importance
of
international
engagement
and
a
globalized
perspective
at
that
time.
However,
after
two
years,
the
significance
of
international
engagement
and
globalized
perspective
faded.
Two
years
later,
the
number
of
students
who
view
globalized
perspective
and
international
engagement
as
extremely
important
reverted
to
slightly
below
pre-‐trip
levels.
When
asked
to
rate
the
issue
of
globalization
as
important
to
their
future
careers,
93%
rated
this
as
either
“extremely”
or
“very”
important
with
61%
rating
it
was
“extremely”
important
(Survey
II,
2013).
Immediately
post-‐trip,
in
2011
(Survey
I),
94%
agreed
it
was
either
“extremely”
or
“very”
important
to
their
career
success,
with
70%
describing
it
as
“extremely”
important.
This
represented
an
immediate
post-‐trip
bounce
in
the
number
of
students
who
viewed
this
issue
as
very
important.
Two
years
later,
the
numbers
reflected
more
of
a
pre-‐trip
mindset,
with
a
total
of
95%
of
students
viewing
this
as
extremely
or
very
important
and
just
59%
viewing
it
as
“extremely”
important—a
number
more
reflective
of
the
pre-‐trip
61%
than
the
70%
immediately
post-‐trip.
This
drop
back
to
pre-‐trip
levels
indicates
that
the
immediate
post-‐trip
bump
faded
over
time,
and
students
reverted
to
their
pre-‐trip
views.
Travelling
overseas
as
freshman,
even
for
just
a
week,
increased
student
levels
of
confidence
and
efficacy.
It
also
created
an
atmosphere
that
precipitated
strong
student-‐professor
relationships
among
those
who
went
on
the
trip.
These
findings
are
consistent
with
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus’s
(2011)
study
in
which
the
professors
who
both
taught
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
course
and
conducted
the
research
study
found
that
students
who
integrated
the
learning
experiences
into
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
74
their
lives
found
continued
meaning
in
the
experience.
In
this
instance,
some
students
created
lasting
connections
with
both
professors
and
other
students
who
shared
their
global
experiences.
Student
comments
revealed
that
these
connections
helped
students
follow
through
on
the
positive
experiences
they
had
and
to
translate
these
experiences
from
good
memories
into
tangible
actions.
This
is
consistent
with
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus’
(2011)
argument
that
the
“key
factors
that
contribute
to
transformative
learning
are
critical
reflection
and
discourse,”
and
further,
that
“the
primary
conditions
that
supported
transformative
learning
included
program
intensity
and
design”
(Rowan-‐Kenyon
&
Niehaus,
2011,
p.
215).
Appropriately
designed
programs
that
encourage
critical
reflection
and
discourse
during
the
event,
and
also
provide
opportunities
for
students
to
continue
that
reflection
and
discourse
afterwards,
through
the
pathway
of
relationships
with
skilled
professors
able
to
help
them
mediate
their
experience
and
channel
it,
are
critical
to
the
experience.
Travelling
overseas
as
freshmen
participating
in
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience
occasioned
growth
in
students’
lives.
Although
students
did
not
retain
the
full
level
of
international
awareness
and
acumen
that
they
showed
immediately
post-‐trip,
this
fall-‐off
in
numbers
is
not
surprising
considering
the
brief
nature
of
the
study
abroad
experience.
What
is
positive
is
that,
despite
the
shorter
duration
of
the
trip,
students
did
continue
to
exhibit
higher
levels
of
awareness
of
international
business
and
globalization
as
compared
to
their
pre-‐travel
levels.
Students
did
retain
some
level
of
globalization
as
a
result
of
the
experience,
although
the
levels
of
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
75
growth
shown
were
not,
overall,
comparable
to
the
levels
of
growth
shown
by
students
who
participate
in
long-‐term
study
abroad.
Students
were
very
sensitive
to
the
community
created
on
the
trip
and
self-‐
reported
that
it
was
one
of
the
most
important
and
lasting
elements
of
the
trip.
This
may
be
a
key
area
in
which
students
could
be
guided
towards
extended
globalized
growth
and
learning.
Sub
Question
II:
How
do
students
integrate
this
new
information
into
their
lives?
Sub-‐question
two
of
the
Research
Question
asked“[h]ow
do
students
integrate
this
new
information
into
their
lives?”
After
participating
in
the
trip,
students
could
take
actions
to
integrate
some
of
their
newfound
global
learning
into
their
lives,
including
their
continuing
education.
One
reason
that
the
Marshall
School
may
place
this
international
learning
experience
early
in
the
student’s
academic
career
is
so
that
students
will
have
their
interest
in
further
global
business
studies
whetted.
The
course
is
designed
to
help
expose
freshman
students
to
business
practices
outside
of
the
United
States.
The
Marshall
School
(2013)
website
also
states
that
the
“USC
and
the
Marshall
School
of
Business
are
committed
to
provide
students
with
several
opportunities
to
increase
your
international
learning
and
exposure.”
Following
this
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience,
students
may
be
more
open
to
pursuing
additional
global
and
international
education
opportunities:
further
study
abroad
coursework,
overseas
internship
experiences,
and
coursework,
such
as
selecting
a
minor,
that
includes
a
more
global
and
international
focus.
Students
may
also
use
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
76
their
experience
overseas
to
create
connections
and
forge
deeper
understandings
of
how
the
international
business
community
might
connect
to
business
generally
and
to
coursework
with
a
more
domestic
focus.
These
might
all
be
potential
outcomes
of
increased
global
understanding
of
business
due
to
such
a
trip.
However,
this
study
examined
whether
students
follow
through
and
actually
pursue
additional
global
experiences
as
undergraduates
to
ascertain
whether
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience
is
sufficient
to
provide
them
with
the
skills
to
follow
through
and
increase
the
globalization
of
their
experience,
as
so
many
of
them
desire
to
do
immediately
post
trip.
In
order
to
understand
how
students
integrated
this
new
information
into
their
lives,
the
research
focused
on
Survey
I,
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12;
Survey
II,
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12;
and
the
Questionnaire,
Questions
1-‐5
(Survey
Questionnaire
61-‐
65).
When
asked
how
they
integrated
this
new
knowledge
into
their
lives,
students
responded
in
a
variety
of
ways.
The
data
collected
in
2013
sought
to
address
this
question
and
build
upon
the
original
Marshall
School
data.
These
responses
reflect
students’
understanding,
memory
and
experiences
two
years
post-‐travel.
Thus,
their
comments
provide
qualitative
insights
into
the
long-‐term
impact
that
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience
had
on
student
learning.
The
most
prominent
recurring
theme
in
how
students
attempted
to
integrate
their
travel
abroad
experience
into
their
lives
was
through
the
continuing
relationships
they
made.
Of
the
28
remarks
that
students
provided
about
what
they
remembered
the
most,
fully
half
(14)
mentioned
the
relationships
and
friendships
with
other
professors
and
fellow
students
in
the
Marshall
School
and
the
lasting
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
77
impact
this
had
on
their
experience.
Students
consistently
remarked
on
the
importance
of
“the
relationships
I've
maintained
with
fellow
classmates
and
professors.”
A
representative
example
of
comments
came
from
a
student
who
noted:
My
lasting
impressions
are
of
the
people
that
I
traveled
with
and
the
bonds
and
memories
that
we
shared.
I
connected
with
a
group
of
students
that
I
thought
I
would
never
get
along
with,
and
I
made
lasting
relationships
with
professors.
My
LINC
group
is
organizing
a
reunion,
professors
and
all,
for
next
semester.
Another
student
wrote,
“the
most
lasting
recollections
were
the
friendships
I
made
and
the
relationships
developed
with
the
faculty.”
Other
students
mentioned,
“bonding
and
becoming
really
close
with
my
classmates
over
the
span
of
one
week,”
“I
recall
the
experience
of
traveling
with
new
friends
.
.
.
and
the
overall
camaraderie
of
the
trip.”
Another
student
cited
her
most
notable
memory
of
the
trip
as
a
specific
professor
(by
name)
who
was
mentioned
as
“being
a
great
leader,
teacher,
and
mentor.”
Another
student
commented
on
lasting
collegial
relationships
made,
stating,
“A
group
of
four
of
us
have
become
close
friends
(we
met
on
the
trip)
and
still
see
each
other
regularly.”
In
addition,
at
least
some
students
seemed
to
believe
this
quality
of
student
and
professor
interaction
on
their
trip
led
to
an
improved
personal
efficacy,
making
such
comments
as,
“I
also
had
new
experiences
with
the
friends
I
made
that
made
me
much
more
comfortable
in
traveling
and
in
life”
(emphasis
added).
The
ability
of
students
to
connect
and
develop
relationships
with
professors
is
an
important
aspect
of
a
program’s
learning.
These
relationships
with
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
78
faculty
are
highly
important
to
the
development
of
the
students
and
provide
a
basis
for
continuing
learning
beyond
the
end
of
the
class
date.
This
theme
of
the
significance
of
personal
relationships
during
the
international
experience
was
also
clarified
when
students
were
asked
how
the
GLP
or
LINC
experience
shaped
their
subsequent
academic
experience.
Again,
a
large
number
of
students
mentioned
the
personal
relationships
they
developed
with
professors
as
a
key
experience
of
their
GLP
or
LINC
course.
As
one
student
explained,
the
course
itself,
“didn't
affect
my
education
path
in
my
evaluation,
but
it
did
connect
me
with
people
that
would
help
shape
my
academic
experience.
The
friends
I
made
helped
me
gain
new
knowledge
and
helped
influence
the
classes
I
took.”
Other
students
mentioned,
“I
intentionally
enrolled
in
a
core
business
course
later
in
my
academic
career
that
was
also
taught
by
one
of
my
GLP
professors,”
and
that
professor
influenced
the
student
because,
“my
LINC
professor,
encouraged
me
to
pursue
finance/banking,”
and
“I
was
able
to
get
to
know
my
academic
counselor…
much
better
and
so
choosing
courses
was
easier!”
Generally,
some
students
responded
with
a
positive
feeling
such
as,
“I
don't
know
if
the
classes
that
I
took
subsequently
were
shaped
by
GLP,
but
my
feeling
on
the
USC
campus
life
in
general
was
broadened
and
made
better”
and
that
because
of
the
course,
students
“saw
the
opportunities
and
resources
available
at
Marshall.”
Students’
learning
more
about
the
opportunities
available
at
the
university
while
off-‐campus
is
valuable.
When
students
can
see
additional
opportunities,
as
well
as
pathways
to
develop
them,
they
take
steps
towards
transformative
learning.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
79
Another
way
in
which
students
integrated
this
knowledge
was
by
incorporating
additional
international
coursework
or
study
abroad
programs
while
at
the
Marshall
School.
When
asked
how
it
influenced
their
courses
(Question
62),
seven
out
of
twenty
(25%)
students
were
influenced
to
take
additional
international
business
coursework
or
coursework
that
built
on
a
global
perspective.
Students
made
comments
such
as,
“[a]fter
LINC,
I
felt
like
I
needed
to
pursue
more
international
experience
while
I
still
have
time
as
a
student
to
do
so,”
and
some
students
mentioned
particular
courses,
such
as
one
student
who
commented:
I
saw
another
course
in
[the]
Viterbi
[School
of
Engineering]
called
iPodia,
which
is
a
global
engineering
innovation
class
that
does
projects
and
takes
a
trip
to
South
Korea
after
the
year
ends.
Based
on
my
GLP
experience
and
how
much
I
liked
it,
I
saw
this
as
something
similar
and
applied
to
join.
I
was
accepted
and
am
currently
in
the
course.
My
decision
to
apply
was
heavily
influenced
by
my
participation
in
GLP.
Another
commented,
“In
the
Fall
of
my
Junior
year
(FA
2012)
I
decided
to
take
BUCO
260:
Business
Communication
Across
Culture
because
I
already
had
the
international
travel
experience
from
LINC
and
I
knew
I
would
be
interning
in
Hong
Kong
during
the
summer.”
In
this
instance,
the
student
took
the
lessons
learned
in
the
GLP
course
and
transferred
them
towards
pursuing
a
new,
similar
goal
in
a
related
area.
This
ability
to
build
upon
the
learning
in
the
GLP
course
and
sustain
and
further
develop
these
lessons
is
a
valuable
example
of
learning.
However,
despite
a
majority
of
students’
self-‐reporting
that
the
GLP/LINC
program
influenced
their
academic
experience,
not
all
did
so.
Twenty-‐one
percent
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
80
of
students
responded
that
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience
did
not
affect
their
experience
in
choosing
their
subsequent
courses
very
much,
if
at
all,
responding
either
“N/A”
or
by
stating,
“it
didn’t”
(affect
their
subsequent
courses).
The
experience
that
students
had
in
terms
of
developing
a
sense
of
community,
being
influenced
by
their
fellow
students
and
professors,
and
becoming
more
fully
aware
of
the
resources
of
USC
are
all
significant.
Sub-‐question
III:
To
what
extent
do
students
follow
through
on
new
commitments
or
intentions
developed,
as
a
result
of
program
participation?
Sub-‐question
III
of
the
Research
Question
was,
“[t]o
what
extent
do
students
follow
through
on
new
commitments
or
intentions
developed,
as
a
result
of
program
participation?”
In
order
to
answer
this
question,
the
researcher
analyzed
the
data
found
in
Survey
II:
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12
and
the
Questionnaire,
Questions
1-‐5
(Survey
Questions
61-‐65).
Students
followed
through
on
some,
but
not
all,
of
their
post-‐trip
goals.
In
general,
students
participated
in
international
experiences
(foreign
language
classes,
minors
in
foreign
languages,
additional
overseas
study-‐abroad
programs
and
overseas
internships/externships)
at
about
the
same
rate
as
they
predicted
post-‐trip.
However,
interest
in
the
international
business
studies
minor
and
follow–
through
on
pursuing
that
minor
increased
dramatically
among
students
who
participated
in
the
trip
and
subsequently
completed
the
studies.
In
addition,
it
is
unclear
if,
absent
the
experience,
students
would
have
pursued
the
additional
coursework
at
the
same
rate.
For
example,
it
might
be
expected
that
some
students
who
plan
overseas
travel,
and
then
become
busy
with
other
student
activities
on
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
81
campus,
would
change
their
plans—thereby
making
rates
of
intent
and
completion
lower.
In
that
case,
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience
may
have
also
encouraged
students
to
maintain
their
original
plans
of
globalized
study.
In
order
to
more
completely
answer
this
question,
the
study
focused
on
analyzing
the
data
found
in
Survey
II:
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12
and
the
Questionnaire,
Questions
1-‐5
(Survey
Questions
61-‐65).
One
important
measure
of
learning
is
how
well
students
are
able
to
integrate
their
experiences
and
translate
them
into
long-‐term
learning.
Immediately
post-‐
trip,
in
2011,
students
exhibited
a
high
degree
of
interest
in
additional
global
experiences.
Although
this
was
a
highly
internationalized
and
globalized
group
prior
to
the
GLP
or
LINC
course,
participation
in
the
trip
still
registered
a
positive
change
in
student’s
interest
in
further
international
or
global
programs.
For
example,
prior
to
the
GLP
or
LINC
study
abroad
course,
59.3%
of
students
rated
themselves
“very
likely”
to
participate
in
additional
study
abroad
experiences.
Immediately
post-‐trip,
the
percentage
who
rated
themselves
“very
likely”
to
so
participate
increased
to
68.6%.
Twenty-‐five
percent
of
these
business
majors
indicated
that
they
were
“very
likely”
to
take
at
least
one
foreign
language
class
while
at
USC,
and,
immediately
after
the
GLP
or
LINC
experience,
that
percentage
increased
to
32.3%.
Therefore,
the
GLP
or
LINC
experience
was
a
positive
one
for
the
students
and
one
that
them
to
desire
to
extend
and
replicate
their
globalized
learning
into
additional
study.
The
percentage
of
student
participants
“very”
interested
in
pursuing
courses
in
ethnic
studies
almost
doubled,
from
13.6%
to
25.5%
immediately
post-‐trip.
The
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
82
percentage
of
them
who
regarded
themselves
as
“very
likely”
to
take
at
least
one
course
focused
on
global
content
increased
from
45.4
to
49.1%.
The
percentage
of
those
interested
in
minoring
in
international
affairs
or
a
foreign
language
also
increased
dramatically,
moving
from
11.5%
to
22.6%rating
themselves
“very
likely.
Students
also
registered
dramatic
increases
in
interest
in
an
international
concentration
(from
14.2%
to
25.2%),
an
international
internship
(from
32.7%
to
48.1%)
and
international
or
intercultural
activities
on
campus
(from
27.4%
to
46.7%).
This
increased
interest
indicates
that
the
trip
had
a
positive
immediate
effect
on
students,
including
the
effect
of
spurring
their
interest
in
pursuing
additional
globalized
and
international
experiences
while
attending
the
university.
How
well,
then,
did
this
course
succeed
in
further
engaging
students
in
additional
globalized
and
international
experiences
while
students
at
USC?
Of
those
students
who
completed
the
two-‐year
later
follow
up,
36%
participated
in
an
additional
study
abroad
experience
through
USC.
Slightly
over
one
third
of
these
students
participated
in
the
International
Exchange
Program.
Students
chose
a
variety
of
destinations,
but
most
students
participating
in
a
second
study
abroad
opportunity
studied
in
either
Europe
or
China
(including
Taiwan
and
Hong
Kong),
although
one
student
went
to
Ghana
and
one
to
Panama.
Eighteen
percent
had
more
than
one
additional
study
abroad
experience.
According
to
the
Institute
of
International
Education,
in
the
2009-‐2010
academic
year,
the
University
of
Southern
California
reported
that
1,534,
or
approximately
a
total
of
36%
of
its
undergraduates,
had
participated
in
one
or
more
study
abroad
experiences.
This
placed
the
University
of
Southern
California
at
number
30
in
Ph.D.
granting
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
83
institutions
to
send
undergraduates
abroad.
However,
in
the
2010-‐2011
school
year
(the
year
studied
here),
the
University
of
Southern
California
fell
off
the
rankings,
indicating
that
less
than
32%
of
undergraduates
participated
in
study
abroad.
This
trend
continued
in
2012,
the
latest
year
for
which
data
was
available,
as
the
University
of
Southern
California
again
did
not
make
the
top
40
among
Ph.D.
–
granting
institutions
to
send
students
on
study
abroad
experiences.
This
seems
to
indicate
that,
while
the
number
of
students
who
participated
in
study
abroad
at
the
Marshall
School
used
to
more
closely
match
the
rest
of
the
student
population,
fewer
of
the
other
undergraduates
participated
in
study
abroad
experiences.
The
number
of
Marshall
School
students
studying
abroad
has
apparently
remained
more
constant
and
remained
relatively
stronger
as
compared
to
the
remainder
of
the
undergraduate
student
population
(IIE,
2014).
Another
question
is
whether
students
successfully
integrated
their
experience
to
their
on-‐campus
life.
This
is
particularly
interesting,
since
the
financial
considerations
that
students
may
bear
when
deciding
whether
to
pursue
multiple
study
abroad
opportunities
will
not
be
as
pressing.
In
general,
the
responses
show
that
students
who
participated
in
the
two-‐year
follow-‐up
survey
participated
in
most
on-‐campus
learning
at
either
the
same
or
a
lower
rate
than
they
predicted
they
would
do
prior
to
taking
the
GLP
or
LINC
course.
With
regard
to
course
selection,
students
took
foreign
language
courses
at
the
same
rate
as
they
intended
to
prior
to
taking
the
GLP
or
LINC
course.
Participating
in
the
GLP
or
LINC
course,
thus,
did
not
appear
to
result
in
a
higher
or
lower
rate
of
completion
of
foreign
language
study.
Twenty-‐five
percent
indicated
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
84
that
they
had
taken
at
least
one
foreign
language
course
while
at
USC,
the
same
proportion
as
had
initially
planned
(pre-‐trip)
to
do
so.
Additionally,
prior
to
the
GLP
or
LINC
course,
11.5%
of
students
deemed
themselves
“very
likely”
to
pursue
an
international
concentration
in
business
through
the
Marshall
School,
and
11.8%
actually
did
so
two
years
later.
This
indicates
that
students
decided
before
the
trip
whether
or
not
to
pursue
an
international
concentration
in
business
and
that
the
trip
did
not
greatly
change
their
decision.
The
rate
at
which
students
actually
participated
in
an
international
internship
did
not
show
a
dramatic
difference
when
compared
with
those
who
planned
to
do
so
prior
to
the
trip.
According
to
pre-‐trip
survey
results,
32%
of
students
planned
to
participate
in
an
international
internship.
Two
years
later,
thirty
percent
of
students
had
actually
completed
an
international
internship
or
had
specific
set
plans
to
do
so
in
the
near
future.
An
additional
13.5%
still
hoped
to
do
so,
but
did
not
yet
have
specific
plans
lined
up.
If,
in
fact,
all
of
the
students
who
indicated
they
were
interested
in
participating
in
an
overseas
internship
actually
ended
up
doing
so,
then
the
final
percentage
would
approach
48%,
indicating,
perhaps,
that
the
students
still
had
positive
feelings
about
their
prior
international
experience
even
if
they
lacked
the
will
or
ability
to
follow
through
at
the
time
of
this
study.
Approximately
56%
of
students
had
not
participated
in
an
international
internship
and
had
no
plans
to
do
so.
This
indicates
that,
although
the
good
feelings
about
the
trip
persisted,
they
had
faded
to
a
level
of
a
pleasant
memory
and
had
little
influence
on
student
learning.
The
trip
may
have
not
been
long-‐lasting
enough,
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
85
or
there
may
not
have
been
enough
follow-‐throughs
to
change
student
attitudes
about
participating
in
an
international
internship.
While
49.1%
of
students
intended
to
take
additional
coursework
in
international
or
global
business,
just
38%
of
students
who
responded
to
the
survey
actually
did
so.
Students
who
did
take
additional
coursework
participated
in
a
wide
variety
of
courses,
ranging
from
Global
Marketing
Management,
to
Business
Communication
across
Cultures,
Global
Strategy
to
International
Global
Relations.
Although
most
students
reported
just
one
additional
course
in
international
or
global
business,
25%
took
more
than
one.
In
addition,
while
approximately
11%
of
students
indicated
that
they
intended
to
minor
in
International
Relations
or
a
foreign
language
while
at
USC,
none
of
the
persons
responding
to
the
questionnaire
actually
did
so.
There
were
two
interesting
findings
pertaining
to
this
area,
however.
While
25%
of
students
indicated
they
intended
to
participate
in
an
ethnic
studies
course
while
at
USC,
a
full
50%
reported
having
actually
done
so.
Students
took
a
wide
variety
of
ethnic
studies
courses,
from
“Korean
Culture
and
Film,”
and
“East
Asian
Humanities,”
to
“Diversity
and
Racial
Conflict”
and
“The
African
Diaspora.”
This
is
interesting
because
the
ethnic
studies
courses
tend
to
focus
on
the
“softer”
aspect
of
the
trip—the
trip
not
just
as
an
entrée
into
a
greater
understanding
of
international
business,
but
of
increased
understanding
of
the
rich
cross
section
of
human
experience
that
international
and
global
travel
affords
perspective
on.
When
coupled
with
the
notable
finding
that
relationship-‐building,
both
among
students
and
with
professionals
at
the
university,
was
a
key
positive
experience
for
students,
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
86
one
can
extrapolate
that
the
human
dimension
of
international
travel—the
strong
relationships
formed,
and
the
interest
developed
in
other
cultures
and
peoples
generally—were
important
parts
of
the
takeaway
learning
for
the
students.
These
relationships
were
more
ultimately
more
influential
over
the
longer
term
than
the
particular
business
knowledge
or
other
academic
skills
students
acquired
or
were
motivated
to
learn.
Second,
while
prior
to
the
LINC/GLP
trip,
just
25%
of
students
indicated
an
interest
in
participating
in
an
international
event
on
campus,
post-‐trip
46.7%
intended
to
do
so.
When
the
students
were
surveyed
again
two
years
later,
54%
of
students
had
actually
done
so,
again
a
much
larger
percentage
than
indicated
this
intent
even
immediately
post-‐trip.
These
types
of
activities
and
participation
ranged
from
participating
in
the
USC
Bollywood
Team,
participating
in
the
Asian
Pacific
American
Student
Assembly
or
the
CASA
culture
show,
to
being
a
host
for
an
International
Exchange
Program
student
from
abroad,
helping
with
International
orientation
and
participating
in
events
organized
by
Africa
SC,
a
student
organization
that
represents
African
students
(USC,
2014).
As
students
reflected
on
their
trip
two
years
before,
it
was
clear
the
trip
still
remained
an
important
experience.
Just
11%
of
students
indicated
that
the
trip
had
not
had
a
lasting
impact
on
their
identity.
Rationales
for
this
included,
“As
an
Asian-‐
American,
I
do
not
think
the
GLP
trip
affected
my
global
view
drastically,”
and
“I’m
actually
from
Taiwan
.
.
.
and
therefore
my
perspective
didn’t
change
much.”
The
latter
student
added,
“However,
it’s
very
interesting
to
observe
my
peers
who
have
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
87
never
been
to
Asia
before.”
Despite
these
outliers,
the
overwhelming
majority
indicated
that
the
GLP/LINC
trip
did
affect
them
in
a
fundamental
way.
Of
those
students
who
felt
that
the
trip
made
a
lasting
change
in
their
perspective,
one-‐third
commented
on
business
issues
as
being
the
most
notable
thing
that
they
took
away
from
the
trip.
“I
was
always
told
in
my
economics
and
business
classes
that
we
now
live
in
a
globalized
world
and
economy,
but
I
never
truly
got
a
first
hand
experience
of
what
that
means
until
my
GLP
trip,”
explained
one
student.
“I
originally
thought
that
firms
and
businesses
would
behave
similarly
even
in
a
global
environment,
but
I
was
incredibly
wrong,”
was
another
student’s
honest
self-‐assessment.
The
trip
“[m]ade
me
more
aware
of
how
global
the
playing
field
is
today.
It
is
very
easy
to
get
caught
up
in
the
US
business
world,
but
today
there
is
no
such
thing
as
just
the
US
business
world
since
our
economy
is
very
much
globally
immersed,”
commented
another
student.
“I
didn't
realize
that
US
was
such
a
key
player
internationally
-‐-‐
and
being
from
the
U.S.
we
are
seen
as
doing
business
differently.”
Although
students
did
not
fully
carry
through
on
their
intended
commitments
to
international
and
global
experiences
in
their
continuing
undergraduate
education
at
USC,
they
did
retain
an
understanding
of
some
of
the
importance
of
globalization
to
businesses.
Their
comments
show
a
lasting
appreciation
for
the
interconnectedness
of
the
global
economy
and
the
significant
role
that
US
businesses
play
in
the
international
marketplace.
A
full
54%
of
students
had
an
experience
that
enhanced
their
own
sense
of
self
as
a
global
citizen
and
made
them
more
aware
of
globalization
generally.
These
students
did
not,
however,
mention
business
specifically
in
their
comments.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
88
Students
in
this
category
made
comments
such
as
“[g]lobalization
is
a
real
thing
and
we
all
play
a
part
in
it,”
and
“[i]t
made
me
think
in
a
more
global
perspective,
rather
than
a
pigeon-‐holed
‘America
is
the
center
of
the
world’
perspective.”
These
students
showed
understanding
of
globalization
and
the
interconnected
international
world,
generally.
“It's
a
really
big
world
out
there,”
and
“[th]e
LINC
trip
made
me
start
thinking
about
my
role
in
the
world.
It
also
fascinated
me
with
the
different
culture
and
living
environment
in
another
country,”
stated
other
students,
continuing
this
theme.
Another
student
commented
that,
“[i]t
reminded
me
.
.
.
learning
about
cultures
other
than
my
own
is
important.”
One
student
noted
“GLP
caused
me
to
see
myself
as
a
citizen
of
the
world
and
not
just
the
US.”
The
lasting
learning
for
these
students
was
that
they
were
somewhat
more
global
and
less
provincial
in
their
outlook.
Students
retained
learning
about
the
complexity
of
the
world,
myriad
alternative
cultures,
and
the
significance
of
learning
about
different
cultures.
Another
student
commented
that
learning,
“made
me
start
thinking,”
while
a
third
noted
“[the
experience]
fascinated
me
and
changed
student
perceptions
of
self”
and
also
“caused
me
to
see
myself
as
a
citizen
of
the
world”.
These
comments
demonstrate
that
students
continued
to
perceive
the
experience
as
changing
their
own
learning,
understanding
and
sense
of
self.
A
third
group
of
students
mentioned
specific
ways
that
the
experience
affected
or
influenced
them,
particularly
in
the
way
they
related
to
others.
These
students
wrote
comments
that
were
more
specific
than
the
“global
citizen”
comments
and
did
not
focus
especially
on
the
business
aspect
of
the
course,
but,
instead,
revealed
specific
other
ways
the
various
types
of
human
interactions
on
the
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
89
trip
made
a
lasting
impression
on
students.
Almost
17
%
(16.7%)
of
students
had
these
types
of
specific
reactions.
Examples
are,
“[i]t
made
me
realize
how
difficult
it
must
be
for
international
students,”
and
“I
want
to
make
a
difference
in
the
world.
I
want
to
do
something
to
help
those
who
aren't
as
privileged
as
I
have
been.”
Although
these
comments
were
less
frequent,
the
type
of
empathy
that
is
expressed
in
these
types
of
specific
comments
reflects
on
particular
student’s
rich
processing
of
the
GLP/LINC
experience.
In
response
to
the
sub-‐question,“[t]o
what
extent
do
students
follow
through
on
new
commitments
or
intentions
developed,
as
a
result
of
program
participation,”
students
followed
through
on
some,
though
not
all,
of
their
goals.
Students
enrolled
in
international
and
global-‐interest
classes
in
higher
numbers
than
anticipated
after
participating
in
the
GLP/LINC
program.
Students
also
participated
to
a
high
degree
in
international
events
on
campus,
much
higher
than
predicted
prior
to
participation
in
the
program.
The
number
of
students
who
followed
through
on
their
pre-‐trip
goals
of
participating
in
additional
international
and
global
study
abroad
programs
and
internships
was
the
same
number
as
expected
to
do
so
originally.
Many
students
reported
holding
global
and
international
attitudes
towards
business,
and
reported
retaining
an
increased
understanding
of
the
importance
of
international
and
global
aspects
to
the
business
world,
years
later.
Conclusion
The
answer
to
this
study’s
core
question,
“are
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
able
to
significantly
influence
development
of
perspectives
and
skills
in
undergraduate
students?”
is
mixed.
Short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
do
appear
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
90
to
influence
student
learning
in
ways
more
significant
than,
for
example,
the
average
vacation.
Students
self-‐report
increased
levels
of
self-‐confidence,
understanding
of
international
business,
and
they
retain
positive
feelings
about
the
trip
years
later.
However,
the
impact
is
not
as
clear
as
it
is
for
those
students
who
engage
in
long-‐
term
study
abroad.
Short-‐term
study
abroad
appears
to
have
a
limited
impact
in
altering
students
educational
trajectories
in
terms
of
classes
taken,
additional
study
abroad
experiences,
or
international
internship
opportunities
pursued,
despite
the
fact
that
this
particular
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
was
strategically
placed
at
the
end
of
freshman
year,
presumably
in
order
to
give
students
time
to
follow
through
on
new
goals.
However,
students
who
did
participate
in
the
program
showed
a
high
level
of
follow-‐through
on
maintaining
and
completing
their
existing
international
study
goals,
so
it
cannot
be
discounted
that
this
experience
may
have
assisted
students
with
follow-‐through
on
existing
goals,
and/or
that
students
who
chose
to
participate
in
the
program
already
had
a
highly
defined
set
of
goals
for
university
studies.
One
particularly
interesting
area
of
potential
for
universities
lies
in
appropriately
developing
the
mentor
relationship
that
appears
to
develop
between
many
professors
and
students,
as
well
as
the
relationship
that
builds
between
students,
as
a
result
of
short-‐term
study
abroad.
Students
developed
particularly
rich
relationships
with
both
professors
and
fellow
students,
and
these
relationships
may
provide
a
foundation
for
students
to
develop
follow-‐through
on
some
of
the
study
abroad
programs.
This
finding
correlates
well
with
understanding
the
importance
of
carefully
designing
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
trip
to
particularly
reflect
the
curriculum
goals
of
the
larger
program.
The
particular
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
91
design
of
the
program
and
the
amount
of
time
devoted
to
follow-‐up
and
development
of
relationships
with
students
may
be
particularly
important.
While
the
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
is
not,
overall,
as
large
as
that
for
long-‐term
study
abroad,
some
of
the
effects
are
different
and
may
offer
unique
aspects
to
the
educational
development
of
the
student
distinct
from
the
traditional
goals
of
long-‐
term
study
abroad
for
student
learning.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
92
CHAPTER
FIVE:
CONCLUSIONS
AND
IMPLICATIONS
The
previous
chapter
provided
analysis
related
to
the
research
question
investigating
the
impact
of
a
one-‐week
study
abroad
program
on
long-‐term
learning
for
undergraduate
business
students.
This
chapter
provides
a
summary
of
major
findings
and
implications
of
the
study
and
contains
the
following
sections:
(1)
synthesis
of
findings,
(2)
implications
for
theory,
policy,
and
practice,
(3)
limitations
of
the
study
(4)
recommendations
for
future
research
and,
(5)
conclusions.
Synthesis
of
Findings
There
are
a
number
of
findings
to
this
study.
First,
students
retain
positive
beliefs
about
their
experience.
Second,
student-‐professor
relationships
appear
to
be
a
particularly
important
component
of
short-‐term
study
abroad.
Thirdly,
students
,
on
their
own,
do
not
retain
high
levels
of
follow-‐through
two
years
post-‐experience.
Students
retain
positive
feelings
about
study
abroad
A
large
percentage
of
students
who
responded
to
the
2013
survey
reported
retaining
many
positive
feelings
about
the
trip.
In
addition
to
remembering
the
trip
positively,
a
high
number
of
students
believed,
two
years
after
the
initial
trip,
that
the
GLP/LINC
course
contributed
positively
to
their
self-‐confidence
and
self-‐
efficacy.
Most
students
concluded
that
the
GLP/LINC
course
continued
to
contribute
positively
to
their
understanding
of
global
and
multicultural
issues
generally
and
to
international
business
issues
specifically
(their
chosen
area
of
study).
Thus,
most
students
had
self-‐reported
gains
in
areas
of
self-‐confidence
and
self-‐efficacy,
international
and
global
competence,
and
improved
understanding
of
intellectual
areas
aligned
with
their
area
of
particular
study.
All
of
these
improvements
in
self-‐
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
93
assessment
reflect
some
of
the
gains
of
long-‐term
study
abroad
in
that
students
who
participate
in
long-‐term
study
abroad
report
increased
self-‐efficacy,
confidence
and
global
and
multicultural
understanding
as
well
as
improvement
in
specific
technical
skills
(such
as
learning
a
foreign
language).
While
the
full
extent
of
actual,
as
opposed
to
self-‐reported,
student
gains
is
unclear,
and
is
likely
less
than
those
of
students
participating
in
long-‐term
study
abroad
experiences,
some
of
the
gains
found
in
long
term
study
abroad
also
are
approximated
in
short-‐term
study
abroad.
Student-‐Professor
Relationships
are
an
Important
Component
An
additional
significant
finding
concerns
the
importance
of
the
professor
and
relationships
with
other
students
in
short-‐term
study
abroad.
Research
into
long-‐term
study
abroad
does
not
typically
reflect
on
the
relationship
between
professors
and
students
or
amongst
fellow
students.
Perhaps
this
is
because,
by
design,
many
long-‐term
study
abroad
programs
place
students
in
faraway
universities
where
the
immersive
experience
is
distinct
from
the
“regular”
on-‐
campus
experience.
Students
may
meet
professors
with
whom
they
do
not
have
relationships
back
at
their
particular
university.
Student
relationships
amongst
fellow
students
have
been
considered
an
incidental
personal
social
experience,
and
their
impact
on
the
learning
experience
has
not
been
fully
explored.
However,
short-‐term
study
abroad
of
the
type
offered
by
the
GLP/LINC
program
is
structurally
distinct
from
such
long-‐term
study
abroad,
and
it
is
not
surprising
that
a
significant
finding
in
this
instance
is
that
students
who
took
all
the
surveys
also
reported
developing
particularly
strong
relationships
with
their
professors
and
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
94
fellow
students
and
that
these
relationships
affected
their
on-‐campus
learning
and
experiences
in
numerous
ways
once
they
returned
to
campus.
Students
Intend
to
Follow
Through
on
Experiences
but,
Unaided,
do
not
A
final
significant
finding
of
this
study
is
that
students
did
not
exhibit
increased
levels
of
follow-‐through
for
most
of
their
pre-‐
and
post-‐study
goals.
Students
reported
an
increase
in
intent
to
participate
in
various
international-‐
studies-‐influenced
minors,
international
business
courses,
and
additional
study
abroad
and
overseas
internships
just
after
their
trip.
Students
did
not,
however,
follow
through
on
their
post-‐study
abroad
goals,
although
they
did
express
a
notably
increased
interest
in
generalized
international
culture-‐related
courses
and
an
increased
likelihood
of
attending
multicultural
events
on
campus.
Students
did
follow
through
consistently
with
their
expected
level
of
involvement
according
to
their
pre-‐study
abroad
experience
goals,
so,
while
the
temporary
increase
in
student
intentions
to
participate
in
international
global
experiences
was
apparently
not
sustained,
it
also
did
not
diminish.
The
extent
to
which
the
GLP/LINC
experience
aided
students
in
following
through
on
their
original
intentions
is
unknown,
but
it
is
possible
that
the
trip
did
help.
Due
to
the
current
limited
follow-‐through
on
student
intentions,
however,
the
learning
attained
in
short-‐term
study
abroad,
as
currently
designed
and
experienced
by
the
students,
cannot
be
deemed
to
rise
to
the
level
of
complete
transformative
learning.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
95
Implications
for
Theory,
Policy,
and
Practice
Finding
1:
Increased
levels
of
Self-‐confidence,
Efficacy,
and
Belief
in
Increased
Understanding
of
Global
Awareness,
Business
Issues
and
Skills
It
is
important
to
understand
that,
while
independent
determinations
of
student
efficacy,
global
awareness,
and
knowledge
of
important
global
and
international
business
issues
and
skills
were
not
independently
assessed
in
this
study,
students
did
gain
increased
confidence
and
the
belief
that
they
have
increased
levels
of
efficacy
and
skill
in
these
areas.
This
confidence
and
positive
view
of
the
experience,
years
after
the
course,
indicates
that
the
experience
was
significant
for
the
students.
Students
believed
that
the
experience
was
of
value
and
offered
them
significant
areas
of
personal
growth
and
learning.
In
addition,
the
belief
that
they
have
increased
skills
and
knowledge
in
the
area
of
international
business
shows
that
the
school
is
moving
forward
appropriately
on
the
AACSB
accreditation
standards.
Therefore,
these
student
beliefs
are
definitely
positive,
even
if
additional
objective
measures
of
students’
actual
increased
knowledge
and
skill
are
not
clear
from
this
study.
When
examining
transformative
learning
experiences,
Mezirow
(1991)
states
that
there
are
ten
phases
of
perspective
transformation.
Students
experienced
some,
but
not
all,
of
these
phases.
Students
did
appear
to
successfully
re-‐integrate
their
trip
into
their
life.
They
did
this
by
retaining
positive
views
of
the
trip
two
years
later.
In
addition,
students
believed
they
acquired
new
knowledge
and
skills
as
a
result
of
the
trip,
although
they
did
not
end
up
using
those
skills
to
implement
new
plans
that
occurred
as
a
result
of,
or
after,
the
transformational
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
96
learning
experience.
As
discussed
above,
students
also
explored
new
roles
and
relationships,
though
they
had
more
difficulty
in
following-‐through
with
independent
actions
as
a
result
of
their
trip.
Students
may
explore
new
relationships,
yet
fail
to
fully
integrate
those
with
any
new
roles
or
new
actions.
Students
may
experience
new
competencies
and
self-‐confidences
and
integrate
those
successfully
into
their
experience,
yet
they
may
still
not
create
and
execute
actions
leading
to
pronounced
and
long-‐term
integration.
Thus,
to
determine
what
is
transformational
learning,
one
may
need
to
reconsider
what
evidence
of
learning
is
truly
determinative
of
a
student’s
having
experienced
a
fully
transformational
learning
process.
New
relationships,
such
as
a
student-‐professor
relationship,
successfully
integrated
into
the
student’s
post-‐experience
learning
sufficient,
in
and
of
themselves,
may
be
sufficient
to
determine
a
transformative
experience.
Conversely,
there
may
need
to
be
relationships,
new
roles,
the
intent
to
act,
and
then
a
concrete
follow-‐up
action
in
order
for
the
learning
experience
to
be
qualified
as
truly
transformative.
In
creating
policy
and
practice
that
builds
upon
increased
student
confidence,
self-‐efficacy,
knowledge
of
world
cultures
and
global
business
awareness,
colleges
and
universities
that
build
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
into
their
curricula
may
want
to
give
their
students
additional
time
and
space
in
later
courses
to
build
upon
these
positive
feelings
as
well
as
additional
time
for
reflection
upon
their
experience.
General
courses
in
the
student’s
department
of
study,
for
example,
might
include
more
units,
lessons,
projects
and
assignments,
which
require
students
to
continue
to
make
connections
with
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience
and
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
97
to
draw
upon
and
further
develop
their
knowledge,
skills
and
understanding
in
global
and
international
areas.
If
successfully
integrated
as
a
policy
into
a
department,
such
units
and
lessons
would
give
students
the
opportunity
to
build
in
an
area
of
confidence
and,
presumably,
interest
for
them
It
would
also
give
them
opportunities
to
self-‐reflect
and
re-‐examine
both
their
current
knowledge
and
areas
for
growth
in
global
and
international
skills
and
knowledge.
Continued
introduction
of
international
and
global
units
of
study
within
the
on-‐campus
business
school
curriculum
would
allow
students
to
make
connections
and
build
upon
the
new
knowledge
acquired
during
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
learning
experience.
Further
opportunities
to
reflect
thoughtfully
and
productively
on
the
experience
may
also
lead
to
increased
integration
of
the
experience
and
higher
levels
of
retained
learning
(Welikala,
2011).
Finding
2:
Positive
and
Long-‐lasting
relationships
with
Professors
and
Other
Students
Significantly
Influenced
Long-‐term
learning
Short-‐term
study
abroad
is
fundamentally
different
in
design,
nature,
and
scope.
Therefore,
while
it
makes
sense
to
assume
that
some
outcomes
of
the
learning
experience
may
be
similar
to
those
of
long-‐term
study
abroad
due
to
the
international
or
global
aspect
of
the
learning
experience
the
goals
and
objectives
for
short-‐term
study
abroad
should
not
be
compared
to,
or
considered
the
equivalent
of,
long-‐term
study
abroad
experience.
Instead,
the
differences
in
learning
due
to
the
students’
experiences
should
be
considered
the
natural
outcomes
of
two
different
learning
experiences,
and
one
should
not
be
considered
inferior
because
it
provides
different
measures
or
types
of
learning.
One
difference,
and
a
potentially
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
98
unique
and
powerful
place
for
student
learning
to
occur
in
short-‐term
study
abroad,
is
the
experience
of
mentoring
and
relationship
potential.
Students
reported
that
their
relationships
with
their
professors
and
their
relationships
with
fellow
students
were
particularly
important
and
powerful
aspects
of
their
short-‐term
study
abroad,
and
this
was
the
area
in
which
the
most
continued
follow
through
happened
back
at
the
home
campus.
Moreover,
students
who
reported
these
powerful
relationships
were
most
likely
to
experience
complete
or
full
levels
of
transformational
learning,
as
students
reported
that
professors
guided
them
in
course
selection
and
helped
guide
them
to
a
fuller
learning
experience;
those
students
more
fully
experienced
transformative
learning
as
a
result
of
their
short-‐term
study
abroad.
Students
who
built
and
capitalized
on
relationships
learning
started
during
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience
were
best
able
to
experience
the
desired
follow
through
on
their
post-‐trip
goals.
On
the
home
campus,
relationships
with
professors
and
fellow
students
are
often
not
considered
a
powerful
or
core
part
of
the
learning
process.
While
it
is
possible
that
the
significance
of
these
previous
relationships
has
been
overlooked,
it
is
perhaps
more
likely
that
the
significance
of
these
relationships
is
greatly
increased
by
the
dramatically
different
structure
and
nature
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
versus
those
of
long-‐term
study
abroad.
Many
of
the
benefits
of
long-‐term
study
abroad
may
stem,
in
part,
from
the
immersive
nature
of
the
independent
student
in
the
foreign
country.
Away
from
their
normal
friends
and
family,
the
emphasis
in
the
learning
experience
is
on
independence.
Students
must
learn
to
act
and
adapt
far
from
home,
in
a
new
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
99
culture,
and,
particularly,
often
without
a
large
group
of
fellow
travelers
made
up
of
students
and
professors.
The
professors
at
the
long-‐terms
study
abroad
program
are
often
different
from
the
professors
on
the
home
campus.
In
addition,
the
mode
of
studying
and
expectations
may
be
dramatically
different,
and
the
friendships
and
relationships
formed
may
not
continue
in
the
same
way
back
on
campus,
as
the
number
of
students
participating
from
the
student’s
home
campus
is
often
much
lower
than
found
in
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
program.
In
addition,
although
current
media
experiences,
such
as
increased
connection
to
home
and
campus
(via
such
popular
tools
as
Skype,
Facebook
and
other
social
media),
have
somewhat
altered
the
long-‐term
study
abroad
experience,
with
the
luxury
of
a
large
amount
of
time
to
process
the
learning
experience
independently,
students
in
long-‐term
study
abroad
have
the
opportunity
for
extensive
and
independent
self-‐reflection
on
the
nature
of
their
study
and
the
new
culture
in
which
they
immerse
themselves.
In
contrast
to
this
independent,
self-‐driven
form
of
learning,
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences
are
often
intensely
collaborative
learning
processes.
Knowledge
and
understanding
is
processed
together
by
a
small
group
of
students
and
a
professor
who
shared
the
same
course
on
campus
prior
to
travel
and
who
will
have
multiple
opportunities
to
interact
in
formal
academic
and
informal
settings
during
and
after
the
course
as
well
as
on
at
least
one
additional
occasion
back
on
campus
to
debrief
the
academic
experience
as
a
group.
Rather
than
being
a
chiefly
independent
and
self-‐determined
learning
opportunity,
then,
the
process
is
deeply
and
inherently
collaborative
and
is
richly
tied
to
the
rest
of
the
on-‐campus
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
100
university
experience
in
a
way
that
the
long
term
study
abroad
program
is
typically
not.
As
a
policy
matter,
it
is
important
for
professors
and
universities
to
understand
that
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
learning
experience
should
not
be
perceived
as
a
light
version
of
the
long-‐term
study
abroad
experience.
Instead,
these
learning
experiences
are
fundamentally
different
from
those
of
long-‐term
study
abroad
and
professors
and
universities
should
acknowledge
and
plan
for
these
differences
in
a
way
that
develops
and
accentuate
the
unique
positives
of
short-‐term
study
abroad.
Additionally,
while
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
may
be
conceived
as
one
way
to
introduce
students
to
the
joys
of
long-‐term
study
abroad
or
to
develop
student
curiosity
about
overseas
internship
potential,
for
example,
the
experiences
are
distinct,
and
students
may
successfully
learn
and
grow
without
the
same
sorts
of
outcomes.
This
is
tied
to
the
AACSB’s
concern
that,
to
be
effective,
globalization
needs
to
be
integrated
throughout
the
curriculum.
Curricular
concerns
include
both
individual
courses
and
the
overall
design
of
a
program.
Since
businesses
seek
students
who
have
learned
from
programs
that
both
incorporate
global
perspectives
into
the
core
curriculum
and
provide
supplemental
training
and
experiential
learning
experiences,
a
student
who
has
fully
experienced
a
successful
and
well-‐designed
short-‐term
study
abroad
benefits
future
employers
(AACSB,
2011,
p.
106).
To
capitalize
on
a
strength
of
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
program,
universities
should
consider
not
only
where
in
the
academic
four-‐year
program
they
have
students
participate
in
one,
but
they
should
also
consider
where
within
the
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
101
term
or
semester
the
study
abroad
portion
of
the
academic
program
occurs.
For
example,
one
strength
of
the
GLP/LINC
program
is
the
interaction
between
professors
and
students,
and
the
place
where
these
relationships
are
most
enriched
is
during
the
study
abroad
portion
itself.
Yet,
the
class
ends
shortly
after
the
students
return.
Although
many
students
continue
to
have
positive
experiences
with
these
professors,
perhaps
timing
the
trip
differently
might
further
enhance
and
strengthen
this
desirable
effect,
allowing
it
to
become
an
even
more
powerful
tool
in
student
learning.
Moving
the
travel
from
the
end
of
the
semester
to
somewhere
in
the
middle
would
also
further
push
the
course
away
from
being
a
purely
“insertion”
course,
where
international
coursework
is
simply
inserted
into
the
rest
of
the
students
‘experience,
to
more
of
an
“interlock”
course,
in
which
the
experience
on
the
home
campus
is
“infused”
with
the
international
or
global
curriculum.
Placing
the
study
abroad
experience
in
the
middle
of
the
term
would
allow
students
to
forge
ties
and
gain
an
academic
context
for
their
work.
When
they
return
from
the
trip,
they
would
still
have
multiple
opportunities
to
continue
their
learning
and
reflection
and
to
make
plans
together
for
concrete
steps
further
act
upon
and
more
fully
actualize
learning
on
campus.
Moving
the
trip
would
also
create
opportunities
for
students
to
act
on
their
learning
while
still
in
the
class
in
order
to
more
fully
develop
elements
of
transformative
learning.
A
final
factor
universities
might
consider
is
that
professors’
ability
to
develop
collegial,
dynamic,
collaborative
classrooms
in
an
international
environment
might
further
positively
affect
student
learning.
Professors’
capacity
to
successfully
lead
these
courses
and
their
knowledge
about
areas
of
greatest
potential
impact
for
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
102
students
should
be
developed.
Course
design
should
build
on
the
particular
strengths
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
courses,
as
this
will
better
support
professors
in
running
successful
programs.
Further
pedagogical
support
for
professors
in
successfully
developing
globalized
curricula
is
a
boon
if
the
goal
is
developing
rich
experiences
for
students
(Cort,
Das,
&
Sin,
2004;
Fisher,
K.,
2008).
Additionally,
because
discrepancies
in
the
data
remain
regarding
whether
short-‐term
study
abroad
provides
a
positive
learning
experience,
(Zamandanis,
2013),
the
academic
relationship
between
the
professor
and
students
and
the
sequence
of
activities,
including
the
follow-‐through
learning
infused
on
the
home
campus,
may
provide
a
key
to
understanding
the
reason
for
these
varied
findings.
Finding
three:
Students
did
not
Exhibit
Increased
Levels
of
Follow-‐through
for
Most
of
their
Goals
Students
did
not
exhibit
increased
levels
of
follow-‐through
for
most
of
their
pre-‐or
post-‐
short-‐term
study
abroad
“goals.”
On
the
pre-‐test,
and
again
immediately
post-‐test,
students
were
asked
to
indicate
whether
they
wanted
to
complete
or
participate
in
additional
globalized
learning
experiences,
including
both
on-‐campus
(such
as
international
business
courses)
and
off-‐campus
experiences
(such
as
long-‐term
study
abroad
or
international
internships).
Immediately
post-‐
trip,
students
exhibited
higher
interest
in
participating
in
such
programs.
However,
two
years
later,
students
who
completed
the
final
survey
and
questionnaire
reported
completing
these
items
at
close
to
the
same
rate
as
their
pre-‐trip
surveys
indicated.
Goals
set
after
the
immediate
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience
went
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
103
relatively
unfulfilled.
From
a
theoretical
standpoint,
this
makes
the
experience
a
less
than
fully
transformative
learning
experience,
as
discussed
above.
Although
students
retained
positive
experiences
and
self-‐report
some
learning
outcomes
two
years
later,
it
may
be
that
a
week-‐long
study
abroad
program
is
not
an
intensive
enough
experience
to
sustain
such
long-‐term
goals.
Transformative
learning
did
not
fully
occur.
While
students
continued
to
express
positive
thoughts
about
the
experience,
they
did
not
set
long-‐term
actions
and
plans
in
motion
that
they
were
able
to
follow
through
on
as
a
result
of
this
experience.
It
may
be,
however,
that
there
is
room
to
consider
another,
different,
level
of
transformative
learning
that
may
occur
if
the
goals
are
adjusted
to
better
suit
the
nature
and
curricula
appropriately.
If
transformative
learning
is
a
goal
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs,
then
it
does
not
make
sense
for
the
type
and
nature
of
the
transformative
learning
to
mimic
the
goals
set
for
long-‐term
study
abroad
programs;
rather,
different
goals
should
be
set.
From
a
policy
and
practice
perspective,
it
may
make
sense
to
adjust
the
goals
of
the
program.
Rather
than
expecting
a
number
of
student
to
independently
add
an
international
studies
or
foreign
language
minor
to
their
coursework,
universities
could
set
a
goal
of
encouraging
a
certain
percentage
of
students
to
take
one
new
foreign
language
course
or
one
additional
international
business
course.
Such
a
course
could
be
introduced
once
students
have
returned
from
the
overseas
component
of
their
travel,
but
prior
to
the
end
of
the
course.
Students
could,
in
additional
classes,
reconnect
with
professors
and
fellow
students
with
whom
they
enjoyed
learning
and
traveling
and
enroll
in
such
a
class
while
the
memory
of
the
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
104
positive
learning
experience
is
strong
and
fresh.
Also,
more
information
about
an
additional
study
abroad
program
or
internship
could
be
introduced
before
the
first
GLP/LINC
course
concludes.
This
second
class
or
learning
experience
could
become
another
part
of
the
springboard
towards
encouraging
more
students
to
pursue
additional
globalized
learning
experiences.
Additionally,
acknowledging
that
the
nature
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
is
more
collaborative
and
structured
than
long-‐
term
study
abroad
will
cause
leaders
to
recognize
that
the
goals
and
types
of
learning
inherent
in
the
experiences
will
be
different
and
will
reward
different
types
of
learners.
Follow-‐through
on
particularly
large
or
ambitious
long-‐term
goals
may
be
weak,
as
the
experience,
while
possibly
fulfilling
and
partially
transformative,
may
not
be
strong
enough
on
its
own
to
allow
the
students
independent
follow-‐
through.
Instead,
if
increased
study
abroad
and
increased
interest
in
international
business
coursework
is
the
goal,
follow-‐up
opportunities
that
build
on
the
program’s
core
successes
should
be
introduced
so
that
students
may
continue
to
work
towards
this
goal.
That
is,
the
experience
of
a
well-‐designed
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
may
allow
some
students
to
obtain
some
of
the
skills
and
interests
they
need
to
pursue
international
and
globalized
facets
to
their
education,
but,
without
more
support,
many
students
may
not
fully
realize
more
ambitious
goals.
However,
per
the
multiple
models
of
measuring
international
perspectives
in
business
students,
all
that
colleges
and
universities
can
do
to
help
push
business
students
towards
increased
levels
of
globalization,
from
generally
increasing
comfort
level
in
international
engagements
to
greater
specific
skills
and
abilities
needed
for
targeted
or
specific
work,
will
prove
helpful
as
schools
and
businesses
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
105
look
for
individuals
with
increased
and
more
sophisticated
skills
sets
in
the
global
marketplace
(AACSB,
2011;
Datar,
Garvin,
&
Cullin,
2010;
Edwards,
Crosling,
Petrovic-‐Lazarovic,
&
O’Neill,
2003;
Gregerson,
Morrison,
&
Black,
1998;
Javidan,
2010;
Scherer
et
al.,
2000;
Toyne,
1992).
Recommendations
for
Future
Research
Additional
research
is
needed
in
the
field
of
short-‐term
study
abroad.
The
particular
aspects
of
curricular
design
that
should
be
included
in
any
well-‐designed
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
have
yet
to
be
established
or
supported
by
research.
An
appreciation
for
the
particular
ways
in
which
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
is
fundamentally
different
in
structure
and
needs
different
types
of
learning
goals
and
outcomes
is
limited
in
the
literature.
Instead
of
being
the
perpetually
less-‐studied
sibling
as
compared
to
the
well-‐studied
area
of
long-‐term
study
abroad,
short-‐term
study
abroad
should
be
appreciated
and
studied
for
its
own
potential
and
pitfalls
in
order
to
maximize
opportunities
for
student
learning.
Additional
research
could
also
be
conducted
regarding
the
different
types
of
short-‐
term
study
abroad
most
likely
to
maximize
desired
student
learning
particular
to
different
academic
disciplines.
Perhaps
this
research
could
lead
to
the
development
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
that,
within
a
fully
infused
globalized
curriculum,
lead
to
the
“destabilizing”
and
transformative
experience
sometimes
envisaged
(Waks,
2003).
Specifically,
more
research
should
be
targeted
towards:
• The
role
of
the
professor
and
the
significance
of
student-‐professor
academic
relationships
in
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
environment
as
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
106
compared
to
long-‐term
or
traditional
classroom
environment
settings;
• Determining
which
learning
activities,
and
in
what
sequence,
will
best
maximize
student
learning
within
the
context
of
short-‐term
study
abroad;
• Whether
“interlock”
or
“infusion”
of
global
knowledge
and
perspectives
into
the
overall
discipline’s
curricula
result
in
more
tailored
learning
experiences
for
students
and
increase
long-‐term
student
learning;
• Specifically
comparing
curricula
amongst
different
types
of
short-‐
term
study
abroad
to
seek
out
various
elements
that
show
most
promise
in
terms
of
best
practices;
• Analyzing
both
professors’
and
students’
understanding,
experience
and
knowledge
during
the
study
abroad
experience
in
order
to
develop
best
practices
for
professors.
There
are
many
areas
of
research
left
in
terms
of
short-‐term
study
abroad.
Research
into
the
academic
relationships
between
professors
and
students
in
short-‐
term
study
abroad
as
well
as
into
the
particular
design
of
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
curriculum
should
yield
interesting
and
important
data
for
those
designing
courses
in
this
area.
Conclusion
Globalization
and
internationalization
of
the
student
learning
experience
in
higher
education
has
been
profound
on
many
levels.
One
important
way
in
which
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
107
this
affected
students
is
through
study
abroad
programs.
Short-‐term
study
abroad
programs,
lasting
less
than
eight
weeks,
are
the
most
rapidly
growing
area
of
the
study
abroad
experience,
and
over
50%
of
students
who
participate
in
study
abroad
programs
do
so
in
short-‐term
programs.
Despite
the
large
numbers
of
students
who
participate,
the
impact
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
on
long-‐term
student
learning
is
poorly
understood.
This
study
expanded
upon
the
earlier
work
of
Rowan-‐Kenyon
and
Niehaus
(2011)
by
answering
a
central
research
question:
Are
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
able
to
influence
development
of
perspectives
and
skills
in
undergraduate
students?
This
question
was
then
broken
down
into
three
sub-‐
questions:
(1)
What
meaning
do
students
make
of
their
participation
in
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
experience,
both
immediately
after
the
experience
and
two
to
three
years
later?
(2)
How
do
students
attempt
to
integrate
this
meaning
into
their
lives?
and
(3)
To
what
extent
do
students
follow
through
on
new
commitments
or
intentions
developed,
as
a
result
of
program
participation?
The
data
gathered
indicated
that
students
continue
to
find
meaning
in
their
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences
two
years
after
its
conclusion.
They
report
high
levels
of
confidence,
self-‐efficacy,
increased
knowledge
of
global
and
international
business
affairs,
which
they
attribute
at
least
in
part
to
their
short-‐
term
study
abroad.
One
of
the
most
successful
ways,
however,
that
students
integrate
the
new
learning
into
their
lives
is
through
the
often
powerful
relationships
formed
through
collaborative
meaning
making
that
occurs
in
a
short-‐
term
study
abroad
program.
Students’
relationships
both
with
other
students
and
with
professors,
who
subsequently
guided
them
into
courses
and
additional
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
108
experiences,
provided
one
of
the
richest
avenues
for
students
to
develop
long-‐term
transformative
learning
experiences
and
to
integrate
their
learning
into
their
life
back
at
the
university.
Unsupported,
students
were
less
able
to
build
on
the
lessons
of
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
program
to
transform
their
self-‐reported
learning
into
actualized
plans
and
goals.
In
these
cases,
the
old-‐fashioned
assistance
of
professors
and
fellow
students
remains
a
key
to
making
meaning
out
of
the
study
abroad
experience.
Universities
and
professors
should
strive
to
carefully
develop
programs
and
curricula
that
take
advantage
of
the
distinctive
potential,
and
minimize
the
limitations,
of
short
term
study
abroad.
Care
must
be
taken
to
provide
support
for
students
back
at
the
university
to
help
them
integrate
their
short-‐term
international
experiences
into
their
overall
university
experience.
Such
careful
design
will
help
the
students,
professors
and
universities
achieve
greater
learning
outcomes
as
a
result
of
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
109
References
Abedini,
N.C.,
Gruppen,
L.P.,
Kolars,
J.C.,
&
Kumagai,
A.L.
(2012).
Understanding
the
effects
of
short-‐term
international
service-‐learning
trips
on
medical
students,
Academic
Medicine,
87(6),
820-‐828.
Allen,
H.W.,
(2010).
What
shapes
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences?
A
comparative
case
study
of
students’
motives
and
goals,
Journal
of
Studies
in
International
Education,
14(5),
452-‐470.
Altbach,
P.,
Resiberg,
L.,
&
Rumbley,
L.,
(2010).
Tracking:
A
global
academic
revolution,
Change,
42(2),
30.
Altbach,
P.G.
&
Knight,
J.
(2007).
The
internationalization
of
higher
education:
Motivations
and
realities,
Journal
of
Studies
in
International
Education,
11(34),
290-‐305.
Altbach,
P.G.
(2004).
Globalization
and
the
university:
Myths
and
realities
in
the
global
world.
In
National
Education
Association
(Ed.).
The
NEA
2005
Almanac
of
higher
education
(pp.
63-‐74).
Washington,
DC:
National
Education
Association.
AACSB
International
Globalization
of
Management
Education
Task
Force
(2011).
Globalization
of
management
education:
Changing
international
structures,
adaptive
strategies
and
the
impact
on
institutions.
Wagon
Lane,
UK:
Emerald
Publishing
Group,
Ltd.
Anderson,
P.H.,
Lawton
L.,
Rexeisen,
R.J.,
&
Hubbard,
A.C.
(2006).
Short-‐term
study
abroad
and
intercultural
sensitivity:
A
pilot
study,
International
Journal
of
Intercultural
Relations,
30(4),
pp.
457-‐65.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
110
Armstrong,
L.
(2007)
Competing
in
the
global
higher
education
marketplace:
Outsourcing,
twinning
and
franchising,
New
Directions
for
Higher
Education,
2007,
131–138.
Bates,
J.
T.
(1997).
The
effects
of
study
abroad
on
undergraduates
in
an
honors
international
program
(Doctoral
dissertation,
University
of
South
Carolina).
Bedore,
G.L.
(1991).
Trends
impacting
graduate
business
education
in
the
coming
decade,
Journal
of
Education
for
Business,
November-‐December,
69-‐73.
Bhayroo,
S.
(2012).
Learning
critical
consciousness
in
the
global
south:
A
case
study
of
Temple
University’s
South
Africa
study
away
program,
JRE
Journal.
Retrieved
July
2014
from
http://jrejournal.com/ojs-‐
2.3.7/index.php/jre/index
Black,
H.T.
&
Duhon,
D.L.
(2006).
Assessing
the
impact
of
business
study
abroad
programs
on
cultural
awareness
and
personal
development.
Journal
of
Education
for
Business,
81(3),
140-‐144.
Bremer,
L.
&
van
der
Wende,
M.
(1995).
Internationalizing
the
curriculum
in
higher
education:
Experiences
in
the
Netherlands.
The
Hague,
Netherlands:
Nuffic.
Braskamp,
L.
(2008).
Developing
global
citizens,
Journal
of
College
and
Character,
X(1).
Retrieved
from
http://www.naspa.org/pubs/journals:/jcc.cfm.
Brock,
C.
(2011).
Education
as
a
global
concern:
London:
Continuum
Books.
Brown,
F.,
&
Boshamer,
C.
C.
(2008,
March).
The
intersection
of
school
desegregation
and
economic
globalization
in
America.
In
Forum
on
Public
Policy:
A
Journal
of
the
Oxford
Round
Table.
Forum
on
Public
Policy.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
111
Burn,
B.
B.,
Carlson,
J.
S.,
Useem,
J.,
&
Yachimowicz,
D.
(1990).
Study
abroad:
The
experience
of
American
undergraduates.
Celsi,
R.
&
Wolfinbarger,
M.
(2002).
Discontinuous
classroom
innovation:
Waves
of
change
for
marketing
education,
Journal
of
Marketing
Education,
24,
64-‐72.
Chieffo,
L.,
Griffith,
L.
(2004).
A
large
scale
assessment
of
student
attitudes
after
a
short-‐term
study
abroad
program,
Frontiers:
The
Interdisciplinary
Journal
of
Study
Abroad,
10,
167-‐177.
Cort,
K.T.,
Das,
J.,
Sin,
W.,
(2004).
Cross-‐functional
globalization
modules:
A
learning
experience,
Journal
of
Teaching
in
International
Business,
15(3,
77-‐97.
Cremer,
R.D.
(2010).
Chinese
business
schools
and
the
future
of
management
in
the
post-‐crisis
era:
Responsibility
and
opportunity,
Chinese
Management
Studies
4(1),
11-‐17.
Datar,
S.M.,
Garvin,
D.A.,
&
Cullen,
P.
G.
(2010).
Rethinking
the
MBA:
Business
education
at
a
crossroads.
Cambridge,
MA:
Harvard
Business
School
Press.
Dewey,
J.,
(1916).
Democracy
and
Education:
An
Introduction
to
the
Philosophy
of
Education.
New
York,
NY:
Macmillan
and
Co.
Donnelly-‐Smith,
Laura.
Global
learning
through
short-‐term
study
abroad.
Peer
Review
11.4.
Dykens,
A.M.
(2013).
Short
Term
Solution:
Application
of
an
Integrated
Model
of
College
Choice
to
Enrollment
in
Short-‐term
Study
Abroad.
(Unpublished
doctoral
dissertation).
University
of
Missouri-‐Columbia.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
112
Edwards,
R.,
Crosling,
G.,
Petrovic-‐Lazarovic,
S.
&
O’Neill,
P.
Internationalisation
of
Business
Education:
Meaning
and
implementation,
Higher
Education
Research
and
Development,
22(2),
183-‐192.
Festervand,
T.A.,
&
Tillery,
K.R.,
(2001).
Short-‐term
study
abroad
programs
–
A
professional
development
tool
for
international
business
faculty,
Journal
of
Education
for
Business,
77(2),
106-‐111.
Fischer,
K.
(2008).
Professors
get
their
own
study
abroad
programs,
Chronicle
of
Higher
Education,
31,
1-‐4.
Galafshani,
N.
(2003).
Understanding
reliability
and
validity
in
qualitative
research,
The
Qualitative
Report,
8(5),
597-‐607.
Gibson,
K.,
Benjamin,
T.,
Oseto,
C.,
&
Adams,
M.
(2012).
A
Short-‐Term
Study
Abroad
Course
in
Costa
Rica.
NACTA
Journal,
56(1),
23-‐27.
Gregersen,
H.B.,
Morrison,
A.J.,
&
Black,
J.S.
(1998),
Developing
leaders
for
the
global
frontier,
Sloan
Management
Review,
40(1),
21-‐33.
Hutchins,
M.
M.
(1996).
International
education
study
tours
abroad
students'
professional
growth
and
personal
development
in
relation
to
international,
global,
and
intercultural
perspectives
(Doctoral
dissertation,
The
Ohio
State
University).
Ingraham,
E.
C.,
&
and
Peterson,
D.L.
(2004).
Assessing
the
impact
of
study
abroad
on
student
learning
at
Michigan
State
University.
Frontiers:
The
Interdisciplinary
Journal
of
Study
Abroad,
10,
83–100.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
113
Jackson,
Jane
(2008),
Globalization,
internationalization
and
short-‐term
study
abroad,
Globalization
and
Diversity:
Contributions
from
Intercultural
Research,
32(4),
349-‐358.
Javidan,
M.,
Teagarden,
M.,
&
Bowen,
D.
(2010).
Making
it
overseas.
Harvard
Business
Review,
88(4),
109-‐113.
Jessup-‐Anger,
J.E.
&
Aragones,
A.
(2013).
Students’
peer
interactions
within
a
cohort
and
in
host
countries
during
a
short-‐term
study
abroad,
Journal
of
Student
Affairs
Research
and
Practice,
50(1),
p.
21-‐36.
Johnson,
L.
&
Morris,
P.
(2010).
Towards
a
framework
for
critical
citizenship
education,
The
Curriculum
Journal
21(1),
77-‐96.
Jones,
S.,
Rowan-‐Kenyon,
H.,
Ireland,
S.,
Niehaus,
E.,
&
Skendall,
K.C.
(2012)
Meaning
students
make
as
participants
in
short-‐term
study
abroad
programs,
Journal
of
College
Student
Development,
53(2),
201-‐220.
Jones,
C.G.,
Redd,
V.
&
Yoon,
S.W.
(2009).
Employer
expectations
of
accounting
undergraduates
entry-‐level
knowledge
and
skills
in
international
financial
reporting,
Journal
of
Business
Education,
2(8),
85-‐102.
Keating,
R.
&
Byles,
C.M.,
(1991)
Internationalizing
the
business
school
curriculum:
Perspectives
on
successful
implementation,
Journal
of
Education
for
Business,
67(1),
12-‐16.
Kedia,
B.L.,
&
Daniel,
S.
(2003,
January).
U.S.
business
needs
for
employees
with
international
expertise.
Paper
presented
at
the
Conference
on
Global
Challenges
and
Higher
U.S.
Education,
Durham,
NC.
Retrieved
from
http://ducis.jhfc.duke.edu/archives/globalchallenges/pdf/kedia_daniel.pdf.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
114
Kehl,
K.
&
Morris,
J.
(2008).
Differences
in
global-‐mindedness
between
short-‐term
and
semester-‐long
study
abroad
participants
at
selected
private
universities,
Frontiers:
The
Interdisciplinary
Journal
of
Study
Abroad,
15,
67-‐79.
Kennedy,
K.J.,
(2009).
Creating
a
citizenship
curriculum:
What
do
we
know
about
the
way
students
learn
to
be
citizens?
In
A.
Kuroda
et
al.
(Eds.),
ICER
2009:
International
Conference
on
Educational
Research:
Learning
Community
for
Sustainable
Development,
(pp.
44-‐54).
Thailand:
Khon
Kaen
University.
Kennedy,
K.J.,
Hahn,
C.L,
and
Lee,
W.O.
(2007).
Constructing
citizenship:
Comparing
the
views
of
students
in
Australia,
Hong
Kong,
and
the
United
States.
Comparative
Education
Review,
52(1),
53-‐90.
Knight,
J.
(2006).
A
Guide
to
the
Implications
of
the
General
Agreement
on
trade
in
service
(GATS)
for
cross-‐border
education.
Report
prepared
for
the
Commonwealth
of
Learning
and
UNESCO.
Kolb,
D.
(1984)
Experiential
learning
as
the
source
for
learning
and
development.
Englewood,
NJ:
Prentice-‐Hall.
Leask,
B.
(2008).
Internationalisation,
globalization
and
curriculum
innovation.
In
M.
Hellsten
&
A
Reid
(Eds.),
Researching
international
pedagogies;
sustainable
practice
for
teaching
and
learning
in
higher
education
(pp.
9-‐26).
The
Netherlands:
Springer.
Le
Loup,
B.R.
(2009).
The
global
citizenship
initiative:
A
case
study
examining
the
leadership
of
Pacific
Coast
Community
College
implementing
organizational
change
in
response
to
globalization
(Unpublished
doctoral
dissertation).
University
of
Southern
California,
Los
Angeles,
CA.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
115
Li,
T.,
Greenberg,
B.
&
Nicholls,
J.A.F.,
(2007).
Teaching
experiential
learning:
Adoption
of
an
innovative
course
in
an
MBA
curriculum,
Journal
of
Marketing
Education,
29(1),
25-‐34.
Martinsen,
R.
A.
(2010).
Short-‐term
study
abroad:
Predicting
changes
in
oral
skills.
Foreign
Language
Annals,
43(3),
504-‐530.
Mayo,
P.
(2003).
A
Rationale
for
a
Transformative
Approach
to
Education,
Journal
for
Transformative
Education,
1(1),
38-‐57.
McLaughlin,
J.S.,
&
Johnson,
D.K.
(2006).
Assessing
the
field
course
experiential
learning
model:
Transforming
collegiate
short-‐term
study
abroad
experiences
into
rich
learning
environments,
Frontiers:
The
Interdisciplinary
Journal
of
Study
Abroad,
13,
p.
65-‐85.
Medina-‐Lopez-‐Portillo,
A.
(2004).
Intercultural
learning
assessment:
The
link
between
program
duration
and
the
development
of
intercultural
sensitivity.
Frontiers:
The
international
journal
of
study
abroad,
10,
179-‐200.
Merryfield,
M.
(2003).
Like
a
veil:
Cross-‐cultural
experiential
learning
online,
Contemporary
Issues
in
Technology
and
Teacher
Education,
3(2),
146-‐171.
Mezirow,
J.
(2003).
Transformative
learning
as
discourse.
Journal
of
Transformative
Education.
1(1),
58-‐63.
Nam,
K.
(2011).
Intercultural
development
in
the
short-‐term
study
abroad
context:
A
comparative
case
study
analysis
of
global
seminars
in
Asia
(Thailand
and
Laos)
and
in
Europe
(Netherlands).
(Unpublished
doctoral
dissertation).
University
of
Minnesota,
Minneapolis,
MN.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
116
Niehaus,
E.
K.
(2012).
Alternative
Break
Programs
and
the
Factors
that
Contribute
to
Change
in
Student
Lives.
(Unpublished
doctoral
dissertation).
University
of
Maryland,
College
Park.
Norris,
E.M.,
and
Gillespie,
J.
(2009).
How
study
abroad
shapes
global
careers:
Evidence
from
the
United
States.
Journal
of
Studies
in
International
Education,
13(3),
382-‐297.
Olson,
C.L.,
&
Kroeger,
K.R.
(2001).
Global
competency
and
intercultural
sensitivity,
Journal
of
Studies
in
International
Education,
5(2),
116-‐137.
Parker,
W.
C.,
Ninomiya,
A.,
&
Cogan,
J.
(1999).
Educating
world
citizens:
Toward
multinational
curriculum
development.
American
Educational
Research
Journal,
36(2),
117-‐145.
Patton,
M.Q.
(2001).
Qualitative
research
and
evaluation
methods.
Thousand
Oaks,
CA:
Sage
Publications,
Inc.
Persteiner,
A.
(2013).
From
the
great
state
to
the
great
beyond:
A
case
study
of
how
the
study
abroad
experience
prepares
accounting
students
to
work
in
a
global
economy.
(Unpublished
doctoral
dissertation).
University
of
St.
Thomas,
St.
Paul,
MN.
Pfeffer,
J.,
&
Fong,
C.T.
(2002).
The
end
of
business
schools?
Less
success
than
meets
the
eye.
Academy
of
Management
Learning
and
Education,
1,
78-‐95.
Porter,
L.W.,
McKibbin,
L.E.,
and
the
American
Assembly
of
Collegiate
Schools
of
Business,
Management
(1998).
Education
and
Development:
Drift
or
Thrust
into
the
Twenty-‐First
Century?
New
York,
NY:
McGraw-‐Hill
Book
Company.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
117
Qiang,
Z.,
(2003).
Internationalization
of
Higher
Education:
Towards
a
conceptual
framework,
Policy
Futures
in
Education.
1(2),
248-‐270.
Quinn,
M.P.,
(2002).
Qualitative
Research
and
Evaluation
Methods
(3d
Ed.),
Thousand
Oaks,
CA:
Sage
Publishing,
Inc.
Renn,
K.A.,
Brazelton,
B.
&
Holmes,
J.M.
(2014).
At
the
margins
of
internationalization:
An
analysis
of
journal
articles
on
college
student
development,
learning
and
experiences,
1998-‐2011,
Journal
of
College
Student
Development,
55(3),
278-‐294.
Rowan-‐Kenyon,
H.T.,
&
Niehaus,
E.
(2011).
One
year
later:
The
influence
of
short-‐
term
study
abroad
experiences
on
students.
Journal
of
Student
Affairs
Research
and
Practice,
48,
213-‐
228.
Sachau,
D.,
Brasher,
N,
&
Fee,
S.
(2010).
Three
models
for
short-‐term
study
abroad,
Journal
of
Management
Education,
34(5),
645-‐670.
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,
50(2),
pp
119-‐143.
Scherer,
R.,
Beaton,
S.,
Ainina,
M.
&
Meyer,
J.
(Eds.)
(2000).
A
Field
Guide
to
Internationalizing
Business
Education:
Changing
Perspectives
and
Growing
Opportunities.
Austin,
TX:
Center
for
International
Business
Education
and
Research.
Schiro,
M.
(2007).
Curriculum
theory:
Conflicting
visions
and
enduring
concerns.
Thousand
Oaks,
CA:
Sage
Publications,
Inc.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
118
Toyne,
B.
(1992).
Internationalising
business
education.
Business
and
Economic
Review,
January-‐March,
23-‐27.
Tyler,
R.W.
(1949).
Basic
Principles
of
Curriculum
and
Instruction,
Chicago,
IL:
University
of
Chicago
Press.
Ueltschy,
L.C.
(2001).
An
exploratory
study
of
integration
interactive
technology
into
the
marketing
curriculum,
Journal
of
Marketing
Education,
23,
63-‐72.
Vernon,
R.
(1994).
Contributing
to
an
international
business
school
curriculum,
Journal
of
International
Business,
25(2),
215-‐228.
Waks,
L.J.
(2007).
Rereading
democracy
and
education
today:
John
Dewey
on
globalization,
multiculturalism
and
democratic
education,
Education
and
Culture,
23(1),
27-‐37.
Waks,
L.J.
(2003).
How
globalization
can
cause
fundamental
curriculum
change:
An
American
perspective,
Journal
of
Educational
Change,
4(4),
383-‐418.
Welikala,
T.
(2011).
Rethinking
international
higher
education
curriculum:
Mapping
the
research
landscape.
Universitas,
21.
Wildavsky,
B.
(2010).
The
great
brain
race:
How
global
universities
are
reshaping
the
world.
Princeton,
NJ:
Princeton
University
Press.
Williams,
T.R.
(2005).
Exploring
the
impact
of
study
abroad
on
student’s
intercultural
communication
skills:
Adaptability
and
sensitivity.
Journals
of
Study
in
International
Education,
9(4),
356-‐371.
Williams,
T.R.
(2009).
The
reflective
model
of
intercultural
competency:
A
multidimensional,
qualitative
approach
to
study
abroad
assessment.
Frontiers:
The
interdisciplinary
journal
of
study
abroad,
Fall
2009,
289-‐304.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
119
Ziamandanis,
C.
(2013).
Qualitative
and
quantitative
gains
from
short-‐term
study
abroad
@tic.
Revisto
d’innovacio
educativa,
North
America.
Retrieved
July
26,
2014
from
http://attic.uv.ed/index.php/attic/article/view/2339/2191
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
120
Appendix
A
Questions
asked
by
the
USC
Marshall
School
in
the
2010-‐2011
School
Year
GLP
and
LINC
Spring
2011
Post
–Trip
Survey
1.
Please
fill
in
your
ten
digit
USCID.
2.
In
which
GLP
or
LINC
trip
did
you
participate?
__Beijing
__
Hong
Kong
___
Mumbai
__
Santiago
__
Singapore
__
Shanghai
__
Sydney
___
Taipei
__
LINC
New
Taipei
__
Buenos
Aires
Part
I:
Reflecting
on
your
experience,
please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
the
extent
to
which
you
agree
with
the
following
statements:
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Strongly
Agree,
Agree,
Somewhat
Agree,
Somewhat
Disagree,
Disagree,
Strongly
Disagree).
1.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
globalization
and
its
impact
on
international
business.
2.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
international
and
global
business.
3.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
how
to
do
business
outside
of
the
United
States.
4.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
how
to
find
data
about
the
business
environment
outside
the
United
States.
5.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
the
political
and
regulatory
environment
of
the
country
I
visited.
6.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
the
technological
environment
of
the
country
I
visited.
7.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
the
history
of
the
country
I
visited.
8.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
of
how
to
do
business
in
the
country
I
visited.
9.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
of
how
to
find
data
about
the
business
environment
in
the
country
I
visited.
Part
II:
Reflecting
on
your
experience,
please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
the
extent
to
which
you
agree
with
the
following
statements.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
121
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Strongly
Agree,
Agree,
Somewhat
Agree,
Somewhat
Disagree,
Disagree,
Strongly
Disagree).
1.
I
have
changed
the
way
I
view
myself.
2.
I
have
a
better
understanding
of
myself.
3.
I
have
changed
how
I
view
the
world.
4.
I
have
a
greater
sense
of
independence.
5.
I
have
a
greater
sense
of
self-‐confidence.
6.
I
feel
connected
with
the
faculty
and
staff
who
lead
the
course.
7.
I
have
gotten
to
know
other
USC
students
I
might
not
have
met
otherwise.
Part
III.
Please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
important
the
following
are
to
you:
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Extremely
Important,
Very
Important,
Somewhat
Important,
Somewhat
Unimportant,
Very
Unimportant,
Extremely
Unimportant).
1.
Understanding
cultures
different
from
my
own.
2.
Possessing
knowledge
of
international
issues.
3.
Having
the
ability
to
work
with
people
who
have
different
beliefs
and
or
values
than
me.
5.
Having
the
ability
to
tolerate
uncertainty.
Part
IV.
Please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
how
important
you
view
the
following
experiences
to
your
future
career
success:
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Extremely
Important,
Very
Important,
Somewhat
Important,
Somewhat
Unimportant,
Very
Unimportant,
Extremely
Unimportant).
1.
Having
an
international
experience.
2.
Having
an
understanding
of
globalization.
3.
Having
an
understanding
of
the
political
and
regulatory
environments
outside
the
U.S.
4.
Having
the
ability
to
communicate
with
people
from
cultures
and
countries
different
than
my
own.
5.
Having
an
understanding
of
cultures,
languages
and
history
of
countries
outside
the
United
States.
6.
Having
an
understanding
of
international
business
and
global
business
strategy.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
122
Part
V:
Please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
the
extent
to
which
you
agree
with
the
following
statements.
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Strongly
Agree,
Agree,
Somewhat
Agree,
Somewhat
Disagree,
Disagree,
Strongly
Disagree).
1.
I
understand
cultures
different
than
my
own.
2.
I
understand
practices
and
systems
of
cultures
different
from
my
own.
3.
I
understand
the
history,
politics
and
government
of
cultures
different
than
my
own.
4.
I
appreciate
the
presence
of
different
viewpoints.
5.
I
am
accepting
of
people
different
than
myself.
6.
I
feel
comfortable
in
new
situations.
7.
I
feel
I
can
adapt
in
new
situations.
8.
I
feel
integrated
into
the
USC
community.
Part
VI.
Please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
how
likely
you
are
to
participate
in
the
following
activities.
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Very
Likely,
Likely,
Somewhat
Likely,
Somewhat
Unlikely,
Unlikely,
Very
Unlikely).
1.
Participate
in
additional
study
abroad
opportunities
while
at
USC.
2.
Take
at
least
one
foreign
language
course
while
at
USC.
3.
Take
one
or
more
courses
in
ethnic
studies.
4.
Take
at
least
one
course
that
focuses
on
global
content
such
as
international
relations
or
global
business.
5.
Minor
in
international
relations
or
a
foreign
language.
6.
Pursue
your
Marshall
concentration
in
International
Business,
Global
Management
or
Global
Marketing.
7.
Participate
in
an
international
internship.
8.
Accept
a
job
in
an
international
location.
9.
Accept
a
job
with
a
focus
on
international
business,
international
trade
or
international
investment.
10.
Participate
in
international
or
intercultural
activities
on
campus.
11.
Try
a
new
activity
or
enter
into
an
unfamiliar
situation.
12.
Travel
abroad
for
leisure.
Part
VI
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
123
Please
use
this
space
or
continue
to
the
back
of
the
page
if
needed
to
relate
any
stories,
experiences
or
comments
you’d
like
to
share.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
124
Appendix
B
Matrix
for
Answering
Research
Questions
Research
Question
Instrument
and
Procedures
Sub-‐Question
1
What
meaning
do
students
make
of
their
participation
in
short-‐term
study
abroad
immediately
after
returning?
Instrument(s):
Survey
I:
Part
I,
Questions
1-‐10
Part
II,
Questions
1-‐7
Part
III,
Questions
1-‐5
Part
IV,
Questions
1-‐6
Procedures:
Collection
and
analysis
of
Survey
I
data
Sub-‐Question
1
What
meaning
do
students
make
of
their
participation
in
short-‐term
study
abroad
two
years
after
returning?
Instrument(s):
Survey
II:
Part
I,
Questions
1-‐10
Part
II,
Questions
1-‐7
Part
III,
Questions
1-‐5
Part
IV,
Questions
1-‐6
Questionnaire
Procedures:
Collection
and
analysis
of
Survey
II
data
Collection
and
analysis
of
Questionnaire
data
Sub-‐Question
II
How
do
students
attempt
to
integrate
this
meaning
into
their
lives?
Instrument(s):
Survey
I:
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12
Survey
II:
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12
Questionnaire
Procedures:
Collection
and
analysis
of
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
125
data
from
Survey
I,
Survey
II
and
Questionnaire
Sub-‐Question
III
To
what
extent
do
students
follow
through
on
their
new
commitments
or
intentions?
Instrument(s):
Survey
II:
Part
V,
Questions
1-‐12
Questionnaire
Procedures:
Collection
and
analysis
of
data
from
Survey
II
and
Questionnaire
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
126
Appendix
C
Questions
asked
by
Graduate
Student
in
the
Online
Survey
LINC
Follow-‐Up
Survey
1.
In
which
GLP
or
LINC
trip
did
you
participate?
_____________________________
2.
Approximately
how
many
years
ago
did
you
participate
in
the
LINC
course?
One
year
Two
years
Three
years
Part
I:
Reflecting
on
your
previous
experience
with
the
LINC
course,
please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
the
extent
to
which
you
agree
with
the
following
statements:
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Strongly
Agree,
Agree,
Somewhat
Agree,
Somewhat
Disagree,
Disagree,
Strongly
Disagree).
1.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
globalization
and
its
impact
on
international
business.
2.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
international
and
global
business.
3.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
how
to
do
business
outside
of
the
United
States.
4.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
how
to
find
data
about
the
business
environment
outside
the
United
States.
5.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
the
political
and
regulatory
environment
of
the
country
I
visited.
6.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
the
technological
environment
of
the
country
I
visited.
7.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
with
the
history
of
the
country
I
visited.
8.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
of
how
to
do
business
in
the
country
I
visited.
9.
I
have
a
greater
understanding/familiarity
of
how
to
find
data
about
the
business
environment
in
the
country
I
visited.
Part
II:
Reflecting
on
your
experience,
please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
the
extent
to
which
you
agree
with
the
following
statements.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
127
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Strongly
Agree,
Agree,
Somewhat
Agree,
Somewhat
Disagree,
Disagree,
Strongly
Disagree).
1.
I
have
changed
the
way
I
view
myself.
2.
I
have
a
better
understanding
of
myself.
3.
I
have
changed
how
I
view
the
world.
4.
I
have
a
greater
sense
of
independence.
5.
I
have
a
greater
sense
of
self-‐confidence.
6.
I
feel
connected
with
the
faculty
and
staff
who
lead
the
course.
7.
I
have
gotten
to
know
other
USC
students
I
might
not
have
met
otherwise.
Part
III.
Please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
important
the
following
are
to
you:
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Extremely
Important,
Very
Important,
Somewhat
Important,
Somewhat
Unimportant,
Very
Unimportant,
Extremely
Unimportant).
1.
Understanding
cultures
different
from
my
own.
2.
Possessing
knowledge
of
international
issues.
3.
Having
the
ability
to
work
with
people
who
have
different
beliefs
and
or
values
than
me.
5.
Having
the
ability
to
tolerate
uncertainty.
Part
IV.
Please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
how
important
you
view
the
following
experiences
to
your
future
career
success:
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Extremely
Important,
Very
Important,
Somewhat
Important,
Somewhat
Unimportant,
Very
Unimportant,
Extremely
Unimportant).
1.
Having
an
international
experience.
2.
Having
an
understanding
of
globalization.
3.
Having
an
understanding
of
the
political
and
regulatory
environments
outside
the
United
States.
4.
Having
the
ability
to
communicate
with
people
from
cultures
and
countries
different
than
my
own.
5.
Having
an
understanding
of
cultures,
languages
and
history
of
countries
outside
the
United
States.
6.
Having
an
understanding
of
international
business
and
global
business
strategy.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
128
Part
V:
Please
bubble
in
the
statement
that
corresponds
with
the
extent
to
which
you
agree
with
the
following
statements.
(All
students
are
asked
to
fill
in
one
of
the
following
choices
to
the
choices
below:
Strongly
Agree,
Agree,
Somewhat
Agree,
Somewhat
Disagree,
Disagree,
Strongly
Disagree).
1.
I
understand
cultures
different
than
my
own.
2.
I
understand
practices
and
systems
of
cultures
different
from
my
own.
3.
I
understand
the
history,
politics
and
government
of
cultures
different
than
my
own.
4.
I
appreciate
the
presence
of
different
viewpoints.
5.
I
am
accepting
of
people
different
than
myself.
6.
I
feel
comfortable
in
new
situations.
7.
I
feel
I
can
adapt
in
new
situations.
8.
I
feel
integrated
into
the
USC
community.
Part
VI.
Please
note
which
of
the
following
activities
you
have
participated
in
after
you
took
the
LINC
course
in
the
second
semester
of
your
freshman
year.
1.
Have
you
participate
in
additional
study
abroad
opportunities
while
at
USC?
What
were
the
opportunities?
2.
Please
list
any
foreign
language
courses
you
have
taken
at
USC.
3.
Please
list
any
courses
in
ethnic
studies
that
you
have
taken
at
USC.
4.
Please
list
courses
that
focuses
on
global
content
such
as
international
relations
or
global
business
that
you
have
taken
at
USC.
5.
Have
you
declared
a
minor
in
international
relations
or
a
foreign
language?
6.
Have
you
pursued
your
Marshall
concentration
in
International
Business,
Global
Management
or
Global
Marketing.
Please
briefly
describe.
7.
Have
you
participated
in
an
international
internship?
Please
briefly
describe.
8.
Have
you
accepted
a
job
in
an
international
location?
Where?
9.
Have
you
accepted
a
job
with
a
focus
on
international
business,
international
trade
or
international
investment.
Please
briefly
describe.
10.
Have
you
participate
in
international
or
intercultural
activities
on
campus?
Please
list.
11.
Have
you
tried
a
new
activity
or
entered
into
an
unfamiliar
situation?
Please
briefly
describe.
12.
Have
you
traveled
abroad
for
leisure?
Where?
13.
Have
you
pursued
other
international
opportunities
not
already
addressed?
If
yes,
please
describe.
Part
VI
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
129
Please
use
this
space
continue
to
the
back
of
the
page
if
needed
to
relate
any
additional
stories,
experiences
or
comments
you’d
like
to
share
regarding
the
influence
of
the
LINC
course
in
your
education
and
experience
while
at
USC.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
130
Appendix
D
Student
Survey
1.
As
you
recall
your
LINC
experience
over
two
years
ago,
what
are
your
lasting
impressions
or
recollections?
2.
In
what
way
did
your
experience
in
the
LINC
course
help
you
choose
certain
courses,
or
otherwise
shape
your
academic
experience?
3.
In
what
way
did
your
experience
in
the
LINC
course
help
shape
decisions
about
the
career
you
want
to
purse
and
your
preparation
for
that
career?
4.
In
what
way
did
participation
in
the
LINC
course
change
the
way
you
see
the
world
and/or
your
role
in
it?
Please
describe.
5.
Please
add
other
significant
information
about
your
experience
with
LINC
that
you
would
like
to
add
about
the
way
that
it
may
have
influenced
your
life,
goals,
or
views.
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
131
Appendix
E
Additional
Tables
78
78.5
79
79.5
80
80.5
81
81.5
2011
2013
Connected
with
faculty
&
staff
who
led
course
(percent)
93
93.5
94
94.5
95
95.5
96
96.5
2011
2013
It
is
important
to
have
the
abilty
to
work
with
people
with
beliefs
different
then
their
own
GLOBALIZATION
OF
A
BUSINESS
SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
132
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
2011
2013
Students
who
Agree
or
Strongly
Agree
that
trip
changed
view
of
themselves
(percent)
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
While a great deal of research has been done on the benefits of study abroad generally, particularly long-term study abroad, far less has been done on the impact of short-term study abroad on student learning. This qualitative study examines the long-term impact of short-term study abroad by surveying students two years after they return from a short-term study abroad experience. The researcher found that (a) students retain positive memories of their trip two years later, (b) seemed to be particularly influenced by academic relationships developed by professors on the trip, as well as by other personal relationships, and (c) had difficulty in following through on learning goals developed as result of the short-term study abroad without additional aid.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Examining the choice of business majors to participate in a short-term study abroad program using the gap analysis model
PDF
Short-term study tours and global competence development
PDF
The role of the fieldbook: a pedagogical tool for intercultural learning
PDF
On the quest for global competencies
PDF
Study abroad and the ethnoracial identity development of Latinx students
PDF
To be young, global, and Black: an evaluation of African-American college students’ participation in study abroad programs
PDF
Undergraduates in the developing world: study abroad program management in sub-Saharan Africa
PDF
The making of global citizens through education abroad programs: aligning missions and visions with education abroad programs
PDF
Assessment and accreditation of undergraduate study abroad programs
PDF
The degree to which the use of sheltered instructional strategies in classrooms impact student access to common core content as a consequence of professional development
PDF
Measuring the impact of short-term campus exchange programs: an evaluation study
PDF
The conceptualization and development of a global community college: a case study examining the perspective and roles of Pasadena City College leadership and management
PDF
The impact of professional learning community on teacher learning and student achievement: a qualitative approach
PDF
Supporting school leaders implementing a global education model in a national network of public schools: a promising practice
PDF
A pedagogical shift from direct instruction: Technology‐Assisted Inquiry Learning (TAIL) in chemistry
PDF
Creating and implementing an offshore graduate program: a case study of leadership and development of the global executive MBA program
PDF
The elements of a differentiated curriculum for gifted students: transfer and application across the disciplines
PDF
Increasing international student enrollment at an East Asian university: a gap analysis
PDF
Chinese high school students' lack of non-academic skills preparation to succeed in their studies abroad
PDF
Developing mathematical reasoning: a comparative study using student and teacher-centered pedagogies
Asset Metadata
Creator
Strojny, Suzanne Rose
(author)
Core Title
Globalization of a business school curriculum: the impact of short term study abroad on long term student learning
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education
Publication Date
09/15/2014
Defense Date
05/08/2014
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
business school,curriculum,Globalization,long-term learning,OAI-PMH Harvest,short-term study abroad,study abroad
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Robison, Mark Power (
committee chair
), Filback, Robert (
committee member
), Kaplan, Sandra N. (
committee member
)
Creator Email
suzannestrojny@gmail.com,suzannestrojny@hotmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-477385
Unique identifier
UC11287853
Identifier
etd-StrojnySuz-2935.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-477385 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-StrojnySuz-2935.pdf
Dmrecord
477385
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Strojny, Suzanne Rose
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
long-term learning
short-term study abroad
study abroad