Analysis of factors affecting participation of faculty and choice of strategies for the internationalization of the undergraduate agricultural curriculum: the case in two land grant universities

To adapt to the new global system, internationalization is increasingly being accepted as a necessity in higher education. Although the process involves the research, service, and education components of academic institutions, many authors have contended that the internationalization of the curriculum is the most important component of the process and that faculty are its main drivers and actors. While a number of the issues involving internationalization are very well documented, there is still little published information regarding the perspectives of random samples of faculty regarding strategies by which to internationalize the undergraduate curriculum. The purpose of this study was to analyze perspectives of faculty in two land grant colleges of agriculture regarding academic and institutional strategies for the internationalization of the undergraduate agricultural curriculum. A mixed method research approach was used to gather data, combining the use of a questionnaire with both quantitative and open-ended questions sent to a census of the teaching faculty of the two colleges, and conducting eight one-hour interviews. The researcher also carried out an in-depth assessment of the effect of nonresponse error in the study by using and comparing various methods of nonresponse analysis. Faculty knowledge of international issues was positively correlated with their participation in the internationalization process. Knowledge and participation were, in turn, positively correlated with faculty perceptions of relevance of internationalization of the curriculum, and with faculty acceptance of most of the proposed academic and institutional strategies for internationalization. Faculty ranked mobility and infusion approaches as their preferred academic strategies for internationalization of the curriculum, and there were clear patterns of associations between selections by faculty, with mobility and infusion belonging to different groups. When asked about incentives to participate in the internationalization process, faculty mentioned funds, "real" recognition, and release time as their foremost choices. Also, faculty expressed a need for increased leadership, vision, and focus for the process. When looking at the academic and institutional strategies together, various patterns of association also appeared, reiterating the notion that there is not a single best approach to internationalization, but that multiple and complementary strategies are needed