International Strategy for Higher Education Institutions
International Strategy for Higher Education Institutions
Placing students at the heart of internationalisation strategy - Part 1 Posted on by Vicky Lewis
This is the first of two blogs drawing on my recent presentation at the Irish Association for International Education conference in Limerick on 11 June 2026.
Part 1 explores what’s distinctive about a student-centred strategy for internationalisation.
Part 2 will set out some recommendations for anyone seeking to support development of an internationalisation strategy which places students at its heart.
It’s easy for a university – or even a country – to say that it’s placing students at the heart of its internationalisation strategy, but much harder to go beyond the noble words and do this in practice.
Building on research undertaken for my chapter in a forthcoming Routledge book on student-centred internationalisation (edited by Professor Elspeth Jones and Dr Ravi Ammigan), coupled with insights from my own professional experience, these two blogs explore how a student-centred approach alters ways of:
To challenge my Anglo-Western assumptions, the underpinning research involved tapping into the perspectives and experiences of expert practitioners and researcher-practitioners from around the world (six different continents) via a survey to understand what a student-centred internationalisation strategy would look like in their context.
The impact of context (both national and institutional) cannot be overstated. Sometimes it’s helpful; other times less so.
A survey respondent from Mexico noted that many Latin American universities are guided by the educational philosophy of humanism, from which the student-centred perspective logically flows.
National policies such as Ireland’s international education strategy, Global Citizens 2030, with its emphasis on talent development, inclusion and global citizenship, can also be useful provide a useful reference point for institutions seeking to centre student interests.
Others, including the UK’s recently published International Education Strategy, take a more narrowly commercial view, emphasising ‘education exports’. It’s harder work – but not impossible – to translate this into a student-centred approach.
A wide range of strategic drivers, highlighted in both national and institutional strategies, can benefit from – and be strengthened by – a student-centred approach.
For example:
At institutional level, the starting point is to ask the ‘why’ questions that uncover the university’s primary rationales for internationalising. The early stages of the strategy development process provide an opportunity for deep thinking and open debate about international education and global engagement.
At this point, it’s worth considering whether student interests could act as a guiding policy for internationalisation. What would happen if the interests of students were used as a touchstone for strategic decisions and a filter for action?
Using examples shared by survey participants, here are a couple of mini case studies showing what it looks like when strategic drivers are translated into practice.
In the first case, a South African institution’s driver is to create a diverse, inclusive and transformative student life. One specific example of an action taken to support this is the introduction of an internationalisation representative on the housing committee of each student residence, with the express remit to enhance the experience of ALL students by facilitating activities that promote intercultural learning and experiences. There’s a fairly direct link here between driver and practice.
In the second case, from Tunisia, the link is less obvious. The driver is to improve the institution’s rankings position by aligning it with international standards. The example of practice that cascades from this is dual supervision for final-year Masters and PhD student projects, involving a Tunisian supervisor and another supervisor from an EU university partner. This provides a richer academic experience for the students, while also aligning provision with international standards.
I’m using a picture of an upside down iceberg to illustrate this blog because I want to make the point that some of the features that distinguish a student-centred approach to internationalisation strategy from a regular one require us to flip the emphasis and look at our priorities from a fresh perspective.
I have three key examples of this.
Emphasis flip 1 is:
Most Anglo-Western universities consider our strategies from the institutional standpoint. The focus is on how the university can embed an international focus across all its activities. Success tends to be measured in terms of institutional reach, reputation, enrolments and, in some cases, income.
What happens if we stop fixating on institutional advantage and, instead, focus on designing policies, partnerships and programmes around students’ needs, experiences and learning outcomes? This would enhance employability, career readiness and global outlook (all high priorities for today’s students). Success could be measured in terms of student development and outcomes.
Emphasis flip 2 is:
Often, most of the content in our internationalisation strategies (certainly here in the UK) is focused on the minority of students who are mobile. A student-centred approach addresses the whole student body: not just international students, or those home students who are privileged enough to take advantage of outbound travel opportunities. And not just students on the home campus, but also those studying in their own countries (or a third country) via transnational education (TNE) provision.
A student-centred strategy prioritises commitment to equity, inclusion and access. Internationalisation at Home is adopted as a primary strategic pathway. Intercultural dimensions are integrated across teaching, learning, student support and campus life, with strong cross-institutional engagement. There is recognition of diverse student realities, taking into account their varied motivations, experiences, needs and interests, rather than pigeonholing them into unhelpfully homogenised segments (e.g. home or international).
Emphasis flip 3 is:
This is perhaps the most significant flip in perspective. Globally, under half of institutions involve students in shaping internationalisation policies (2024 IAU survey).
A student-centred strategy moves beyond seeing students as passive recipients to involving them as active participants and co-creators of strategy. A respondent from Grenada recommended involving students in the design, planning, monitoring and evaluation of internationalisation strategies.
I’ve emphasised ‘evaluation’ as this is often overlooked. In the UK, we’re notoriously poor at reflecting on the successes and failures of the last strategy before we launch into developing the next one. Let alone actually asking students to help us evaluate aspects of it against agreed criteria.
By involving students at the strategy creation stage, an institution can help to establish a culture of actively seeking and acting on feedback. And students’ contribution to strategy development can pave the way for their ongoing engagement and advocacy, giving them a stronger stake in their university and positioning them to become alumni ambassadors once they’ve graduated.
My next blog will turn these insights into recommendations for those involved in internationalisation or global engagement strategy development who are seeking to place students at the heart of their strategy.
IAIE CONFERENCE STUDENT-CENTRED STRATEGY INTERNATIONALISATION
|
|
