Archives
Questions &Answers
On Jan 5-6, President John B. Simpson was one of a small group of university presidents selected to participate in a summit on international higher education convened by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings. The summit focused on the future of international higher education and its critical importance to the national interest, with attention to such issues as economic development, public affairs, national security, U.S. science and engineering leadership, and international diplomacy. In addition to hearing remarks given by President Bush; Spellings; Rice; Karen Hughes, undersecretary for public diplomacy and public affairs; and other leading public figures, summit participants also had the opportunity to take part in smaller, focused discussions organized around specialized topics related to international higher education issues.
Give us a brief overview of the summit and a summary of the discussions that took place there.
The future of international higher education impacts an enormous range of issues of national importance—these are not merely confined to the academic sphere, but have considerable economic, social and political implications as well. In convening this summit, the departments of State and of Education clearly recognized the wide-ranging significance of international higher education. Accordingly, the summit covered quite a lot of territory, ranging from the need for U.S. students to benefit from and contribute to an increasingly global environment, to the importance of international academic exchange in fostering cultural understanding and strong diplomatic relations, to the priority of investing in international higher education and research to advance scientific research, discovery and technological development in the U.S. Much of the press coverage I've read afterward has focused on issues of national security as they relate to international relations and foreign language education, and indeed, that was among the important topics addressed at the summit. But I believe the most critical topic of discussion—one that itself has tremendous relevance to national security and how the United States is perceived in many international locations—is the important role international education plays in "soft diplomacy." The international students and visiting scholars and faculty who come to the United States to study, teach and conduct research are an invaluable cultural resource, serving to enrich and broaden the horizons of our academic community. Academic exchange and collaboration across cultural and national borders are enormously important to fostering goodwill, building lasting diplomatic ties and creating a culture of mutual understanding and cooperation. It's impossible to overstate the importance of those outcomes within the increasingly global economy we live within.
Why is the academic perspective so critical to this conversation?
One of the most important factors is the notion of "soft diplomacy" I mentioned earlier. The more active a role the U.S. plays in advancing international academic exchange and collaboration, the more positive the nation's image overseas becomes, and the greater our ability to break down the cultural and national barriers that threaten national security and impede our growth as a nation. Another key factor is that the U.S. is steadily losing its longstanding position of global leadership in science and engineering research and technological development. In the past 100 years, U.S. importance in a global context has been largely fueled by our leadership in generating intellectual capital and a superbly trained workforce. This is no longer the case. To an increasingly large degree, the U.S. is failing to produce its own native educated populace, especially in science and engineering—fields that have traditionally been pivotal to U.S. intellectual, economic and military power. The U.S. faces growing international competition in these fields, in particular from Asian and European nations, where increasing numbers of science-and-engineering students are trained and work. In the science and engineering fields, as well as more generally, the U.S. is losing its competitive edge in drawing foreign students in the post 9/11 environment because of a whole host of issues affecting international access to U.S. higher education, including stringent visa regulations and immigration policy, persistent perceptions of the U.S. as unwelcoming to international students and growing competition from other nations in attracting overseas students. Opening our doors to foreign students and visiting scholars and faculty from other nations, and removing barriers to cross-cultural education and academic collaboration, are critical to the advancement of U.S. research and education in an increasingly global world.
Why do you think UB was selected to participate?
UB has a rich and longstanding history of leadership as an international academic community, and we have been engaged in addressing these issues—both as an institution and as part of the global academic community—for a long time. With a large international enrollment and more than 60 international academic exchange programs, UB is truly an international university in scope and in orientation. Not only were we ranked 11th in the nation this fall in terms of our international enrollment by the Institute of International Education, but we also rank first among the nation's public research universities in terms of the total percentage of our total enrollment that is international. More than 10 percent of our undergraduate students participate in study abroad programs—more than 5 times the national average. All of these figures reflect the fact that international education is a major priority for UB and a critical aspect of our mission as a public research university with a global impact. I believe UB's selection to participate in this small group of higher education leaders reflects national recognition of our leadership in this regard.
What were your overall impressions of the summit, and what do you see as its most important outcomes?
To begin with, I view it as a tremendously encouraging step that this summit was convened. U.S. higher education plays an increasingly important role with respect to U.S. foreign policy, and to our nation's competitiveness within the global economy. At the same time, fostering international diplomacy and greater cultural understanding and cooperation is of vital significance to an increasingly global community. The world is changing, and knowledge-creation and knowledge-sharing are increasingly taking place across cultural and national borders. If the U.S. is to succeed in this global environment, our nation's higher education institutions must play a leading role in helping the country to become more globally aware, more culturally open and a stronger contributor to global education and cooperation. Federal leadership and support are critical to advancing these goals, and this conference was remarkable both for the active involvement of many prominent Washington officials and for the genuine and deep interest they demonstrated in gaining an academic perspective on these issues of national and global importance. The nation's government, policy and higher education leaders have opened these conversations; now it is up to us to continue to work in partnership to sustain this dialogue and to act upon it.