INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS ADVISORY COUNCIL

CHARGE & RESPONSIBILITIES: The International Affairs Advisory Council shall be responsible for:

• (1) Advising the Vice Provost for International Affairs on matters relating to this office and the Universityäs international program committees;
• (2) Identifying opportunities for international curriculum and academic program coordination, planning, development, and enhancement;
• (3) Formulating strategies for faculty development and internationalization, including fund-raising; and serving as a panel to review and advise the awarding of foreign grants for faculty and international programs whenever these become available;
• (4) Identifying ways to make the student experience on campus more international in character and to stimulate student interest in international education;
• (5) Recommending broad institutional policies and goals for programs of study and other opportunity abroad (in coordination with the Foreign Study Programs Committee);
• (6) Identifying opportunities and procedures to improve services for international students and scholars;
• (7) Advising the Vice Provost, the Provost, and the University President on external relations concerning the international dimensions of the University;
• (8) Promoting and enhancing international living on campus by supporting and advising the International House; and,
• (9) Recommending revised or new policies as appropriate in any area of the University to strengthen the international character of the University.The Office of International Affairs provides the staffing for this committee.

Relevant email correspondence

From: Peter B Gilkey [mailto:gilkey@uoregon.edu]

Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 10:32 AM

To: czhang@uoregon.edu

Cc: gsayre@uoregon.edu; gwens@uoregon.edu; hubin@uoregon.edu

Subject: International Affairs Committee

Dear Vice Provost Zhang:

The "International Affairs Committee" is a standing University Committee which was established by the UO Senate. It was suspended in 2001. I am making a motion at the November meeting of the UO Senate to do some routine houskeeping and clean up things. I was wondering if you could check with someone in your office and let me know (a) if there is a sucessor committee and (b) why the committee was abolished. Or, I suppose, (c) who I SHOULD be contacting.

That way I could make an appropriate explaination to the UO Senate at our November meeting since, at least in principle, abolishing a standing University committee requires Senate approval. I don't forsee any problem. I am just trying to present as complete and explaination to the senate as possible.

Respectfully submitted

Peter B Gilkey

To gilkey@uoregon.edu

Cc: gsayre@uoregon.edu, gwens@uoregon.edu, hubin@uoregon.edu

From: "Chunsheng Zhang"

Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 09:45:02 -0700

Dear Prof. Gilkey,

Thank you for your email. Here is what I found so far:

1. No one in International Affairs seems to know anything about the reasons why "International Affairs Committee" was abolished.

2. According to my predecessor, Tom Mills, when he was appointed Associate Vice President, then Provost/Sr. VP John Moseley and VP Lorraine Davis formed the International Coordinating Council (ICC) to advise the three of them about UO international affairs. I am not certain whether ICC is a successor committee or whether ICC is a standing University Committee.

I would like to have an opportunity to discuss this matter with Provost Brady and the past Chair of the ICC, Prof. Priscilla Southwell, regarding the status of ICC in relation to standing University Committees.

I hope this brief reply is helpful for now. I hope we can all work together to further strengthen the university's infrastructure to support true internationalization at the UO.

Best regards,

Chunsheng

Chunsheng Zhang, Ph.D. Vice Provost International Affairs & Outreach University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403-5209 Tel (541) 346-5851 Fax (541) 346-1232 http://international.uoregon.edu

Subject: RE: International Affairs Committee
To: Chunsheng Zhang, Peter Gilkey
Cc: Gordon Sayre, Gwen Steigelman
From: Priscilla Southwell
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 14:52:31 -0700

All:

Here is an archive that might help to clarify the origins of the current International Coordinating Council (ICC) as established in 2002, and the uncertain status of the "International Affairs Committee." This is the July 18, 2001 "Final Report of the Committee on International Affairs Review" http://academicaffairs.uoregon.edu/IntlReport.html, which recommended the creation of the ICC, among its other recommendations. My interpretation of this report is that this international affairs committee was set up as a temporary committee, following an unsuccessful internal search for vice-provost for international program, and that this committee's purpose and function were completed once this report was completed at the end of 2001.

I also have a hard copy of a memo from John Moseley, dated 3/18/2002, to the members of the university committee, announcing the creation of the ICC, its members, and the charge to the Council. I will send a copy of this memo to Chunsheng and any others who would like a copy. The ICC is supposed to "work with the International Affairs Advisory Council" and the Committee on Committees to recommend how future committee structure should be formulated," but there is no mention of an "International Affairs Committee."

I hope this helps a bit.

Priscilla Southwell
Chair, International Coordinating Committee
Associate Dean, CAS

Prepared by:

• L. Davis (chair), [ lgd@oregon ]
• W. Ginsberg, [ warren@oregon ]
• T. Mills, [ tommills@oregon ]
• R. Steers, [ rsteers@Oregon ]
• L. Steeves, [ lsteeves@oregon ]
• A. Tibbitts (student), [ atibbitt@darkwing ]
• R. Tomlin, [ tomlin@oregon ]

Committee Charge

Based in part on a recommendation from the search committee that had conducted the unsuccessful internal search for a new vice provost for international programs, the provost assembled a committee of faculty and one student, chaired by the vice provost for academic affairs, and charged it to: ÒÉundertake a thorough review of the structure and functions of both the office and the position with the aim of submitting before the end of the year a comprehensive analysis of UO international efforts and ideas for sustaining or re-structuring the vice provostÕs office in support of them.Ó

In order to conduct an effective review, the committee consulted broadly with the wider campus community. This document incorporates input from numerous discussions with representative groups and individuals concerning the directions the University of Oregon (UO) might take in developing international affairs. As such, it presents some of the key ideas that have emerged from efforts of other campus committees and councils, as well as individual faculty and student input and review.

We provided for reviewersÕ reflection and comment:

• 1. A draft mission statement for international affairs,
• 2. A summary of the extensive array of international activities ongoing across campus,
• 3. A summary of some key operational principles that constrain or govern international affairs,
• 4. The committeeÕs current proposal for supporting international affairs,

The committee actively sought input from the campus community through a series of meetings with standing groups of faculty and students involved with international matters. In addition, we also solicited direct response and ideas from the entire campus community via e-mail or phone calls to any committee members.

Mission Statement: International Affairs at the UO

The University of Oregon enjoys an enduring tradition of significant and extensive international activity, ranging from its unusually successful set of study abroad programs to the extensive involvement of faculty in collaborative international research and instructional activities. The development of UO international affairs is essential to our aspirations to be a national university and to our aspirations to serve well and fully both regional and state interests and needs. While our national and international roles may be paramount, it is also critical to our regional and state responsibilities that we develop international affairs.

The University of Oregon will achieve a clear and comprehensive position of West Coast and national leadership in the extent and quality of its international activities. In general, our goals must be:

• 1. To maintain and promote existing excellence in international programs, especially in student programs;
• 2. To cultivate excellence and new opportunities internationally, especially in research and instruction;
• 3. To make the excellence we have and that we achieve more visible to each other and to the larger world.

In conceptualizing the institutional structures that will best encourage and support the pursuit of these goals, the critical questions include:

• 1. What are the various academic and administrative activities that go on in the international arena?
• 2. Who presently has responsibility for their operation and development?
• 3. What structures are essential to ensure the success of the operation?

Summary: Functional Areas and Operating Principles

The committee prepared an extensive list of ongoing activitiesÑcalling them functional areasÑin the international arena. These include:

• 1. Research and development activities, including but not limited to cultivation of reciprocal research programs and relationships, facilitation of faculty and foreign scholar research visits, international conferences, development and support of international grant writing and collaborative grant opportunities, and support of research activities in international areas across departments and programs.
• 2. Instructional programs, including but not limited to area and international studies programs, foreign language and culture studies, international offerings in departments, export of UO instructional programs abroad, cultivation of collaborative international degree programs, and development of supporting academic infrastructure.
• 3. Student activities and support, including but not limited to cultivation of study abroad and internships, international scholarships, recruitment and support of international students, and building networks of international alumni.
• 4. Faculty support, including but not limited to travel support, international fellowships (e.g., Fulbright), support for faculty with ongoing or occasional international commitments, support for visiting scholars and departments that host them.
• 5. Diplomacy and administrative support, including but not limited to cultivation and stewardship of institutional relationships (e.g., UO-Waseda), formal review and approval of institutional commitments, coordination of international activities across academic and administrative units, coordination with other (OUS) institutions, and the international side of public affairs and development (university advancement).
• 6. Entrepreneurial activities, including but not limited to both campus and overseas opportunities for academic initiatives and resource cultivation, and international fundraising.

Virtually all of the academic substance of UO international affairs arises from the expertise and initiative of the faculty located within existing academic units. These academic ventures in turn require administrative infrastructure and support and it is the development and shape of this administrative infrastructure that is under review. The general shape of administrative support is constrained by a number of general organizing principles:

• 1. Academic oversight. All international academic programs fall solely under the direction of the schools and colleges.
• 2. Mutual support. International educational efforts do not exist in a vacuum. They should be integrated with, and mutually supportive of, other campus academic programs. They should operate in close cooperation with the schools and colleges and their deans.
• 3. Clear accountability: symbolic leadership. The UO needs one single senior administrator who serves as a reference point both on and off campus as the key representative responsible for strategic planning and implementation in the international arena.
• 4. Focused effort. The UO does not have resources to do everything and do it well. Our international efforts must be strategically sound and implemented with careful coordination to assure attaining concrete goals rather than missing idealistic ones.
• 5. Small and flexible. Administrative activities and structure must be small, flexible, and cost-efficient, though still effective.
• 6. Rational choice. The emergent design must be based on the UO international mission and its strategic goals.

Committee Proposal and Current Directions for Reorganization

We believe the proposal presented here supports and strengthens the university's efforts to enhance the breadth and scope of endeavors in international affairs. This proposal includes changes to the original proposalÑthe results of extensive input and concrete suggestions from faculty. It is important to acknowledge that there was considerable concern expressed that the original proposal, despite assertions of continued commitment to international affairs, diminished UO support to international matters (1) through a perceived reduction of the standing of the administrative position and the office responsible for international affairs, and (2) through the absence of any directly stated information regarding the funding for international affairs. This proposal includes a number of changes aimed at addressing the first concernÑdefining the appointment as vice provost and strengthening explicitly the role of the International Coordinating Council in particular. For the second concern, we are confident that the level of funding for international affairs will not be reduced as a result of these recommendations. Finally, the effectiveness of this proposal will be assessed systematically over the next two years and modified as determined by the experience and input from faculty and other stakeholders.

Proposal Appoint a vice provost for international and academic affairs1 who has the responsibility to be the primary administrator for international affairs. This individual will provide vision, entrepreneurial direction, cultivate new international ventures, and put ideas into action. The vice provost will develop connection to and represent the interests of ÒinternationalÓ faculty who are in numerous intellectual and professional fields or whose work is not necessarily international, per se, but whose activities have strong international links. The chair of the International Coordinating Council2 and the director of the Office of International Education and Exchange3 will report to this vice provost.

Merge the operations of the Office of International Education and Exchange with some of the current operations of the Office of International Affairs. This moderately expanded Office of International Education and Exchange3 will be responsible for international student and scholar advising, overseas study and internship programs, the International Resource Center, staffing the presidentÕs and provostÕs international activities, assisting with international alumni activities, advising about international student recruiting, and handling other duties as assigned by the provost.

Move relevant research centers, notably CAPS, under the vice president for research; consider creation of a more general research center in support of international research and development activities. It is expected that the vice president for research and vice provost for international and academic affairs will collaborate to facilitate the development of a structure to promote international research.

Create an International Coordinating Council2 to oversee, monitor, and advise the provost regarding the international agenda at the UO. The charge of this council will be to formulate overarching international goals and to coordinate campus-wide implementation of these goals. The councilÕs memberships would include:

• Vice provost for international and academic affairs, ex-officio, convener (chair elected by members)
• Director, Office of International Education and Exchange Vice president for research, or designee
• Four appointed representatives from College of Arts and Sciences
• Four appointed representatives from professional schools and colleges
• Two student representatives (one an international student)

Notes:

• 1. Alternate suggested titles for this position are: vice provost for academic and international affairs, or vice provost for international and external academic affairs, or vice provost for academic affairs.
• 2. During the first year, this council will work with the International Affairs Advisory Council and the Committee on Committees to recommend how future committee structure should be formulated.
• 3. Alternate suggested name for this office is Office of International Programs; if implemented, the International Programs CouncilÕs name would likely change. Report Ends

  ---

  Web page spun on 10 October 2007 by Peter B Gilkey 202 Deady Hall, Department of Mathematics at the University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-1222, U.S.A. Phone 1-541-346-4717 Email:peter.gilkey.cc.67@aya.yale.edu of Deady Spider Enterprises