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: “…undertake 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 provost’s office in support of them.”

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 reviewers’ 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 committee’s 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:

To maintain and promote existing excellence in international programs, especially in student programs;
To cultivate excellence and new opportunities internationally, especially in research and instruction;
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:

What are the various academic and administrative activities that go on in the international arena?
Who presently has responsibility for their operation and development?
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 activities—calling them functional areas—in 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 proposal—the 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 concern—defining 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 “international” 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 Council²and 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 president’s and provost’s 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 council’s 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)

Because the work of this council will be particularly critical during the period of evaluation and assessment of changes in international affairs, the council will meet quarterly with the provost over the next two years. As such, the committee believes the proposal reaffirms and strengthens UO commitment to international affairs and its integration within the larger academic and research mission of the UO. The UO has long established itself as an exemplary institution regarding matters in international affairs from students’, academic, and research perspectives. With this proposal the committee seeks to maintain and improve this well-earned reputation.

Notes:

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.
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.
Alternate suggested name for this office is Office of International Programs; if implemented, the International Programs Council’s name would likely change.