1. AEUA Presidents’ Meeting 2011 July 3-6, Groningen, Netherlands

2. International Branch Campuses

3. University of Groningen Frans Zwarts

4. Former Rector Magnificus (2002-2011) Vice Chair of the Coimbra Group Provost of the University Campys Fryslân

5. How global universities are reshaping the world ›17,ooo institutions of higher education in 184 countries ›3,000,000 students studying abroad ›162 international branch campuses (IBC’s),mainly in the Middle East and Asia (43 percent increase in 3 years) Source: Ben Wildavsky, The Great Brain Race, Princeton University Press, 2010

6. Two emerging models of academic globalization ›Establishment of corporate universities that act as educational multinationals (America, Australia, United Kingdom) ›Creation of intensive university cooperation networks (Continental Europe)

7. Public universities in the U.S. (1) ›The U.S. federal government and the various state governments encourage institutions of higher education to establish branches overseas ›Higher education overseas is seen as an important export industry ›International education is also viewed as an instrument in so-called “soft diplomacy” as it adds to the prestige of the home country

8. Public universities in the U.S. (2) ›Public universities in the U.S. are prohibited from making capital investments abroad, even when they use private or foundation funds ›Such regulations put public universities at a disadvantage with respect to private institutions of higher education ›Additional guidelines have therefore been developed to regulate the establishment of branch campuses and other overseas training programs

9. The State University of New York at Buffalo ›Overseas branch campus in Singapore in collaboration with the Singapore Institute of Management (SIM, SIM GE) ›New York State regulations require that all overseas branch campuses should be in collaboration or in partnership with a recognized local accredited institution of higher education ›These regulations do not permit a stand alone branch campus or one in partnership with a proprietary institution Source: Stephen C. Dunnett, Vice Provost for International Education

10. Expectations ›The expectation is that the local partner institution will provide the facilities while the U.S. institution will provide the education program, as well as quality assurance from the home campus and ultimately a U.S. degree ›In many cases there is an expectation that the U.S. institution will also contribute to the development of the local partner institution and the professional development of the local faculty ›Institutional development is always an altruistic claim by the U.S. partner institution, even when it is paid to deliver this development

11. Financial models ›One common model is for the U.S. institution to charge all direct and indirect costs to the local partner ›Direct costs include all the costs incurred by the U.S. institution on the home campus, which is usually calculated in terms of a percentage of staff and faculty time spent on matters associated with the overseas branch campus ›Indirect costs vary, but the U.S. federal government has set an indirect cost rate which is the norm used by U.S. institutions of higher education: 52% for costs incurred on the home campus, 28% for costs incurred overseas

12. Quality assurance ›U.S. accreditation regulations insist that the degree awarded overseas must be equivalent to the degree awarded in the U.S.A. ›Accreditation agencies increasingly insist on a separate accreditation process for branch campuses ›In some cases, accreditation agencies require that at least 60% of instruction should be delivered by U.S. faculty and no more than 40% by locally hired faculty

13. Thank you for your attention