Higher Education

, Volume 66, Issue 3, pp 325–340 | Cite as

The American faculty in an age of globalization: predictors of internationalization of research content and professional networks

  • Martin J. Finkelstein
  • Elaine Walker
  • Rong Chen


While there has been considerable policy discussion about the need to internationalize American higher education, our understanding of the internationalization in American faculty’s research remains limited. This study intends to investigate the extent of internationalization in American faculty’s scholarly work and what individual and institutional levers shape faculty decisions to engage internationally. The results of a 2007–2008 comparative international survey provide insights into these important issues and suggest implications for enhancing the international engagement of US faculty.


Higher education Faculty Internationalization Engagement Scholarly work 


  1. Allison, P. D. (2001). Missing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Altbach, P. G. (Ed.). (1996). The international academic profession: Portraits of fourteen countries. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  3. Baldwin, R., & Blackburn, R. T. (1981). The academic career as a developmental process: Implications for higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 53, 598–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blackburn, R. T., & Lawrence, J. H. (1995). Faculty at work: Motivation, expectation, and satisfaction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Clotfelter, C. (Ed.). (2010). American universities in a global market. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Crowther, P., Joris, M., Otten, M., Nilsson, B., Teekens, H., & Wächter, B. (2000). Internationalisation at home: A position paper. Amsterdam: European Association for International Education, with the Academic Cooperation Association, IAK, IÉSEG, Nuffic, KatholiekeHogeschool Limburg and Malmö University.Google Scholar
  7. Egron-Polak, E., & Hudson, R. (2010). Internationalization of higher education: Global trends, regional perspectives. 2009 IAU 3rd global survey report. Paris: IAU.Google Scholar
  8. Fairweather, J. S. (1996). Faculty work and public trust: Restoring the value of teaching and public service in American life. Needham Heights, MA: Simon and Schuster Company.Google Scholar
  9. Fairweather, J. S. (2005). Beyond the rhetoric: Trends in the relative value of teaching and research in faculty salaries. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(4), 401–422.Google Scholar
  10. Finkelstein, M. (1988). The American academic profession: A synthesis of social scientific inquiry since World War II. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Finkelstein, M., Walker, E., Chen, R. (2009). The internationalization of the American faculty: Where are we, what drives or deters us? The Changing Academic Profession over 1992–2007: International, Comparative, and Quantitative Perspectives (Report of the International Conference on the Changing Academic Profession Project), 13, 9.Google Scholar
  12. Goodwin, C. D., & Nacht, M. (1991). Missing the boat: The failure to internationalize American higher education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Green, M. F., et al. (2008). Mapping internationalization on U.S. campuses (2008th ed.). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  14. Groves, R. M. (2006). Non-response rates and non-response bias in household surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 646–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Groves, R. M., & Peytcheva, E. (2008). The impact of non-response rates on non-response bias: A metanalysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72 (Summer 2008), 167–189.Google Scholar
  16. Hermanowicz, J. C. (2009). Lives in science: How institutions affect academic careers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  18. Huang, F. (2007). Internationalization of higher education in the developing and emerging countries: A focus on transnational higher education in Asia. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3/4), 421–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Joris, M., van den Berg, C., & van Ryssen, S. (2003). Home, but not alone: Information and communication technology and internationalisation at home. Journal of Studies in International Education, 7(1), 94–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kalbfliesch, P. J. (2005). Communication Yearbook 29 Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  21. Knight, Jane. (2003). Internationalization of higher education practices and priorities: 2003 IAU survey report. Paris: IAU.Google Scholar
  22. Knight, J. (2004). Internationalization remodeled: Definition, approaches, and rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1), 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Knight, Jane. (2006). IAU 2005 internationalization survey: Preliminary findings report. Paris: IAU.Google Scholar
  24. O’Hara, S. (2009). Internationalizing the academy: The impact of scholar mobility. In R. Bhandari & S. Laughlin (Eds.), Higher education on the move: New developments in global mobility. New York: The Institute for International Education.Google Scholar
  25. Porter, S. R., & Umbach, P. D. (2001). Analyzing faculty workload data using multilevel modeling. Research in Higher Education, 42(2), 171–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ray, W., & Solem, M. (2009). Gauging disciplinary engagement with internationalization: A survey of geographers in the United States. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33(1), 103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rostan, M. (2010). Aspects of the academic profession’s internationalisation beyond physical mobility: Teaching, research and dissemination activities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of CHER [Council on Higher Education Research], Oslo, June.Google Scholar
  28. Smart, J. C., & Umbach, P. (2007). Faculty and academic environments: Using Holland’s theory to explore differences in how faculty structure undergraduate courses. Journal of College Student Development, 48 (March/April), 183–195.Google Scholar
  29. Teichler, U. (Ed.). (2002). ERASMUS in the SOCRATES programme. Findings of an evaluation study. Bonn: Lemmens.Google Scholar
  30. Umbach, P. D., & Milem, J. F. (2004). Applying Holland’s typology to the study of differences in student views about diversity. Research in Higher Education, 45(6), 625–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. U.S. Department of Education. (2008). The national study of postsecondary faculty 2004. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
  32. Wächter, B. (2003). An introduction: Internationalisation at home in context. Journal of Studies in International Education, 7(1), 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin J. Finkelstein
    • 1
  • Elaine Walker
    • 1
  • Rong Chen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational Leadership, Management and Policy, College of Education and Human ServicesSeton Hall UniversitySouth OrangeUSA

Personalised recommendations