Responses. The response of participants to the invitation to take part in a study about internationalisation of the curriculum can serve as an important initial indicator

towards the interview itself, as well as their more explicit statements about the topic in the space of the interview.

5.2.1.1 Enthusiasm and strong agreement. In general, the topic of

internationalisation seemed to inspire an enthusiastic response among interviewees. Most of the respondents were looking forward to answering my questions about curriculum

internationalisation and seemed grateful for the opportunity to share their thoughts in the space of the interview. They were deeply engaged with the questions in the interview and their basic response was generally a positive one. One interview question in particular, generated a very positive response: Do you find the concept of internationalisation of the curriculum an effective tool to think about teaching and learning? If so, how?

Enthusiastic responses towards this question, also expressing strong agreement, can be observed in the following quotes. Josh for example, says: “Yeah I definitely think so!…I think that a lot of students will benefit!”, Debora replied with: “Definitely! I guess what comes to mind first are the learning outcomes. The thought of us getting to that point is REALLY AWSOME!” and Joanna said: “Yes because I think it opens up so many questions in our minds about how we teach…just those questions that keep your teaching alive and if you don’t' go there it shrinks into nothing”. Finally, Hannah added:

Yes! Because now I have to cater to people from a different culture…When I prepare my lesson, when I prepare my syllabus, I would have to keep in mind that I have people from different walks of life, who may or may not have been exposed to the same content.

It seems that framing internationalisation of the curriculum as a tool, as something which aids teaching rather than prescribes it, was positively embraced and inspired some reflection on teaching. This insight can be valuable when designing an internationalisation of the

curriculum workshop and inviting teachers to engage. The interviewees were enthusiastic to

reflect on how curriculum internationalisation may appeal to them in their teaching context.

This kind of question can perhaps serve as a good point-of-engagement at the initial stages of the process.

5.2.1.2 Perceived sense of agency. Respondents’ initial reaction towards curriculum internationalisation was characterised by either a strong sense of ownership and inclusion in the process, or a feeling of disconnect and lack of control. While some participants were very opinionated, others felt it was something which was happening ‘out there’ and of which they were not a part.

In the case of some participants, it seemed that they had spent some time thinking about the topic prior to the interview, and that the space of the interview was an opportunity to finally share their view with someone else. At times, it even felt like the argument around the topic was carefully constructed, almost rehearsed. For example, when asked about her motivation to internationalise the curriculum, Hannah readily answered with a smooth and structured ‘speech’, listing her three major motivations to internationalise. She then summarised them and concluded:

Those are the three reasons: it would be good for local student because they will be exposed to English, it would be good for the college because the college will be able to absorb students from abroad, and it would be good for the country because the country will be part of a pool exporting – one more product the country will be exporting.

When responding to a different question, Hannah replied: “O.K., I thought a lot about this!”

Joanna too, replied without hesitation, when asked about the motivation to internationalise:

First of all, it has always been the model for this college….we’re here for everyone.

To open the door for different types of people. So, I'm very motivated because I believe in it, I always believed in it. I still do.

It is important to note that compared to the rest of the interviewees, Hannah and Joanna have had relatively more exposure to the topic through participation in workshops and

Tempus/Erasmus projects, and may have had more opportunities to form their views and feel that they have a say in shaping the process. They also felt more confident to reflect on where the college leadership stands with respect to internationalisation. Joanna for example, said: “I think it's in the air, I think it's just starting, I think the administration themselves have just caught on to it”.

Other participants, like Debora and Jonah, were not as ready to share their opinions about curriculum internationalisation. Their responses were more hesitant, and they generally felt it was something happening around them and did not see themselves included. Debora for instance, notes that:

I guess I don't feel engaged in it yet but I'd like to possibly get it in the works, in this programme it would be nice to develop a course, but I don't know enough about it to tell you either way. I think people are pushing for it and it would be nice for Israel to be included, but I can't tell you yet, it's not something I've put enough thought into.

Similarly, Jonah says:

Umm. Ah, It’s basically not something I’ve been in any way involved in. So it’s just things that have dropped down. Even memories of things that you have said. So I haven’t formed any great ideas on this.

It is quite apparent from the different kinds of responses (Joanna and Hannah versus Debora and Jonah), that while some teachers have a more proactive approach, others may be more passive and respond mostly to an external driving factor. This could be particularly true for the language teachers, because as it is, they tend to feel a general disconnect from the

extended academic community on campus and may therefore be more reluctant to see themselves as change agents.

It is important to note that these initial responses on the part of Jonah and Debora stand in sharp contrast to the depth of engagement they showed throughout the rest of the interview, as they shared many practical examples, knowledge and experiences around internationalisation of the curriculum. Despite their potential to play a key role in the process, their sense of agency was relatively low.

From an internationalisation-of-the-curriculum process perspective, which values championship and individual leadership, an in-depth interview may be an opportunity to engage faculty in an intimate setting and encourage a more personalised approach to internationalisation of the curriculum. Personal affiliation with the topic can be important because that may later translate into a greater sense of inclusion, ownership, commitment and confidence to embark on the process. The English teachers have an obvious key role to play in the process, but it seems that in this case, their sense of agency must be addressed and developed.

5.2.2 Motivations. This section analyses the motivational forces driving the