Standardization and the globalised curriculum. When asked about their understanding of internationalisation of the curriculum, several respondents described it as a

move towards a globalised curriculum. Since globalisation is a term which is charged with different meanings, it is interesting to see what the Technological Marketing participants mean when they refer to a ‘globalised curriculum’.

Several participants expressed the notion that a globalised curriculum stresses

uniformity and covers similar content items across different geographical contexts for a given subject. Simon for example, notes:

In my conception internationalisation of the curriculum is about uniform standards between academic institutions. Which means the credit points, well not just the credit points but the content. The content is such that when I go a different university and I will say I studied these topics/ content areas at Green College, they will say: it’s very similar to what we do, to what we teach, and it matches, there’s some uniformity.

Within the space of academic freedom, every teacher introduces slightly different stresses and directions, but it’s generally similar. The layout, the framework, the guidelines are essentially the same.

Simon further clarifies and says: “[i]t’s not that the course looks similar, but that the content items will be similar”. Similarly, Ron describes his teaching experiences in Brazil and notes that he felt confident that his course “was global, that the principles were global, the same perceptions, directions, theories – they hold in a totally different environment”. He

emphasised that it goes beyond the content, and that it’s also about “perceptions which you realise work in a different culture, in a different language”. Finally, he says: “Look, take these 10 outcomes and you can put them anywhere, in Kellog, in Brazil, in any MBA programme”. Dan continues to support this view and says:

I see it on two levels: The first level is that of standardization, in terms of formal standards, to work in international standards, which enable a common language and mutual recognition. And the second level is the actual capacity of the students to reach meaningful learning outcomes which are also on an international level. That’s not just a formality but that the learning outcomes are relevant in the international context. It’s especially relevant to Israel because Israel is a small and in hi-tech you have to aim global – that’s where our department is looking.

When asked if he plans to introduce any changes to one of his courses, Josh replied that there is no need because he touches upon global issues which are naturally similar worldwide. His

implied assumption here is that global is synonymous with sameness or that his academic field possesses an inherent global dimension. According to Josh, the literature for his course comes from different journals and places and he doesn’t feel the need to introduce much change, claiming that he teaches “how a consumer behaves in the global village so it doesn’t make a difference where you’re coming from”.

Dalia takes a somewhat more complex view and positions curriculum

internationalisation as yet an extension of larger globalised trends. But like Josh, she believes that the curriculum is naturally becoming more global and international, even without

deliberate intervention:

Since our learning environment and our living environment has been globalised, the differences between different countries in the world are getting smaller and smaller because the information is there, the communication is there. It's not only the interaction, it's the economic, the political, involving all aspects of everyday living.

It's similar, I'm just talking about the West. In the West you can see that many

countries have the same organizations, the same economies, the same neighborhoods.

So, if education emerges from our perspective of what life should be, I think this process is gradually becoming internationalised and global without us doing.

Unlike other participants however, Dalia adds the importance of the local and national dimensions in the discussion about curriculum internationalisation and globalisation, and notes that internationalisation of the curriculum should be constructed around three

parameters. The first parameter should be the “content needs of the specific university”, the second, “it’s application of future employment for students” and the third, “how it touch[es]

or not other issues which other colleges in the same countries touch, and in the international context”. Simon too, stresses that while the content may be global, the thinking would still be local. Ne notes that he relates to the term ‘glocal’ and that we should stress “our own

personality and flavour as an institution” and not expect our students to think like students in other places. Their identity is Israeli, but “they study problems/issues which are global”.

Eden takes the local-global tension a step further and criticises her colleagues’ approach of understanding the global curriculum as being similar to that offered in other countries.

According to Eden, if this would be the way to go global, we would be risking losing ourselves in the process:

Globalisation? I know we want to be there at the level of awareness. We changed the syllabus to a recognised format, great, we introduce English Medium Instruction, great, but if we really want to be international, we first have to be us. You have to contribute something to the global space. You have to be comfortable in your own skin and be able to contribute something unique to the global. With a sincere intention to learn from others but not to lose ourselves in the global, who we are.

Overall, these quotes point to an understanding that the process of internationalisation of the curriculum should aim to deliver a curriculum which many participants refer to as ‘global’.

By global curriculum they describe two levels: on the administrative level, it would comply with international syllabi standards, and on the content level, it would engage in knowledge items which are similar worldwide. Some participants, however, find this approach risking oversimplification and point to the need to discuss the intricacies involved, particularly with how the local context is considered in the process of creating an international presence through a globalised curriculum.

6.2.6.2 Employing learning outcomes. As mentioned in the contextual preface to the