Academic Council on
International Programs (ACIP)
Committee and Plenary meetings
October 20-21, 2011
Oct. 20, 10:00-12:00 (Plenary):
Report of the Council’s Chair (Robert
April meeting will be held at Sacramento State, April 19-20.
Director’s report (Leo Van Cleve)
Budget for 2011-2012 is currently in balance, based on following
1- Governor’s Budget
includes potential cuts.
2- Stable exchange rate.
3- Continued containment of costs abroad.
The proposed budget for 2012-13, assumes the same enrollment pattern as
the current year and does not include changes that may occur in general
fund allocation, costs abroad, exchange rate, or fee increases.
In July, 2011 the Board of Trustees increased the tuition fees for all
students in the California State University by 12 percent. We notified
students of the possibility once the Trustees agenda was posted and
then informed them via e-mail and letter after the vote had taken place.
Once again this year we do not have any plans to increase the amount of
the study abroad fee.
The number of applications for the coming year was strong and certainly
IP should be able to maintain stable enrollments for the coming year.
Program Operations –Abroad
After reviewing the exchange balances and meeting with our
partners in Australia, we have decided to open recruitment for 2013
academic year. Based on the improved intake of exchange applicants from
Australia, we will continue to monitor this closely as our applications
come in and report back at the spring meeting.
During the summer the CSU commissioned a risk assessment of Israel and
in particular the three cities where we have had system partners;
Haifa, Jerusalem, and Tel Aviv. In addition, we are reviewing
material from the State Department and other public sources. With the
assistance of the Israel Campus Coalition we gathered information from
other U.S. universities regarding their policies in regard to student
participation in programs in Israel. Among the conditions placed on
participants would be:
1- Attend an
orientation prior to departure
2- Provide advance information about the U.S. State
Department Travel Warning
3- Follow guidelines as established by the host
4- Stay in regular contact with university officials
5- Agree to Conduct themselves in accordance with CSU
6- Not travel to the West Bank or Gaza except through
university arranged trips.
The risk report is done and the IP director and the director of the CSU
risk management will visit all three sites in a few days. The full
report will be submitted to the Chancellor in early December.
The IP director recommended that the Faculty Affairs Committee of the
ACIP withdraw the requirement to place a Resident Director on-site in
Israel. He suggested that with the assistance of the host university,
we can operate a successful program.
There is a potentially high qualified RD is in negotiation with the
CSU. The IP director will visit the site soon.
In New Zealand both exchanges remain out of balance even after three
years of not sending CSU students for 2013.
We continue to have interest in the Learn Spanish program. Budget
limitations prevented a visit as planned.
Oct. 20, 2011, 1:00-5:00 & Oct. 21, 10:00-11:30
Oct 21, 1:00-2:30
Academic and Fiscal Affairs
1) Request for a
matrix of county/sub-center with areas of academic disciplines that
students may pursue for distribution to all ACIP members at the April
2) AFAC would like to continue to recommend that if
changes to the current partnerships are deemed necessary or desirable,
that necessary or desirable, that prioritization of changes, either in
reductions, additions, or the reopening of sites will follow the same
precepts found in the “Guidelines for New Program Development, ACIP
AFAC October 20, 2006” so that OIP maintains maximum accessibility
(given funding) to the greatest number of students, and to maintain or
improve programmatic diversity: culturally, geographically and in the
variety of fields of study.
3) In relation to the reopening of the Israel
Program, the AFAC recommends that the above mentioned guidelines be
considered, and that the Office of International Programs report back
to the ACIP at the Spring 2012 meeting:
a. The findings of
the Security Report
b. The location or locations deemed most advisable to
restart as well as rationales for the particular location/s.
c. The assessment of the curricular offerings
2- Making an exception to the Travel Advisory
Warnings can be confusing, and therefore AFAC recommends that any
request for an exception needs a serious and compelling reason and AFAC
requests that such information should be provided to ACIP in a timely
3- The AFAC recommends in light of the developments
of the past 10 years, and in order to provide a more inclusive
perspective on the Israeli/Palestinian issue that priority and effort
be given to exploring new partnerships such as: Birzeit University,
Arab American University in Jenin.
4- In addition to these requests, the AFAC requests
that the previously agreed upon importance of opening a site in the
Arabic world be placed on a fast track, and would like to begin
preliminary site discussions at the Spring 2012 meeting.
5- The AFAC also applauds the new requirement passed
by ACIP on April 15th 2011, requiring one college level course with a
focus on contemporary Middle Eastern Studies (i.e. history, politics,
geography, religion, humanities, social sciences), is a minimal
requirement. As such it helps to counteract the overwhelming
pro-Israeli US media and US international policy that casts
Palestinians as the sole aggressors and as the origin of violence
within the multi-cultural nation, while it ignores Israeli violence.
AFAC would like to recommend that all students going to sensitive areas
of the world have a briefing before they go by their home campuses
about issues that they might face.
6- AFAC would like to request that the Office of
International Programs continue to explore new agreements in Spain and
Japan as stated in the minutes of the AFAC Committee report of Spring
Faculty Affairs Committee:
1- Encouraging ACIP
members to advertise RD opportunities.
2- FAC reviewed and revised the RD interview
questions and amended some of them.
3- FAC planned for the RD application review meeting
on Jan. 27.
4- FAC discussed the issue of the evaluation of the
RD by students, OIP staff and host country program staff and faculty,
for purposes of development and program assessment.
5- ACIP asks that IP coordinators and ACIP members
invite RD applicants to participate in the campus IP student
6- FAC discussed the Wang scholarship review process
7- FAC discussed the need of an RD in Israel in case
it re-opens. We trust that the IP office will perform a thorough
assessment of the program in terms of safety and security and that IP
will keep CSU students’ best interest in mind.
1- In case that the
Israel program is re-opened, and in order to offer flexibility in its
re-establishment, ACIP recommends to remove the policy that requires
the presence of an RD in Israel. (approved)
2- The FAC requests access to the results of the
student post-program questionnaire pertaining to the question about the
Resident Director (question #24) including the personal comments
1- PRC reviewed the PR template, considering criteria
2- PRC reviewed and is working on a student
questionnaire to be administered by OIP.
3- PRC is working on an IP coordinators survey for
China, Chile, Taiwan, Canada to be administered by PRC.
4- PRC recommends considering enhanced data
collection of assessment purposes.
Student Affairs Committee (SAC)
1-SAC moves that requirements for Ghana be changed. SAC suggests that a
course with African focus be recommended. SAC also recommends courses
which look at non-western societies. (approved with minor amendments)
2-SAC moves that IP (refer to AFAC) investigate the opportunities
available for CSU students to study abroad in India. This may include,
but not be limited to, establishing links with other universities that
already have programs in India. (approved)
Prepared by Manzar Foroohar (ASCSU liaison to ACIP)