Introduction generating productive knowledge, innovation and technology to


In the face of an
increasingly complex, global and competitive environment, internationalization
has become an important strategic priority for many countries, governments, and
higher education institutions, and the process has accelerated dramatically worldwide
(International Association of Universities, 2005; Murphy, 2007). Mestenhauser
(2005) has pointed out that there is broad agreement among scholars and
practitioners that internationalization is no longer a choice but has become an
urgent necessity. To attain this urgent necessity, the faculty members should
be one of the frontrunners of internationalization since they are the ones who
are responsible for educating the students. The comprehensible
contextualization of the geopolitical and geocultural interdisciplinarities of
faculty diversification should be the prevailing wigwag ken of cache of every
higher education institution if they are to pursue worldwide superiority in
educational competencies (Quitan, 2016). Worldwide, the top five reasons for internationalizing
an institution are, in order of importance, to improve student preparedness;
internationalize the curriculum; enhance the international profile of the
institution; strengthen research and knowledge production; and diversify its
faculty and staff (Marmolejo, 2010). This is clearly shown on the last reason
that the faculty should get involved in becoming internationalized.

According to the
Commission on Higher Education (CHED) in the Philippines, in the context of
globalization, higher education has been viewed increasingly as a crucial
factor for generating productive knowledge, innovation and technology to
develop higher order skills needed to compete in the knowledge economy.
Universities have thus become more central to a country’s economic success
which is perceived to be determined largely by its ability to compete in high
value goods and services. In its broadest sense, the internationalization of
higher education is the process of integrating an international/intercultural
dimension in the teaching, research and service functions of the higher
education institutions (Knight, 1997); it involves a process of interchange of
higher education between nations, between national systems of higher education,
and between institutions of higher education (Knight and de Wit, 1997).

However, the Philippines
have been facing certain setbacks that hinder the Internationalization program
to prosper in the country.  Berse (2017)
stated that, Government support plays a crucial role in ensuring that internationalization
opportunities and developments on higher education in the region are
disseminated equitably to all HEIs. The Philippines needs its government to
heavily invest in higher education the way its neighboring countries do so more
HEIs, especially public ones, will go for quality (Pascual, 2013). There is a
need to professionalize the internationalization spaces in HEIs in terms of
physical space, staff training, and ample institutional or government support
that would allow such space or unit to thrive and meet the demands and
opportunities that internationalization would continue to bring Berse (2017).

Hence, the researchers are
interested to conduct a research about the “Faculty Members Perception on
Opportunities in the University for Internationalization” to find out whether
or not, the teachers in Liceo de Cagayan University are actually exposed in
internationalization. Because a teacher’s involvement in internationalization
program serves as the backbone of the school to be internationalized since they
are the ones who will provide knowledge for the students.

Theoretical and conceptual framework

This study aims to involve
the faculties through internationalization as they have the capacity to set a
deeply embedded foundation both international and intercultural character in
the university.

John Dewey’s experiential
learning is the theory of this study, because it is an important approach
within the theoretical tradition of adult education where also been used in
Europe, North America and Australia (Boud, 1985; Boud and Miller, 1996; Weil
and McGill, 1989). The approach, or movement, has a special nature as a
cognitive enterprise and it can also be seen as a kind of  ideology needed to confront the diverse
challenges of adult education. Its theoretical frame has diverse sources of
inspiration: The T-group movement, the learning style technology, humanistic
psychology and critical social theory. It has been influential in the
literature of management training as well as adult education per se. Without
doubt, the two concepts that characterize the approach most clearly are
experience and reflection. In Dewey’s own words, “Education in order to
accomplish its ends both for the individual learner and for society must be
based upon experience which is always the actual life-experience of some
individual.”(1938). He  stresses on
the intentional use of experience in its effective form and make that
experience usable with the concept that the aim of learning is to understand
and know about the world as we experience it. In a relation to this study, the
university is committed to transform every faculty’s’ perception that would
able them to develop to be more resourceful, knowledgeable in any international
studies, competitive – outside, and most especially their efforts which are to
build on international competence so that they would use to create connections
to bring an international expertise to the community through their influences
in terms of engaging globalizations. According to Patti McGill Peterson, a
Presidential Advisor for Global Initiatives of American Council on Education
states that, “The crucial role that faculty play in institutional
internationalization efforts, particularly in shifting culture and sustaining
such efforts over time.” and she wrote that:

Students graduate, but the faculty
remain and serve as the stewards of the curriculum. As a group, they have the
capacity to set a deeply embedded foundation for the international and
intercultural character of an institution. Investing in the worldliness
quotient of all college and university faculty – not just the area studies
specialists – has the potential to pay off in myriad ways. (Peterson,2000)

In addition, Faculties are
the heart of the whole academic enterprise. They are the drivers of teaching
and research in any institution, shaping and delivering the curriculum and
carrying out the institution’s research mission. These areas are critical to
any institutional internationalization effort.



Stement of the problem

While student’s
development and preparedness in internationalization is imperative, the first
and most essential component to ensuring such an outcome is equipping the
faculty to successfully integrate necessary components into courses and other
learning environments. However, further knowledge is needed to understand on
how to best prepare faculty to internationalize their domestically-based
content courses. In terms of cognitively preparing faculty, additional research
could further explore this topic. The first study, they could explore the
knowledge areas needed and the programmatic strategies that promotes knowledge
acquisition in these given areas. Second, they could explore the long-term
effectiveness of a faculty training program on internationalization, in hopes
of guiding and strengthening future approaches for the effective training of
faculty in similar programs. (Urban, 2016).

Since successful
internationalization of the curriculum requires a collaborative,
interdisciplinary approach, one of the greatest challenges in
internationalizing the curriculum is to bring together large numbers of faculty
from diverse disciplines to collaborate towards this goal (Cleveland-Innes et
al., 2001; Ellingboe, 1998; Jones & Andrews, 2002; Maidstone, 1995; Mestenhauser,