Global Learning Is Workforce Readiness: Building the Links
Live Session from November 19, 2025
Session Description:
Higher education is being asked tough questions, by students, families, and policymakers alike. What’s the true value of a degree in a world defined by rapid change, digital transformation, and global interdependence?
In this community discussion, Andrew Gordon and Dr. Kati Bell, co-authors of Global Education as a Career Success Imperative, unpack how global learning can—and must—serve as a driver of career success. Grounded in the white paper’s policy framework, this session will trace the throughline from pathways to practice:
How global education builds workforce competencies aligned with NACE and WEF frameworks
How the 4A Framework (Awareness, Assessment, Action, Accountability) guides institutions in embedding global learning across academic and career ecosystems
How cross-campus collaboration, employer partnerships, and inclusive access expand impact
How policy recommendations can sustain and scale equity-minded global learning
Together, we’ll explore how institutions can move from talking about global learning’s value to measuring its impact, and why global education is not a luxury, but a career success imperative.
Moderator:
Lily López-McGee, Ph.D., Senior Advisor, DA Global Access Network
Panelists:
Kathrina Bell, Ed.D., Adjunct Professor, Leadership & Management, Dominican University of California
Andrew Gordon, CEO & Founder, DA Global Access Network
Gen Alpha Meets AI: Preparing the Next Wave of Global Talent
Live Session from September 19, 2025
Session Description:
As Gen Z graduates confront a shifting, AI-disrupted job market, Gen Alpha undergraduates are next in line; and international educators have a powerful role to play. Study abroad, virtual exchange, and globally inclusive campuses offer more than cross-cultural learning; they build the human skills that are difficult for AI to replicate. This session explores how global learning experiences, whether virtual or physical, can help students build the adaptability, empathy, digital fluency, and resilience employers now demand.
Moderator:
Claudio Castaneda, Director of Content & Programs, DA Global Access Network
Panelists:
Katie Lander, Director of Global Career & Internship Programs, CEA CAPA
Esther-Gail Fraser, IE University Alumni and Business Analyst, OneTrust
Martha McGivern, PhD, Director, Study Abroad, DePaul University
This article reports on a case study of data-driven decision-making around scholarship allocation. It outlines one institution’s method and suggests it can be applied across institutions to maximize available scholarship resources, specifically for students with high financial need.
In considering how to allocate funding to increase accessibility among students with high financial need, institutions may wonder: 1) How do scholarships affect the rate of study abroad participation among Pell-eligible students? 2) Based on that, what is the most effective allocation of finite scholarship funds, i.e., how many awards and at what value?
DePaul University tracks participation rates among scholarship award recipients and makes annual allocation decisions based on that data. This paper focuses on data from the last three years through which the institution eliminated the participation gap between Pell-eligible and non-Pell students.
Literature Review
Study abroad scholarships are not the singular solution to access for students with high financial need. Funding is not necessarily sustainable (Gordon, 2018), and scholarships do not address other key factors students weigh as they consider study abroad (West, 2019; Salisbury et al., 2009). Cost, however, is the number one reason students cite for not going abroad (Diversity Abroad, 2017), so scholarship administration is key to reducing that barrier. Large funders like the Benjamin A. Gilman International Scholarship Program , Fund for Education Abroad , and many education abroad providers, colleges, and universities award scholarships to increase access among students with high financial need.
Little research shows how effective study abroad scholarships are in supporting study abroad access or how institutions can best leverage funding. Whatley (2017) found that grant aid (not loans) increased the chance of participation among low-income students. In a more complex study, Whatley and Clayton (2020) found that low-income students who received need-based grants were 50-71% more likely to study abroad than their peers with similar financial barriers. But how much funding do students need?
Methodology
DePaul University in Chicago is a large private, Catholic, urban institution with a history and mission of providing education access to marginalized populations. The current first-year class is 51% students of color, 41% first-generation (DePaul University, 2023), and 34% Pell-eligible (Dickman et al., 2023).
DePaul University Study Abroad maintains quarterly spreadsheets of scholarship data, including awards offered, financial-need rankings (per FAFSA), student demographics, and program details. Spreadsheets were combined across academic years 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24 (through present) and filtered for key data.
The sample was limited to undergraduate students accepted to institutionally sponsored study abroad programs within the timeframe, n = 2063. Charts were created to illustrate the following data points:
Scholarship award type: “large” (90% of non-tuition costs up to $5,000), “small” (25% of non-tuition costs up to $1,000), or “no award”
Participation: whether or not the accepted student confirmed and ultimately participated in the program
Financial need: “Pell-eligible” or “non-Pell”
Program length: “short-term” (1-3 weeks) or “term-long” (quarter/semester/academic year-length)
Table 1. Key data points, compiled
Participation rates were then calculated across the variables, including financial need, scholarship award type, and program length.
Results and Discussion
As expected, students offered scholarships participate in study abroad programs at higher rates than those without awards. Those differences are further pronounced among students with high financial need and at higher award values to a certain extent.
Two specific findings can be applied to maximize study abroad scholarship allocation:
“Small” awards were associated with increased participation rates among Pell-eligible students
Participation rates varied by program length
Small Awards: A Good Value
“Small” awards make a difference in study abroad participation among students with high financial need and allow institutions to spread limited funds across more students. See Table 2 for participation rates across financial need and award types.
Table 2. Participation rates by financial need and award type
When Pell-eligible students were not awarded scholarships, most did not participate in study abroad, only 33%. When granted “small” awards, they participated at a rate of 71%. “Small” awards were usually $1,000, a relatively small amount of funding for this impact.
Pell-eligible students awarded larger values participated at an even higher rate, 89%. “Large” awards averaged $3,583, so those were more expensive for a less dramatic impact.
Program Length Considerations
Participation rates for term-long study abroad programs (traditional quarter/semester/academic year-length) were lower across both financial need levels and award types, but they follow a similar pattern.
Very few Pell-eligible students participated in their term-long study abroad programs without a scholarship (32%). The participation rate increased by 28% among those who received small awards and an additional 14% for those who received large awards. Students considering a semester or academic year-long program need to consider degree progress, time away from loved ones, and competing opportunities on campus. Perhaps their decision-making process (Salisbury et al., 2009) includes more factors despite the established benefits of longer duration programs on particular outcomes like language acquisition, intercultural competence, and personal growth (DeLoach, 2021; Dwyer, 2004).
Using this Data
DePaul University used this data to allocate scholarship funds. Based on the finding that “small” awards are associated with much higher rates of participation, DePaul allocated 75% of scholarship funds to awards up to $1,000 each. The remaining 25% of funds were allocated as “large” awards to support a smaller number of students with nearly full financial coverage.
Based on the finding that overall participation rates differ by program length, DePaul University separated scholarship allocations by program length. The objective was to ensure that students were awarded funds for the type of program that met their goals, financially and otherwise. A new category of “medium” awards ($2,500) was also created for term-long program students to bridge the gap between the “small” ($1,000) and “large” ($5,000) categories.
Conclusion
This case study provides two key contributions. First, it presents a feasible method of using data to make decisions about scholarship allocation. Institutions and funding organizations can track participation rates among students at various award levels and program types to determine how to maximize finite scholarship resources. Combining and sharing this data further across the field could lead to developing standards in study abroad scholarship funding, maximizing resources more broadly.
Second, it shows that Pell-eligible students at one institution who received relatively small scholarships participated in study abroad at more than double the rate of those without awards. That data can be considered by other institutions and organizations as they plan scholarship allocations with limited budgets.
DeLoach, S. B., Kurt, M. R., Olitsky, N. H. (2021). Duration matters: Separating the impact of depth and duration in study abroad programs. Journal of Studies in International Education, 25(1), 100-118.
Dickman, C. Holder, L. (2023, December 6). Fall 2023 New Freshman Profile Outcomes. IRMA Brown Bag, DePaul University, Chicago, IL.
Dwyer, M. M. (2004). More is better: The impact of study abroad program duration. Frontiers: The interdisciplinary journal of study abroad,10, 151-163.
Gordon, A. (2018). A way forward: Exploring strategies at multiple levels. In Promoting Inclusion in Education Abroad: A Handbook of Research and Practice(pp. 185-196). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003446545
Salisbury, M. H., Umbach, P. D., Paulsen, M. B., Pascarella, E. T. (2009). Going global: Understanding the choice process of the intent to study abroad. Research in Higher Education, 50, 119-143.
Whatley, M. (2017). Financing study abroad: An exploration of the influence of financial factors on student study abroad patterns. Journal of Studies in International Education, 21(5), 431-449.Whatley, M., Clayton, A. B. (2020). Study abroad for low-income students: The relationship between need-based grant aid and access to education abroad. Journal of Student Financial Aid (2), 1.
Kaishan Kong, PhD, Associate Professor | University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, United States
Xiaoling Deng, Director, International Exchange Programs, International Office | Suzhou City University, PRC
Chanjuan Chen, Deputy Director, Office of International Exchange and Cooperation (Office of Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan Affairs/School of International Education and Culture) | Lingnan Normal University, PRC
According to the statistics from the China Association for International Education, the number of international students enrolled in universities in China has steadily increased from 2003 (77,715) to 2018 (492,185). As Zhao (2011) argued, China has “grown from an insignificant player to a major destination.” Among the international students, over half of the students are from other Asian countries. Take 2018 for example: the Ministry of Education of China published that among the 492,185 international students, those from Asian countries made up 59.95%. While China’s economic development and global influence have stimulated growing interest among international students, how to create a more inclusive system and attract more diverse students is one of the priorities for international professionals in higher education within China.
The three authors have had the privilege of working with international students in various capacities. Kong is a language and culture professor in the US where she works closely with international students and is dedicated to international educational exchange. Deng and Chen are seasoned professionals in two regional colleges in China, directly working with student recruitment, exchange programs, and global programming. We formed a community of practice to examine challenges in international education, especially for small teaching-oriented institutions, and explore practical strategies to propel inclusive international education within China. In particular, we discussed the following questions:
What are some fundamental disadvantages and challenges faced by teaching-oriented colleges in China regarding global programming?
What are some potential practices to enhance accessibility and inclusivity in global programming?
Global Programming and its Challenges A closer look at the increased enrollment of international students in China reveals that larger cities and larger universities are much more popular than smaller ones, due to their international reputations and the availability of ample scholarships. Statistics showed that in 2018, Beijing attracted 80,786 international students and Shanghai came second with 61,400 students, while many other provinces with less than 10,000 students. These statistics expose the disadvantages of smaller cities and institutions, which resonates with both authors’ (Deng, Chen) first-hand experiences since they work in two separate, small-sized teaching-oriented colleges. Although their colleges offer a quality education, they are competing with over 160 other universities within their province to gain resources for global programming, many of which are worldwide reputable research-oriented institutions with tremendous financial support.
The increasing attention to international rankings pushes higher education institutions to think creatively to enhance their global competitiveness (Hammond, 2016; Marginson & van der Wende, 2007). In this process, small-sized teaching-oriented colleges face three major challenges, including (1) inadequate collaboration among various stakeholders (faculty, department, community) to promote international education, (2) lacking diverse course offerings to connect with students’ career planning, and (3) insufficient support to create impactful and inclusive experiences for international students. Depending on the international office team alone to tackle these challenges is neither realistic nor sustainable. It requires orchestrated efforts from faculty and local communities (Kim, Song, Liu, Liu, & Grimm, 2017). Kim et al. discovered that some faculty may perceive building global education in broader global dimensions without making relevance to their own contexts, and some faculty acknowledged growing gaps between administration and faculty.
Creating a Connection and Collaboration-based Model
One popular instrument in China to assess universities is called the University 360-degree Data Monitoring Framework, including 10 categories and over 40-dimension breakdowns. Global Competitiveness consists of three sub-categories and 10 dimensions (Figure 1).
This data framework provides a holistic view of global competitiveness and includes some quintessential components. While larger research-oriented institutes may be stronger in publications, smaller teaching-oriented colleges may consider what areas would be realistic to improve and thus establish achievable goals to make their global programs more inclusive and inviting to international students. We suggest a model (Figure 2) that catalyzes collaborations and connections to offer a more inclusive and impactful learning experience for international students where they can access various local resources.
Figure 1. Indicators of Global Competitiveness in the University 360-degree Data Monitoring Framework. Source: Information retrieved from https://gaojidata.com/product/ub
Figure 2. A Connection and Collaboration-based Model
Firstly, small colleges could create a wide range of academic offerings and highlight distinctive disciplines. Ding’s (2016) study revealed that international students’ interests go beyond Chinese language classes. If teaching-oriented colleges could examine their own disciplinary strengths and offer more diverse courses, especially in connection with local cultures and students’ different majors, they could distinguish themselves in global programming. For instance, the School of Food Engineering and Sciences in the third author’s university has established a successful course on food appreciation that explores the intersectionality of culture, language, cuisines, and food engineering. This course exemplifies collaboration between international administrators and faculty to reimagine education and utilize the school’s unique disciplinary advantage to create a niche program to cater to the interests of students from various academic backgrounds.
Secondly, small colleges could integrate career readiness in curriculum design so international students can expand their learning and accessibility to local resources. Since many international students choose to study in China because of its global economic power, colleges can consider offering courses related to their career skills and internship opportunities in local enterprises. For instance, a medical program in Jiangsu province offers bilingual courses that enhance international students’ language and subject knowledge, followed by a practicum component allowing these international students to work along with medical staff in local hospitals. Such courses connect students and local entities, not only enabling international students to apply their knowledge and skills in real life but also benefiting local employers with a new workforce.
Thirdly, small colleges can enhance academic services and support for international students. Engaging students with local communities helps to break bubbles and create truly inclusive learning. Research shows that university support and peer support play a significant role in international students’ experience (Hussain & Shen, 2019). Such support should be more than airport pick-ups and orientations by including effective mechanisms to support their experience. One effective practice shared by the second author is creating a sustainable Host Buddy program that connects students with local families, especially those with multiple generations, to have weekly meetings. International students are invited to various events from ordinary family gatherings to cultural celebrations. Having the chance to interact with various generations will be an exceptional chance for international students to experience authentic cultures.
Lastly, foster global collaborations—one step at a time! It takes tremendous efforts to launch large-scale global collaborations, but institutions can collaborate on smaller projects to gain momentum (Kong, 2023). One example is a global virtual exchange between the first two authors, where they connected faculty and students from their institutions to conduct a 10-week project to explore cultural topics. Projects like virtual exchange are an extraordinary example of involving faculty in global education so they can both adopt new pedagogy in teaching and conduct research from such projects.
This model illuminates the importance of connections and collaborations. It connects international students with local communities, connects study abroad with employability, and connects faculty with other aspiring colleagues beyond national boundaries. It promotes collaborations between colleges and local enterprises, between students and future employers, and, more importantly, between faculty and international teams on campus. By offering more thoughtful curriculum design, unique courses, and inclusive services, smaller colleges can improve their global competitiveness and become a niche market in international education.
Hammond, C. D. (2016). Internationalization, nationalism, and global competitiveness: A comparison of approaches to higher education in China and Japan. Asia Pacific Education Review, 17, 555-566.
Hussain, M., & Shen, H. (2019). A study on academic adaptation of international students in China. Higher Education Studies, 9(4), 80-91.
Kim, D., Song, Q., Liu, J., Liu, Q., & Grimm, A. (2018). Building world class universities in China: Exploring faculty’s perceptions, interpretations of and struggles with global forces in higher education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 48(1), 92-109.
Kong, K. (2023). Intercultural talk: Fostering intercultural citizenship in a Chinese program. In Kong, K. & Spenader, A. (Eds.), Intercultural Citizenship in language education: Teaching and learning through social action (pp. 90-119). Multilingual Matters.
Marginson, S., & van der Wende, M. (2007). To rank or to be ranked: The impact of global rankings in higher education. Journal of Studies in Higher Education, 11, 306-329.
Suzanne LaVenture, MA, Davidson-Davie Community College (Retired)
Melissa Whatley, PhD, School of International Training (SIT)
The Community College Model
In the United States, community colleges offer tertiary education to students in local communities. Students can earn two-year Associate degrees that transfer to four-year institutions and a variety of certificates and diplomas in technical/vocational fields. The first community college was created in Joliet, Illinois in 1901, but they proliferated in the 1960s. Community colleges were created to democratize higher education, offering open access to farm workers and other members of the working class. The focus at community colleges is on teaching, not research. Community colleges often partner closely with local business and industry to provide needed training. There are currently 1,038 community colleges in the US, and 38% of all undergraduates in the US attend a community college.1 This article describes how one community college worked to extend its open-access mission to international education using data to identify areas to improve access to globalized courses. Globalized (often referred to as internationalized in the literature) courses are a key component of many institutional Internationalization at Home (IaH) strategies.
Community College International Education
Because of the focus on the local community, many community colleges do not offer international education opportunities. However, as the local is increasingly more global (e.g., many international companies now operate in rural parts of the United States), many institutions have begun to offer activities and coursework with a global perspective. Because of financial and familial constraints, very few community college students can study abroad. Hence, the need for internationalization at home activities is even more crucial at these institutions compared to four-year colleges and universities. An example of this trend is Davidson-Davie Community College (DDCC), located in Thomasville, North Carolina. In 2013, DDCC launched their Scholars of Global Distinction program, in an effort to reach more students and, hopefully, to offer more equitable access to internationalized curricula. The Global Scholars program requires students to take 15 hours of globalized coursework, attend eight on-campus events, and participate in a Global Experience (study abroad, virtual exchange, or a project with a global focus). DDCC’s International Education committee reviewed all course offerings and designated certain courses (e.g., World Languages, International Business, World Religion) as inherently global. The committee also developed a process for faculty to globalize any course not deemed as inherently global. In brief, faculty were required to add a Global Learning Outcome, internationalized course content and activities to support the outcome, and an assessment. Each course was submitted to a Course Approval Team, consisting of three faculty members from the International Education committee.
In 2014, World View, a Center at the University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel-Hill, moved to expand the Global Distinction program to all North Carolina community colleges. World View created curriculum internationalization grants open to faculty across the state. The faculty receiving grants worked in collaboration with UNC librarians and National Resource Centers (NRCs) to develop courses with content focused on various world regions. Each approved course was stored in a repository available to faculty across the state. Every college has access to these World View approved courses in addition to courses internationalized at the institutional level. Each institution has some latitude in determining what constitutes a globalized course and how it is approved. However, the following student competencies should be met:
Investigate the world beyond their immediate environment, framing significant problems and conducting well-crafted and age-appropriate research
Recognize perspectives, others’ and their own, articulating and explaining such perspectives thoughtfully and respectfully
Communicate ideas effectively with diverse audiences, bridging geographic, linguistic, ideological, and cultural barriers
Reflect critically on their role as a member of the global community and pursue ways to create positive change
There are currently 33 community colleges offering a Global Distinction program under the umbrella of World View. Thousands of students across North Carolina participate in globalized coursework, even those not participating in the Global Distinction program.
Assessing Diversity
Globalizing coursework with the goal of increasing access to international opportunities is a worthy endeavor in and of itself. However, just because educators have this intention doesn’t mean that such access happens automatically or that it is equitably distributed. To explore the extent to which globalized courses were equitably accessed among students across demographics at DDCC, we used data from the college’s Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Office of International Education. The Office of Institutional Effectiveness collects data annually on student demographics and course enrollments, and the Office of International Education tracks courses that are globalized. Through combining these two data sources, we were able to analyze the extent to which students belonging to different demographic groups enrolled in globalized courses. The demographic characteristics we were able to account for included: racial/ethnic identity, sex, first-generation-in-college status, low-income status (defined as receiving a Pell grant), and age. Academically, we accounted for a student’s degree program (e.g., Associate in Arts, Associate in Science) and their full-time/part-time enrollment status.
With reference to demographic characteristics specifically, our results indicated that Black students and older students enrolled in globalized courses to a lesser extent than they would have if enrollment patterns were equitably distributed. In contrast, white students, female students, and Pell recipients were more likely to take globalized courses than we would expect by chance. These relationships in our data were all statistically significant.
Implementing Policy Changes
These results pointed to key areas where equity-focused institutional policies and practices could be changed or newly implemented to improve access to globalized courses for marginalized students. However, arriving at the results and translating them into action are two different things. One key recommendation from our results involved globalizing courses that were already popular among Black students and older students. We returned to our dataset to identify courses, and the faculty members who taught them, to report to the college’s International Education Committee. Globalizing these courses would benefit the most students from these two demographic groups. With the support of the International Education Committee, faculty members were encouraged to globalize their courses, a process by which access to globalized courses would become more equitable for the diverse students attending DDCC.
This example illustrates one way in which data can be used to support diversity initiatives in international education. Other similar analyses could be used to explore diversity among participants in other international education opportunities or to explore learning outcomes among diverse students who participate in international education. By combining data from several units on campus, we were able to identify gaps in access for particular demographic groups and suggest key changes to institutional practices that would address these gaps. Gathering and analyzing data regarding student enrollment and participation in IaH activities, such as globalized courses, is a first step in addressing access inequalities so that design and implementation can more intentionally address international education’s longstanding patterns of inequitable access and inclusion. Communicating with stakeholders, such as the International Education Committee in this example, is key to translating these findings to practices that promote diversity and inclusion in global programming.
Title: Sustainability in Action: Integrating SDGs into International Education
Presenters:
Sean Reilly, AFS
Saskia Kaya, AFS
Description:
Integrating Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into international education programs enhances their global impact. This session explores how SDG-focused curricula prepare students and educators for responsible and informed global citizenship..
Discuss how SDGs can be seamlessly integrated into curriculum and program design.
Highlight the value of aligning international education goals with global sustainability objectives.
Share examples of collaborative projects or community engagement initiatives tied to SDGs.
Explore the benefits of preparing students with sustainability-focused learning outcomes.
Title: Identity & Inclusion at the Crossroads: Involving Students in the Development of Practical Support Strategies in the European Context
Leadra Reeves, CASA Granada Spring ’24 Alum & Travel Grant Awardee
Dani Kaufman-Sedano, CASA Granada Spring ’23 Alum & Travel Grant Awardee
Description:
Join a seasoned study abroad director and two program alums as they share their stories, effective strategies, easy-to-implement practices, and the measurable outcomes that result from incorporating student voices in the development of inclusive support services onsite. In this deep-dive session, we invite you to engage in the exercise of validating the lived experiences of recent graduates whose identities span a range of both visible and invisible identities that we often encounter among our student cohorts, and of translating those experiences into concrete strategies. More specifically, based on both research findings and direct personal experiences, we will:
Come to a comprehensive understanding of inclusion, drawing from the different approaches utilized in Europe and the U.S., and the lived experiences of our students at this crossroads, and use it as the foundation for building inclusive programs and practices.
Explore the importance and the impact of inclusive approaches in academic and cultural adjustment support on students’ overall wellbeing and personal growth.
Identify specific challenges that students of varying identities face while studying abroad in Europe, with a particular focus on students of low-income backgrounds, Black students, LGBTQ+ students, and students of different religious backgrounds.
Discuss intentional support services/resources that study abroad programs can provide for diverse student populations in close collaboration with their host partners – institutions, host families, faculty, community organizations – and how to approach potential obstacles that may surface.
Engage with the process of developing, implementing and evaluating the success of inclusive initiatives, and measuring the direct impact on your students and the future of your program!
Title: From Abroad to Beyond: Turning European Experiences into Career Success
Presenters:
Nicola Sullivan, AIFS
Maya Edwards, AIFS
Description:
Global education experiences in Europe equip students with unique skills for careers in public and private sectors. This session highlights how these experiences translate into employability and career preparedness.
Explore how global education in Europe impacts students’ employability and career preparedness.
Identify transferable skills developed through international education and their alignment with workforce demands.
Discuss reverse culture shock and strategies to leverage the abroad experience professionally.
Showcase alumni success stories to inspire future students.
Concurrent Session Block 3
The Role of the Global University in Navigating Conflict, Dialogue, Transformation — How campuses cultivate dialogue, resilience, and civic readiness amid geopolitical tension while keeping learning and community at the center.
Partnerships that Drive Real Collaboration & Innovation — Models that move beyond finance-only deals to co-created programs, research, and talent pathways linking MENA and global institutions.
Concurrent Session Block 2
Making the Student Success Case for International Education to Campus Leadership — How to build deeper support for global learning among campus leadership by framing international education as a key driver to improving student success.
Inclusion in MENA: Narratives, Demographics & Opportunity — Public narratives about MENA are often formed at a distance. This session examines inclusion through societal trends and the policy frameworks that enable openness and stability.
The Value of International & Experiential Study Through the Lens of Global Employers — What employers say global and experiential learning uniquely delivers, from teamwork across cultures to problem-solving on real projects.
Concurrent Session Block 1
Preparing Today’s International Students for Tomorrow’s Workforce — How institutions align global and experiential learning along with employer partnerships so international students translate global study into career readiness and impact.
Unique Mental Health & Wellbeing Considerations for Study to & from MENA — Culturally grounded approaches that support student wellbeing across languages, faith, family expectations, and cross-border transitions.
Tech for Global Education: What’s Actually Working? — Practical, people-first uses of digital tools that expand reach, improve student support, and strengthen collaboration without turning staff into technologists.
