This special issue of Research in Comparative and International Education, which we have titled “Promoting Global and Intercultural Competencies through Internationalization,” is intended to encourage dialogue between and among scholars from multiple disciplines, international education professionals, and academic program accreditors regarding how best to instill and assess global, international, and intercultural (GII) competencies. The articles included here build upon a conversation started as part of a small invitation-only conference funded by the Spencer Foundation which was held at the SUNY Global Center in April 2018 to examine how institutions consider the quality of internationalization efforts in the promotion of GII competency development. Because quality assurance and accreditation have shifted from their historical focus on input measures to place increasing emphasis on measuring learning outcomes, educational quality is no longer simply measured or limited to reductive output measures (e.g. graduation rates). Instead, accountability for educational quality is increasingly based on measuring whether students have the knowledge and skills promised to them by their educational institutions and programs, as well as measures of whether the education is contributing to broader societal goals (Billing, 2004; Martin and Stella, 2007). While great strides have been made in the assessment of learning outcomes as it relates to some aspects of the higher education experience, there are other areas where the practice and the scholarship is less advanced. Internationalization falls into the latter category particularly as it relates to the development of GII competencies (Soria and Troisi, 2014). Among specialized accreditors of professional degrees, assessing cultural competencies remains among the most challenging tasks, and programs continue to struggle to define, measure, and assess intercultural competencies (Rubaii and Calarusse, 2014). In an effort to prepare students with the global mindset and cultural competencies necessary for effectiveness as professionals and citizens in an increasingly globally interdependent world, universities are placing greater emphasis on providing students with international experiences as part of their education (ACE, 2011). The gold standard of international experiences for students is presumed to be study abroad (Ballestras and Roller, 2013; Deardorff, 2006). Conversely, there is growing recognition that direct-enrollment semesteror year-long study abroad programs are not financially or otherwise feasible for the majority of students (Parkinson, 2007). As such, universities are placing an increasing emphasis on short-term faculty-led programs, many of which involve international service learning (ISL). These short-term ISL programs have the potential to 901950 RCI0010.1177/1745499920901950Research in Comparative and International EducationEditorial editorial2020

中文翻译：

---

改进高等教育对全球，国际和跨文化能力评估的考虑

本期比较与国际教育研究专刊，题为“通过国际化促进全球和跨文化能力的发展”，旨在鼓励来自不同学科的学者，国际教育专业人员和学术计划认可者之间就如何最好地进行对话。灌输和评估全球，国际和跨文化（GII）能力。本文所包含的文章基于对话而开始，对话是由Spencer基金会资助的小型邀请会议的一部分，该会议于2018年4月在纽约州立大学全球中心举行，旨在研究机构如何考虑国际化工作在提升GII能力方面的质量发展。由于质量保证和认证已经从其过去对投入措施的关注转向对测量学习成果的日益重视，因此教育质量不再简单地进行测量或仅限于减少产出的措施（例如毕业率）。取而代之的是，对教育质量的责任越来越多地基于以下方面：衡量学生是否拥有其教育机构和计划向他们承诺的知识和技能，以及衡量教育是否对更广泛的社会目标做出贡献的衡量标准（Billing，2004年； Martin和Stella ，2007）。尽管在评估学习成果方面已经取得了长足的进步，因为它与高等教育经验的某些方面有关，但在其他领域，实践和奖学金却不那么先进。国际化特别属于后者，因为它与GII能力的发展有关（Soria和Troisi，2014）。在专业学位的专业鉴定人中，评估文化能力仍然是最具挑战性的任务，并且计划仍在努力定义，衡量和评估跨文化能力（Rubaii和Calarusse，2014）。为了使学生具备在日益全球化的相互依存的世界中成为专业人士和公民所必需的全球思维和文化才能，大学越来越重视为学生提供国际经验作为其教育的一部分（ACE，2011）。假定学生要获得国际经验的金标准，那就是出国留学（Ballestras and Roller，2013； Deardorff，2006）。相反，越来越多的人认识到直接入学的学期或为期一年的出国留学计划对大多数学生而言在经济上或其他方面都不可行（Parkinson，2007）。因此，大学越来越重视短期的教师主导课程，其中许多课程涉及国际服务学习（ISL）。这些短期的ISL计划有潜力901950 RCI0010.1177 / 1745499920901950比较与国际教育研究编辑社论2020 其中许多涉及国际服务学习（ISL）。这些短期的ISL计划有潜力901950 RCI0010.1177 / 1745499920901950比较与国际教育研究编辑社论2020 其中许多涉及国际服务学习（ISL）。这些短期的ISL计划有潜力901950 RCI0010.1177 / 1745499920901950比较与国际教育研究编辑社论2020