'Princeton in the World'

The University's recent "Princeton in the World" report calls on all members of the University community to embrace a more international outlook both in the classroom and in University initiatives. The internationalization of the University, however, is an important issue to consider and necessitates a better and more thorough approach than "Princeton in the World" provides. The report resorts to vague, cliched, politically correct rhetoric and is astonishingly lacking in clarity.

Rather than identifying and making recommendations about core and compelling University interests, the report appears as a publicity stunt timed to coincide with the beginning of public fundraising for the new capital campaign. Instead of beginning from the abstract, theoretical basis of "globalization is happening," the report would have done well to identify concrete needs through consultation with more stakeholders, including students. The undergraduate portion of the report is lacking; the University needs to clarify what internationalization will mean for undergraduates and what benefits it will bring them (as opposed to faculty and foreign graduate students).

The report does contain certain innovative proposals, such as the idea of a gap year devoted to public service in a foreign country and a "Global Scholars" faculty exchange that would allow distinguished international scholars to visit Princeton on a recurring basis. The report, however, does not address the possibility that faculty exchange might dilute the teaching and research that would still take place on campus.

In addition, the report should have outlined concrete methods to eliminate the financial disincentive for studying abroad. Many students interested in studying abroad in countries with strong currencies like England, where the cost is higher than for a similar term at Princeton, find themselves forced to take out loans. Perhaps the fuzzily outlined "Global Initiatives Fund" in the report could make some of its funding available for this purpose.

"Princeton in the World" came from a fine sense of do-goodism. But do-goodism is not the same as sound thinking. The report would be much more valuable had its faculty authors toned down their language and toned up the substance of their proposals.