TEMPUS CORINTHIAM

280Guide of Good Practices TEMPUS CORINTHIAM1.2. Internationalisation and Bologna in Israel: The IsraeliParadoxTypically, when Internationalisation is first raised in a discussion one’s first associationis with the activities that have come to symbolize Internationalisation during thelast decade: studies abroad, student exchange, active university bilateral agreementsand joint degree programmes. While there is general agreement that Internationalisationhas an extremely broad spectrum and incorporates much more than the aboveactivities, these areas have occupied the centre of the stage for quite some time. Internationalisationhas been branded in the public mind as well as among students anduniversity staff and is associated, above all, with the abovementioned activities.Internationalisation, as described above, is virtually non-existent in Israel. Wheresuch activities exist, the numbers are so small as to be statistically insignificant. WhileEurope has set itself a goal to achieve a 20% annual level of student mobility by 2020(the current level is between 4 and 5 per cent), the number of Israeli students whostudy abroad annually just slightly exceeds one-tenth of one per cent. The fact is that,of the seven universities in Israel, there is not one that, by formal policy or design,actively encourages its students to experience study abroad as part of their education.The single Israeli higher education institution with a tradition of systematically encouragingits students to study abroad during the course of their studies is the BezalelAcademy of Arts and Design in Jerusalem. Ben-Gurion University of the Negev wasthe first institution to officially establish an international office (in 2007) and, untiltoday (2012) it remains the only formally established IRO in the country.While many of the Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) in Israel (all of the universities)have traditionally engaged in various “international” activities (such as overseasstudent programmes aimed at generating revenue or small, English taught MA programmes),these initiatives are ragged and can be characterized as an anarchic state ofspasmodic, uncoordinated efforts of internationalization co-existing in an institutionwithout awareness of each other rather than systematic and carefully planned andcoordinated activities. It is generally agreed that it makes a great difference whetherthe initiative proceeds from a component of the institution, such as a department orresearch group, or whether the institution’s internationalization is also being initiated,coordinated, planned and systematically integrated by the institution’s central leadership.Herein lies a paradox: while internationalization, as defined above, and as it is commonlyconceived in the world today is virtually non-existent in Israel, the Israeli Institutionsof Higher Education are, in many other aspects, highly international, often toa far greater degree than in most other countries; the existing international activities,however, did not carry a title of internationalization.