In this paper, we address the internationalization of higher education (HE) and specifically the importance of internationalisation at home (IaH) given its strategic priority at educational, research and policy levels. Internationalization has become primarily associated with developing academic partnerships, the increase of student and staff mobility and of international research collaborations (European Commission, 2013), in efforts to enhance institutional prestige and global ranking (Lumby and Foskett 2016). A key priority of the European Commission’s (2013) internationalization strategy, however, is IaH, which provides all staff and students, and particularly the non-mobile majority, with opportunities for an internationalised university experience. We explore how HE staff and students experience IaH and consider how HE institutions can cultivate skills for life and work in a global economy, promote critical thinking and civic responsibility, and thus contribute to the quality and relevance of HE (Urban and Palmer 2014; Hénard, Diamond, and Roseveare 2012; de Wit et al. 2015). To this end, we draw on an Erasmus+ Strategic Partnerships project involving a consortium of three European universities, with the goal of furthering approaches and tools for implementing IaH at European HE level. Following a mixed methods exploratory sequential design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011), we analyse quantitative data from an online survey administered to staff and students (mobile and non-mobile) across the partnership and other European HE institutions. The responses from 342 participants on their experience of IaH practices in their own HE institutions are at the heart of our paper. By building on these experiences, we provide empirical-grounded responses to a key question underpinning this call for papers. More specifically: “How HE internationalization can be redefined in terms of equity, inclusion and impact on individuals and communities?” Preliminary findings suggest key activities that can be implemented in formal and non-formal HE areas to promote inclusive IaH practices, where students and staff are both beneficiaries and agents of change. Implications for research and practice forefront the need to continue to further an empirical definition of IaH and promoting its application across institutions, individuals and communities.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.de Wit, H., F. Hunter, L. Howard, and E.Egron-Polak. 2015. The Internationalization of Higher Education. Brussels: the European Parliament, Committee on Culture and Education European Commission. 2013. European Higher Education in the World. http://ec.europa.eu/ education/policy/international-cooperation/world-education_en Hénard, F., L. Diamond, and D. Roseveare. 2012. Approaches to Internationalization and Their Implications for Strategic Management and Institutional Practice. A Guide for Higher Education Institutions. Institutional Management in Higher Education. OECD. Inan, A., D. Wick, H. G. van Liempd, and M. Fastner. 2014. Internationalization with Integrity:Modelling a New Approach. European Association for International Education. Accessed 25July, 2014. http://www.eaie.org/blog/internationalization-with-integrity/ Lumby, J. and Foskett, N. (2015) Internationalization and Culture in Higher Education Educational Management Administration & Leadership 44(1) 95–111 Pashby, K., and V. Andreotti. 2016. “Ethical Internationalization in Higher Education: Interfaces with International Development and Sustainability.” Environmental Education Research 22(6): 771–787. doi:10.1080/13504622.2016.1201789. Robson, S., Almeida, J. & Schartner, A. (2017): Internationalization at home: time for review and development?, European Journal of Higher Education, DOI:10.1080/21568235.2017.1376697 Urban, S.L., and Palmer, (2014) International Students as a Resource for Internationalization of Higher Education. Journal of Studies in International Education 18(4): 305-324.