It is widely argued that pursuing higher education can enhance critical thinking, personal growth, self-development, and earning potential, thereby improving quality of life (Hong, Bista, and Timmons 2025). It is often assumed that individuals who complete a university education are more likely to enjoy more prestigious positions and higher wages than those without a university degree. In addition, most high-end jobs and career opportunities require at least a higher education. Even more attractive is the pursuit of global competence and experiential education, which adds a layer of value and quality to higher education. Thus, the desire to acquire global competence and to engage in experiential learning often takes students outside their home country and has fueled Internationalization at a distance (IaD). Internationalization at a distance is a growing concept that blurs the binary distinction between internationalization at home and abroad and is defined as “distance education across borders or the international mobility of knowledge without human mobility” (Brunner 2024, 870). Although higher education institutions globally compete to recruit international students, student retention has always been a challenge for most universities, and this is where the prospect of LaD is crucial. Factors such as school environment, inadequate funding, limited access to resources, instructor-student relationships, safety, and the quality of education all pose challenges to student retention strategies (Sujitparapitaya 2006; Pike and Kuh 2005). Despite these challenges, institutions continue to strive to provide students with a range of resources to enhance their learning and educational experiences, especially through IaD initiatives (Choudaha and De Wit 2014). One such initiative to improve student learning is engaging in international student mobility (ISM) programs.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) defines “internationally mobile students” as individuals who cross national borders specifically to pursue education (2006). According to UNESCO, the number of students participating in international mobility globally increased significantly from 2 million to 6.36 million between 2000 and 2020 (2020). Hong, Bista, and Timmons (2025) posit three key drivers of student mobility: “the pursuit of high-quality education, enhanced career opportunities, and personal growth” (Verbik and Lasanowski 2007, 3). These key drivers may indicate the need for global connections and a deeper interest in quality education and a better future.
Globally, student mobility opportunities (SMO) have been a significant aspect of student learning, offering experiential learning opportunities while reflecting on the sociopolitical, cultural, and interpersonal undercurrents (Kritz and Gurak 2018; Lehane 2025). Ogden, et al. (2023) posit that SMO provides a “host of positive outcomes, including improved oral language proficiency, self-efficacy, intercultural sensitivity, and knowledge of sustainability,” yet educational institutions have not been able to harness these benefits into recruitment and retention plans especially for local students and students in programs that promotes SMO (289–290) and as a strategy for ensuring inclusive global learners (Myhovych 2019). For more than two decades, ISM has undergone significant transformations in response to global events, including the COVID-19 pandemic, the rise of artificial intelligence (AI), shifting immigration policies, political conflicts, and evolving educational policies (Hong Bista and Timmons 2025). Despite these challenges, there remains a steady interest among postsecondary students in blended/hybrid and fully online courses, as well as in-person learning and mobility opportunities to support students in achieving global competencies (Garrett, Simunich, Legon, and Fredericksen 2023; Choudaha and De Wit 2014). Also, institutional offers of these opportunities remain a staple in higher education, especially in disciplines that support experiential learning, such as business and social sciences.
In a systematic review, Gutema, Pant, and Nikou (2023) investigated trends, research directions, and key themes in ISM. In their investigation, they identified five key themes related to student mobility from a global perspective. These themes are (1) betterment of life, (2) policy of the host country, (3) role of institutions, (4) return to home country, and (5) social, economic, environmental, individual, and cultural factors (Gutema, Pant, and Nikou2023). These themes provide insight into the various factors at play in SMO. On the contrary, Movassaghi, Unsal, and Göçer (2014) found that fear of delayed graduation is a significant factor in students’ nonparticipation in IMO. Historically, ISM was considered the domain of mainly elite students (Hoffa 2007). This is partly due to the historical marketization of IMO as a double exploratory opportunity for tourism and education, and many parents and undergraduate students have the notion that combining tourism and learning could pose a distraction that could impede the progress and focus on academic excellence and career preparation (Movassaghi, Unsal, and Göçer 2014; Salisbury 2012). In addition, institutions have capitalized on “mobility capital” by promising prospective students permanent residence and even citizenship upon completion of their studies. Bourdieu (1986) argues that this practice strategically produces a form of capital that can be accumulated, thereby focusing on the formal (legal) aspects of citizenship rather than the informal (sense of belonging), which can promote self-growth and meaningful student engagement. Furthermore, Kaufmann, Bergman and Joye (2004) argue that focusing on formal citizenship as something that can be acquired, rather than on informal citizenship as something that can be attained, contributes to a form of inequality termed motility. According to the authors, “motility is the potential and actual capacity for people and information to be mobile both geographically and socially,” which they propose as three features: access, competence, and appropriation (745). Nevertheless, higher institutions have capitalized on students’ desire to access educational resources, develop global competence, and the prospect of acquiring legal citizenship, and appropriated IaD as a capital that can be acquired, thereby further creating social inequalities (Brunner 2025; Kaufmann, Bergman and Joye 2004; Mellors and Vicencio 2025). Institutional promises for acquiring permanent status through International education also constitute a form of capital and, by extension, produce social reproduction (Brunner 2025; Moret 2018).
Academic disciplines such as business, education, engineering, and social work rely on experiential learning through IaD, co-op placements, and internships to supplement and enhance student learning. Students who engage in these programs often have a stronger advantage in on-the-job skills and international mobility opportunities (IMO), and can transfer these skills to their academic and personal lives. Drawing from existing research on experiential learning, intercultural competence, and equity-based retention strategies, postsecondary institutions have limited the ways SMO is often framed, which is primarily through a lens of prestige or global branding for the institution, with little to no investments in preparing students and promoting culturally responsive strategies for embedding mobility programs within student support and retention frameworks. Thus, this article argues that registrars and institutional leaders must begin to view SMO not as a luxury for privileged students but as a strategic, inclusive educational intervention to enhance student learning and as a retention strategy (Geddie 2015; Hoffa 2007; Mellors and Vicencio 2025). This article also suggests that institutions focus on equity, accessibility, and inclusive program design to support meaningful IMO engagement among marginalized and underrepresented students.
Student mobility opportunities (SMOs) are not merely high-impact, global learning opportunities, as most study abroad offices and postsecondary institutions frame them. SMO has been an underutilized strategy for enhancing student retention and success because, from its inception, it has been marketed as a luxury for privileged students with little to no institutional support for marginalized groups. Thus, mitigating social, structural, and financial barriers that pose complex issues for marginalized and underserved student populations (i.e. mature and international students, students with disabilities, students from low social backgrounds, and students in historically underfunded disciplines) continues to be swept under the rug (Gutema Pant, and Nikou 2023; Hong, Bista, and Timmons 2025; Ogden, et al. 2023). For example, Ogden, et al. (2023) examined the impact of participation in international mobility opportunities on academic outcomes among first-generation college students. Applying a rigorous multivariate matching methodology, they found that first-generation students experienced greater benefits when they engaged in SMO than continuing-generation students did. Their results also concluded that first-generation students who engaged in SMO experienced higher cumulative GPA scores and took less time to graduate than those who did not. The results of these studies indicate that SMO can be a powerful tool for fostering high-impact educational strategies and student recruitment, especially for first-generation students.
Furthermore, a nationwide college student experience questionnaire found that first-generation students perceive their college campus environment as less desirable, with limited opportunities to engage socially and in educational and social activities on campus (Pike and Kuh 2005; Ogden, et al. 2023). Leveraging the positive impacts of SMO while also addressing these issues can significantly improve student experience and retention. Recently, scholars and educators have called for a more culturally engaging and sustainable environment and for meaningful engagement, especially for minoritized students, by improving and implementing high-educational-impact practices and policies to mitigate these barriers and students’ social isolation. In another study, Harris and Bensimon (2007) found that racially minoritized groups face disproportionate disparities, which negatively impact their college graduation rate. Nevertheless, many studies have shown that racialized students who take part in international mobility programs are more likely to complete their degrees within four, five, or six years compared to their peers who do not engage in such opportunities (Malmgren and Galvin 2008; Rubin, et al. 2014; Sutton and Rubin 2010). However, again, higher institutions continue to underscore the benefits and correlation between SMO and student retention. There is significant evidence on the positive impacts of SMO on underserved and minoritized students (Harrisand Bensimon 2007). However, only a small percentage of minoritized students get to participate in mobility opportunities due to complex barriers and institutional policies and practices.
In addition, several significant factors contribute to students’ exploration of mobility opportunities. According to Gutema Pant, and Nikou (2023), factors such as the quality of education, visa requirements, academic reputation, tuition fees, availability of scholarships, job opportunities, and various social, economic, environmental, individual, and cultural factors (Gutema Pant and Nikou 2023; Wells 2014). Globally, the demand for international experience has not slowed (Hanley and Chankseliani 2025), and universities are unable to offer SMOs to all their students due to limited funding and opportunities, as well as the significant factors described above (Verbik 2007). Some universities are increasingly seeking individuals who can navigate these complexities by providing institutional support through funding, strategic policies, and partnership agreements (MOUs); however, these challenges can be complex to combat.
Let’s face it, SMO in higher education can improve institutional reputation and contribute to the unique experiences and benefits that higher education offers; still, the student recruitment office and institutional administrators have not fully harnessed its potential as a student retention and engagement strategy. Too often, SMO is siloed within international offices and framed as an optional or elite experience, rather than as a central, equity-oriented pillar of student success. Additionally, many students have shown that the first year of college is the most vulnerable stage for student retention. Yet most SMOs are offered only in the second and third years of university. Also, a high percentage of students withdraw from the university in their first year, increasing the first-year attrition rate (Ogden, et al. 2023). Thus, the underutilization of SMO and inadequate system management and tracking of its long-term impacts, coupled with restrictive institutional policies, continue to underscore the benefits of SMO not only as a rewarding student experience but also as a valuable tool for student retention. Therefore, institutional practices must pay proper attention to marginalized students’ experiences and academic success, thereby improving student experiences and retention. Institutional policies and practices must extend beyond the pursuit of global reputation; rather, the institutional growth plan must center and invest in meaningful efforts to enhance global competencies frameworks and integrate SMO data into institutional learning analytics that prioritize culturally sustainable and inclusive strategies and programs. More importantly, ongoing strategic collaboration across student affairs, registrar, and international education offices is imperative for providing a well-rounded SMO system that supports student learning and schooling experiences.
share