This article develops the claim that the Teacher-Scholar Model (TS), which is used by Institutions of Higher Learning (IHL) to evaluate faculty worktime, is ill-suited for the strategy of comprehensive internationalization (CI). CI aims to enhance global learning by offering academic and non-academic opportunities for greater student engagement with international people and organizations. Because of lower transactions and other costs related to non-research academic collaborations with international organizations and people, they have the potential to expose large numbers of undergraduate students to global learning opportunities. Nevertheless, because the TS Model frequently prioritizes research, this type of collaboration is likely to be discouraged. The basis of research prioritization is the contested association of scholarship with better teaching, and more recently evidence-based practice. This article considers some of the consequences of this prioritization for aspirational learning models such as CI. It proposes an update to the TS Model given the conclusion that even in cases where global learning is enhanced, and collaborators' goals are realized, the TS Model is likely to undervalue faculty work, which threatens to undermine the academic component of CI. The proposed update, the Teacher Scholar-Practitioner Model, (TSP) is consistent with evidence of complex knowledge flows between practice, scholarship, and teaching. This evidence confirms that like research, practice activities can lead to original knowledge and can inform scholarship and teaching. Innovative adaptations to the TS model are explored as guides for advocates of CI.