Home

          Rachel Ellett, Beloit College
          David Kiwuwa, University of Nottingham
          Joseph W. Roberts, Roger Williams University

Looking back over five years of Internationalizing the Curriculum tracks it is clear today that the emergence and ubiquity of information and communication technologies place us at the edge of a profound transformation in global learning. The papers and discussion in the 2009 track offered a fascinating opportunity for reflection on our early experiments with these technologies as we seek to construct new global learning communities. This reignites the need to reconfigure our understanding of internationalizing the curriculum; from a static exploration of the other to “the enriching modes of inquiry and dynamic processes of global interaction” (Barber 2007:105). However, despite these changes we continue to find ourselves hampered in our internationalization efforts by both institutional and cross-cultural obstacles.

For many of us study abroad remains the central component of internationalizing the curriculum. Presenters and discussants agreed on the concomitant need to continue experimentation in study abroad programs while more purposefully reflecting on the ways in which study abroad is and can be integrated into the curriculum. As the 2008 track noted, these efforts need to be multi-level: the student, the course, the department and the institution.

The Democratization of Education: Increasing Cross-Cultural Scholarship, Collaboration, and Assessment
Study abroad; incorporating international students, faculty, or others from a “local” diaspora community into the classroom; and international collaborative teaching are ways to internationalize the curriculum. International education creates, for students, an opportunity to see how other communities approach similar problems and, for faculty, an opportunity to encounter divergent teaching styles and university settings. The former is indicative of Steven L. Lamy’s (2007) emphasis on preparing students for a role as citizens in a global society. Equally important, should we not see political science and an international curriculum as a bridge to a range of opportunities for our students? We use the term democratization to emphasize the need to make global learning available to all students, both at our home institutions and abroad. Exchange of ideas from diverse social, cultural, and political positions internationally encourages the democratization of education.

A theme our track repeatedly came back to was how students from different countries see the world, and their role within it, differently. Dennis McCornac, Pam Zeiser and David Kiwuwa note in their papers, how international exchange allows for unique dialogue, debate, and unsurprisingly, disagreements. The different structures of university life or educational culture create a unique set of problems for collaboration and learning. Students will have differing expectations for workload, timing of assignments and critical reflection of empirical and theoretical claims that can be both challenging and an opportunity for growth. Kiwuwa discusses a unique set of problems in this vein: the different socio-political or cultural aspects of student experiences. There is a general perception of a pedagogical divide between ‘Asian,’ ‘Western,’ ‘European,’ and ‘American’ learning and instructional approaches. While there is a realization that there is no rigid differentiation, an acknowledgement of the crucial adaptation and sensitivity to alternative learning styles and traditions is necessary.

Increasingly, internationalization of the curriculum suggests two distinct assessment problems. At the student level, how are activities and coursework abroad assessed by the home university for fulfillment of departmental and university degree requirements? Generally, when students are working through a recognized partner institution these issues are minimized. However, there are increasing opportunities for international internships, service learning, and unique partnership arrangements where the academic rigor and cross-cultural relevance is not as apparent and assessment must be resolved on a case-by-case basis. At the faculty level, the issue of assessment is far more challenging. The assessment of faculty for retention, promotion, and tenure (RPT) focuses to varying degrees on scholarship and teaching. The consensus is that faculty RPT assessment must incorporate international experience and the promotion of international education into the process. Faculty will do what they are incentivized to do.

Using Appropriate/Evolving Technology
Pam Zeiser and Doris Fuchs demonstrated successful use of course management systems (WebCT, Blackboard, Sakai, or Moodle) as a tool for cross-border discussions between the U.S. and Germany. The ability to host varied content (text, pictures, audio, and video) allows faculty to incorporate international, student or faculty generated content into their courses. Of course, these can also be posted online on Facebook, YouTube, or other more accessible systems. Roger Murphy demonstrated how a web-based course could be offered in conjunction with a traditional study abroad experience. Students in the web-based course viewed films prepared and uploaded during the study abroad experience. Murphy found that the web-based students came to view study abroad as a necessary component of their education. Skype, an online videophone system, could potentially allow for expansion of the program to real-time interaction.

Web conferencing presents possibilities for international collaboration in the classroom and beyond. Numerous options are currently available for web conferencing. DimDim is an open source application that provides free access for up to 20 participants. Elluminate is available as an add-on for some course management software (notably, Blackboard). The COTELCO program at Syracuse University, built around Elluminate, is the most rigorous program using web conferencing. Tomorrow’s college graduate will be more likely to use web conferencing in a typical work environment making it an important and marketable skill. More importantly, it allows students from diverse locations to share the classroom experience. Martin (2007) notes that web conferencing “facilitate[s] the exchange of knowledge within learning (or, epistemic) communities and the development, transferal, and/or realignment of norms, views, and values. This process is a small cog in the wheel of a larger global civil society.”

Finding Resources and Allies to Promote Internationalizing
Presenters and discussants came from a wide range of institutions, with access to various levels of resources. Discussion frequently came back to concerns about how international programming will be affected by budget cuts in the current economic climate. When international programming is located at the heart of the curriculum it is more likely to be protected from budget cuts. Faculty should position themselves at the forefront of these efforts. In examining ways to integrate study abroad back into the classroom Rachel Ellett found that students were surprisingly open to the public dissection of their experiences. Extended papers and senior theses also represent potential outlets for students to process and convert their personal experience back into an academic and theoretical framework.

Our track concluded that moral, financial and technical support for study abroad programs was encumbered by meek institutional endorsement. The use of technology as an important component/alternative to physical presence in study abroad programs was seen as an attractive option; albeit prone to weak take-up enthusiasm from administrators and faculty. Crucially, there remains an entrenched hesitance in faculty going abroad, not to mention students who are still reluctant to embrace its normality perhaps seeing this as just ‘academic tourism’ with little intellectual reward. As Derek Hall noted, both students and faculty frequently need convincing of the intellectual and practical worth of global cultural capital.

References
________________________________________________________________________
Barber, Benjamin. 2007. “Internationalizing the Undergraduate Curriculum: Opening Commentary.” PS: Political Science and Politics 40:1: 105.

Lamy, Steven L. 2007. “Challenging Hegemonic Paradigms and Practices: Critical Thinking and Active Learning Strategies for International Relations.” PS: Political Science and Politics 40:1: 112-116.

Martin, Pamela L. 2007. “Global Videoconferencing as a Tool for Internationalizing Our Classrooms.” PS: Political Science and Politics 40:1: 116-117.