|
Shane Nordyke, Indiana University This year’s Internationalizing the Curriculum I track built on the contributions of past TLC conferences by focusing on two major questions: what should we strive to accomplish in our efforts to internationalize the curriculum and what means are available to reaching those objectives. Track participants explored a myriad of goals to move beyond the rhetorical popular promise to “internationalize” curricula and provide substantive experiences to students. Two goals emerged as having paramount importance: the development of global citizens and forcing students out of their comfort zones, especially when these concerned Western narratives and stereotypes. The concept of global citizenship goes beyond knowing something about “foreigners.” As Heidi H. Hobbs ( North Carolina State University) and Harry I. Chernotsky (University of North Carolina) explained in their research, students need to develop an increasing awareness of the world’s complexity and interdependence, appreciate differences and acquire the ability to communicate across cultures. The concept of global citizenship also emphasizes the connections between what is local and what is global and stresses the importance of breaking away from a purely Westernized view of the world. Nancy E. Wright (Long Island University, Brooklyn) demonstrated practical application of these ideas using a series of narratives by the Ojibwa tribes of Michigan ’s Lake Superior region along with class readings and discussions on environmental policy to help students shift away from the more traditional Western anthrocentric approach to environmental issues. Getting students to explore beyond their comfort zones and see things from different perspectives is a second important goal of international encounters. Edward Weisband and Courtney Irene Powell Thomas (both of Virginia Tech) showed that students are able to grapple with foreign and domestic situations of prejudice, racism, nativism, etc. as well as their own reified beliefs when provided with learning environments that encourage them to face situations where people have reified their beliefs to the point that they deny freedom and humanity to others. Denise M. Horn and Florencia Ines Gabriele, (Northeastern University) introduced, G-PACT, a program student groups of various nationalities were given overseas opportunities to develop local political action entities to try and solve local challenges. Through this the participants had ample prospects to interact with the local culture and people, learn from each other, as well as challenge their mutual stereotypes. Global internships are one of the few ways to internationalize college political science curricula that emphatically juxtapose theory and student experience, the action and reflection of global citizenship, and the link between college and career. Eugene Schmiel of the Washington Internship Institute (WII) described his program where “civic engagement occurs as the students are placed in foreign embassies and thereby immersed in a foreign culture allowing intensive opportunities for cross-cultural communication and an examination of their one’s own culture. Brigham Young University’s Danny Damron, concludes that the successful internship is in direct proportion to the efforts taken to prepare, screen, or “fire” candidates who may not have the survival skills or global savvy that sustain the program’s goals. The quality of an overseas program can be maintained by stressing independent problem-solving abilities and enhancing them through preparatory classes. Maryville College colleagues, Professor Scott Henson and International Program Director Kirsten Sheppard evaluated some of the institutional dynamics involved in promoting international experiential education. They conclude that experiential education must be supported by administrative support and faculty guidance. Students who have returned from an international experience can be an invaluable tool at their home campus if they are incorporated into the curriculum. This is particularly important for those students who are unable to go abroad. In her presentation, Maria Victoria Perez-Rios (City University New York) explained how she uses role playing exercises in her class on international human rights in order to broaden the perspectives of her students and demonstrate the complexity of human rights issues. Through the exercise students not only learn about human rights issues in other countries but are enabled to see the multiple perspectives involved. When exploring terrorism’s dynamics in the classroom, Shane Nordyke (Indiana University) emphasized learning objectives centered on students’ abilities to define key concepts, use precise language and ask the right types of questions. Examining the expanding (and overlapping) categories of ‘target’ and ‘perpetrator’ allows students to explore their assumptions and preconceptions of self and other. The conflict in Iraq along with elections in Afghanistan and Palestine are focal points in the American Government course of Rebecca C. Harris (Washington & Lee University). The goal is to encourage higher order thinking; students apply common concepts to unconventional contexts using situational assignments. Students are thus encouraged to engage global events in a ‘domestic’ context thereby developing a more sophisticated understanding of the relationships between seemingly disparate topics: the US Constitution and the Iraqi conflict; elections in Palestine and voting irregularities in the US. Finally, Anas Malik (Xavier University) highlighted learning opportunities that emerge from incorporating three specific crises into course content: 9/11, the Lebanese-Hezbollah-Israeli conflict and Pope Benedict’s comments regarding Islam. Malik underscored the need for faculty to recognize the potentially stressful aspects for some students due to personal connections with the crisis; ‘teaching at the edge of knowledge’ acquires new meaning in such learning environments. Using peer/collaborative learning mechanisms, students again apply concepts of ‘self’ and ‘other’ and critically analyze themes of polarization and politicization. To conclude, participants in this panel focused on the many benefits of and challenges to internationalizing the curriculum as well as a variety of methods for doing so. We sought to develop global citizenship and to break out of familiar territory, both figuratively and literally, as well as encouraging students to make the political personal. The quality of student cross-cultural engagement is independent of time spent and a diversity of programs, each with strengths and weaknesses, can seek to develop global citizenship and encourage students to see beyond themselves. Overall, the crucial element is to continue to pursue internationalizing the curriculum efforts in as many ways as possible for the benefit of our students, our societies and our world. |
Join/Renew Now!
Contribute
Contact APSA