View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Discussions across Borders: A German-American Partnership

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Discussions across Borders: A German-American Partnership
Language: English
Authors: Zeiser, Pamela A., Fuchs, Doris, Engelkamp, Stephan
Source: Journal of Political Science Education. 2013 9(4):474.
Availability: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 13
Publication Date: 2013
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: Postsecondary Education
Higher Education
Descriptors: Partnerships in Education, Political Science, Global Education, International Educational Exchange, Computer Mediated Communication, Teaching Methods, Educational Practices, Active Learning, Technology Uses in Education, Educational Objectives, Scheduling, Assignments, Group Discussion, Feedback (Response), Academic Achievement, Student Evaluation, Participant Satisfaction, Foreign Countries, Cultural Differences
Geographic Terms: Florida, Germany
DOI: 10.1080/15512169.2013.835574
ISSN: 1551-2169
Abstract: This article reports on our experiences in a German-American partnership in internationalizing the curriculum. In a globalized world, engaging other cultures and identities as well as understanding global issues and events from other perspectives are important qualifications that allow students to gain different insights in political science. Yet, not all students have the opportunity to study abroad to achieve these goals. Today's technology, however, offers effective methods and techniques for internationalizing the curriculum and requiring students to think beyond their own national borders. Our "discussions across borders" show how communication technology can be utilized to create opportunities for international exchanges with students at a university in another country. Beginning in 2008, students at the University of North Florida and University of Muenster engaged in joint online discussions on international issues. Based upon the achievement of educational objectives, we consider these online discussions an effective way to increase student awareness of other cultures and perspectives as well as substantive course content. As such discussions could be replicated at other institutions, this article presents the educational objectives for, design and process of, assessment of, and challenges in carrying out discussions across borders.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 8
Entry Date: 2014
Accession Number: EJ1024133
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFnOUO72ig5-2vL5bFB1uyNAAAA4TCB3gYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHQMIHNAgEAMIHHBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDIsL0byzcuIginus6AIBEICBmQ6bT41i_YDOD1BXyyXntGdzJWOZtARkWT_becmHsJM0vDQbZyVlBprBhe1xPHPd2YLEwi3X1o7k0ahIawyOTRxo2SQPkBcTvPqojkWi8JW9lV6H7lMeDMw28PyPFYTcbLEKaAktn81uzR8yODY31gzGKpd4glIOjeke2IgbZQh9Wx-R5_UVSQLvcqViRz0XCS_696wnEr3mfA==
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0091809517;[15ub]01oct.13;2019Feb08.15:41;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0091809517-1">Discussions Across Borders: A German-American Partnership. </title> <p>This article reports on our experiences in a German-American partnership in internationalizing the curriculum. In a globalized world, engaging other cultures and identities as well as understanding global issues and events from other perspectives are important qualifications that allow students to gain different insights in political science. Yet, not all students have the opportunity to study abroad to achieve these goals. Today's technology, however, offers effective methods and techniques for internationalizing the curriculum and requiring students to think beyond their own national borders. Our "discussions across borders" show how communication technology can be utilized to create opportunities for international exchanges with students at a university in another country. Beginning in 2008, students at the University of North Florida and University of Muenster engaged in joint online discussions on international issues. Based upon the achievement of educational objectives, we consider these online discussions an effective way to increase student awareness of other cultures and perspectives as well as substantive course content. As such discussions could be replicated at other institutions, this article presents the educational objectives for, design and process of, assessment of, and challenges in carrying out discussions across borders. [Supplementary materials are available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of the Journal of Political Science Education for the following free supplemental resource: Appendix 1. This appendix contains an example of a student feedback form.]</p> <p>Keywords: active learning; international politics; internationalizing the curriculum; teaching with technology</p> <p>Because of globalization and global commerce, "internationalizing the curriculum" has become a common catch-phrase throughout American higher education. The catch-phrase has many definitions and varied means of implementation throughout the country. Broadly, internationalizing the curriculum includes "projects to bring international perspectives into the undergraduate curriculum, promote study abroad, build academic partnerships with foreign universities, and even create American-style campuses around the world" (Lovett [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref1">5</reflink>], A40).</p> <p>In "We Need a New Model of Global Education," Clara M. Lovett argues that "the challenge today is not simply to teach students to 'know the other.' It is to help students see the world and its wonders and problems through the eyes and minds of others, to explore alternative interpretations of events and trends" (Lovett [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref2">5</reflink>], A40). The goals of internationalizing the curriculum in political science, as defined by a joint APSA-American Council on Education Symposium on the topic, are also quite varied when applied to substantive subjects such as public policy, political theory, and international relations but can be condensed to comparing and contrasting the following: Western and non-Western political ideas, systems, and behaviors; political culture and its impact on political systems; actors' roles in policy making at home and abroad; politics of difference (ethnicity, class, gender, culture, etc.); and International Relations theories as tools to study the world as well as their relation to practice. Commonly suggested strategies for internationalizing the curriculum of American university and college courses include bringing international perspectives into the reading list, requiring students to read foreign media, assigning students research papers or other assignments that focus on international or other nations' perspectives, international case studies, and in-class activities or debates that emphasize international perspectives (Barber et al. [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref3">1</reflink>]). Some of these strategies rely on traditional teaching methods, while others implement active learning.</p> <p>Outside of the American campus classroom, of course, study abroad is the main form of internationalizing the curriculum. It offers students opportunities to achieve such goals as experiencing other cultures and customs, understanding global issues and events from other perspectives, gaining a new perspective on and appreciation for their own country, and gaining self-confidence and independence. Yet, not all students have the interest, ability, or funds to study abroad and thus achieve these goals.</p> <p>Today's technology, however, offers effective methods and techniques for internationalizing the curriculum and requiring students to think beyond their own national borders, which can provide us with a valuable "middle ground" between adding international content to existing courses and undertaking study abroad. Following from other political scientists' efforts at online simulations and/or video conferences with other countries (Jones [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref4">3</reflink>]; Martin [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref5">6</reflink>]), our "discussions across borders" utilize communication technology to create opportunities for students to engage in discussions with students at a university in another country. Beginning in 2008, students enrolled in the variable-topic International Studies senior seminar at the University of North Florida (UNF) and the senior seminar on "Power and Corporations in Global Politics" at the University of Muenster engaged in joint online discussions. Faculty in the United States and Germany cooperated on their syllabi, coordinated readings and required common assignments from their students. Students in both countries participated in online discussions in response to the same questions, with the expectation that they would learn substantively about not only course concepts but also the culture and attitudes of the other country's citizens through interactions between them. Many theoretical concepts in political science, and especially social phenomena like power or identity, are not "just there" or even "value-free" but socially constructed; hence, they need to be situated in their respective sociocultural context. It is in this respect that we consider transnational discussions an effective means for students to learn about the importance of social context for the cultural validation of theoretical knowledge. In this specific case, moreover, the cooperation allowed for the "globalization" of courses on globalization and related topics.</p> <p>Based upon the achievement of educational objectives, these online "discussions across borders" provide an effective way to increase student awareness of other cultures and perspectives as well as substantive course content. As such discussions could be replicated at other institutions, this article presents the educational objectives for, design and process of, assessment of,[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref6">1</reflink>] and challenges in carrying out discussions across borders.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-2">Educational Objectives</hd> <p>Pedagogically, we have two overriding goals for our discussions: active learning and internationalization. Bonwell and Eison define active learning as "instructional activities involving students in doing things and thinking about what they are doing" ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref7">2</reflink>], 2). Though there is little agreement on a common definition, Bonwell and Eison insist that active learning focuses on engaging students in more than just passive listening: "They must read, write, discuss, or be engaged in solving problems. Most important, to be actively involved, students must engage in such higher-order thinking tasks as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation" ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref8">2</reflink>], 2). A variety of techniques and strategies fall within active learning: guided lectures, in-class writing, case-study methods, discussion and debate, role-playing, games, and simulations (Bonwell and Eison [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref9">2</reflink>]).</p> <p>We utilize discussion and debate as our active-learning techniques and seek to internationalize them by engaging in "discussions across borders." Hence, our aim is not simply to introduce international content into our courses but to, in Lovett's words quoted above, make it possible for students "to explore alternative interpretations of events and trends" (Lovett [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref10">5</reflink>], A40) by conversing online with students from another country. Specifically, we intend for our internationalized discussions to enable students (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref11">1</reflink>) to engage with and experience other cultures, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref12">2</reflink>) to understand and identify differing cultural perspectives on course topics (such as power and globalization), (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref13">3</reflink>) to gain a new perspective on their own cultural and personal viewpoints, (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref14">4</reflink>) to practice communicating online about potentially sensitive topics with strangers from another country, including producing engaging, clearly written comments, and (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref15">5</reflink>) to gain and demonstrate substantive knowledge about course concepts. We consider these educational objectives important both educationally and for our students' preparation for eventual careers. These objectives are conveyed to the students at both universities in writing and during in-class explanations of the activity.</p> <p>The discussions between students at the University of North Florida and the University of Muenster are designed and carried out with these educational objectives in mind. We believe the first four goals are general enough that they could apply to many courses, even outside political science — really, any course in which students engage in discussion and another perspective could be valued. Certainly within the field of political science, such discussions across borders would be useful in a variety of comparative politics and international relations courses. Course- and content-specific goals can then be added, as we did with our fifth objective.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-3">Design and Process</hd> <p>Internationalizing course discussions requires a fair amount of planning and active management during the discussions. We found the following steps necessary for effective cross-border discussions.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-4">Making Connections With Other Universities</hd> <p>In our case, the American professor and German professor attended graduate school together and stayed in contact. However, there are numerous ways faculty can make contacts with foreign universities if they believe internationalizing course discussions would be useful in their courses. The annual conferences for professional associations such as the International Studies Association and the Association of Third World Studies provide opportunities for American faculty to meet colleagues from other countries. In addition to meeting potential partners through conference workshops, discussions, and social events, one could examine the programs for panels related to course topics or on pedagogy and approach presenters from other countries whose work is relevant. American faculty can also enroll the assistance of their study abroad or international education offices, whose staff would already have contacts at the international universities with which the American university has exchange or partnership agreements. Particularly when those universities abroad offer some or all of their education in English, study abroad staff could help faculty make contacts. Academic discussion groups, blogs, and other online fora could also offer American faculty a way to contact faculty from other countries.</p> <p>While we focused on international relations courses and allowing students from different countries to interact, this activity could also serve American government courses. Faculty from different states and regions of the United States could partner to allow their students to discuss key U.S. policy issues and to learn how geographical location, economic status, regional variations in culture, and other factors influence Americans' views of policy. During election years, especially, such discussions could be useful for courses on campaigns and elections as well as the presidency and Congress. Likewise, international cooperation on American government courses could prove fascinating; combining a view from the inside with a view from abroad would challenge both American and international students to better understand and to reflect upon American politics and policy. While American government seminars are not taught as frequently in other countries as international relations (IR) courses, they do exist.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-5">Considering the Language Barrier</hd> <p>The University of Muenster offers upper division international relations courses in English, also making this an easy connection for us. Many other foreign universities do as well, and, of course, Americans in advanced language courses could seek out discussion partners whose courses are offered in that particular language.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-6">Matching Compatible Courses</hd> <p>Compatible course levels, topics, and size are necessary for effective discussions. Students get frustrated in discussions with un- or underprepared partners, so it is important to match course levels: upper division courses in one country with upper division courses in the other. Course topics must also be closely related in order to allow for common knowledge for successful online discussions and related writing assignments, which, in turn, rely upon common readings. Moreover, a close match in course topics makes it easier to reference the content of the online discussions in class sessions and vice versa. In 2008, our discussions across borders focused on the concept of power in global politics, although the American students studied Germany's power in the world today while the Germans studied corporate power. In 2009, both groups studied globalization as the course topic.</p> <p>Courses must also be compatible with regard to class size. In 2008, many of the German students dropped their course — they were unused to required course activities throughout the week and dropped rather than risk their grades. Roughly 30 American students were left to discuss with only about five German students who posted regularly. The unbalanced number of participants became a problem for American and German students alike, with the University of North Florida students becoming frustrated by the weak German participation and the University of Muenster students overwhelmed by the volume of American postings. A more equal number of course participants during 2009 eliminated those complaints. The American course enrollment dropped from 2008 to 2009 because an ongoing backlog of students in the required course was eliminated. At the same time, the German course enrollment increased due to the enrollment of a larger number of students into the program of study.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-7">Fixing a Schedule</hd> <p>Different academic year calendars are a challenge that must be taken into consideration. In our case, the University of North Florida fall semester runs from mid-August until early December, while the University of Muenster semester runs from mid-October until early February. Therefore, we plan four weeks of mutually convenient discussions. Other issues related to scheduling include how long each graded discussion continues and ensuring students post regularly throughout the week.[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref16">2</reflink>] We have, thus far, utilized asynchronous communications due to the time difference, but our students are encouraging us to introduce live chats and/or Web cam capabilities.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-8">Technology</hd> <p>There are a number of communication technology tools at all price ranges that make cross-border discussions possible, both propriety products such as Blackboard, Elluminate Live!, or open source products such as Moodle. Private blogs and wiki tools are other means through which such cross-border discussions could be held. We utilized the Blackboard distance-learning platform. The German faculty and students are enrolled in the UNF Blackboard course as external users, and all discussions are held through Blackboard Discussion Forums. This worked well for us overall, though many students have been frustrated with how threads are displayed within Blackboard.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-9">Coordinating Assignments</hd> <p>We coordinate on three types of assignments: readings, the discussions themselves, and reflective essays. Our decision to coordinate readings resulted from the desire to create a common conceptual language for all students. For example, in 2008 students at both universities read Joseph Nye's <emph>The Paradox of American Power: Why the World's Only Superpower Can't Go it Alone</emph>. Coordinating readings has had mixed results. The American professor requires her students to tie discussion posts directly to readings to encourage students to stick to the topic and to promote a higher level of intellectual engagement. The German students, however, do not appreciate these constant references to the text, as they feel the American students are too tied to the textbook and not engaging in meaningful discussions of their own thoughts.</p> <p>The discussions themselves were graded assignments for both sets of students in 2008, but thereafter changes to the nationwide grading system in Germany meant the German professor could require but not grade the discussions. Of our four weeks of discussions, the first week is required but devoted to ungraded discussions around a set of "icebreaker" questions, both to give the faculty a chance to make sure the technology is in order and the students a chance to get to know one another before engaging in grade-earning, academic discussions.</p> <p>The icebreaker forum and a separate forum for "nonacademic" discussions (such as movies and music) remain open throughout. The icebreaker forum included "have you ever" and "can you" questions: Have you ever been skydiving? Have you ever cooked a meal for more than 20 people? Have you ever been without a shower for more than two weeks? Can you speak more than three languages? Have you ever sung karaoke? Have you ever been rock-climbing? Have you had a relative live to over 100? (Neill [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref17">7</reflink>]). Students could pick which questions they answered. They were encouraged to tell stories associated with their answers, offering them the opportunity to get to know each other's interests, hobbies, families, goals, and aversions. For example, some students already spoke more than three languages and wrote about those they spoke, while other students answered "no" to the question but explained that they would like to learn more languages. The questions about rock-climbing got answers of "yes" with descriptions of where as well as answers of "No way! I am afraid of heights." Often, students used the stories told in the icebreaker forum to find partners with whom they started threads in the "nonacademic" forum.</p> <p>For the next two weeks of academic discussions, faculty post discussion questions centered on course topics and common readings. The questions vary from year to year as the course topics change. For example, in 2008 we posted for discussion the first week: "Applying Nye's concepts of hard and soft power, assess Germany's power in the world today. Please consider: sources of power, uses of power, and potential future changes in power (if any)." Students could, and did, create new discussion threads, such as "Can Germany overcome its past?" and "Will Germany's power become 'Europeanized'?" During the final week, we generally ask a question that brings the previous weeks' discussions to a meaningful conclusion.</p> <p>We also coordinate on a writing assignment: Students at both universities write reflective essays, following the discussions, in which they compare and contrast the contributions of their own and the other university's students to discussions. These reflective essays are designed to assess the educational objectives, particularly the goals of understanding others' perspectives and of gaining a new perspective on one's own country as a result. We discuss the results of these essays below.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-10">Managing Discussions</hd> <p>Each year, over the course of four weeks of discussion, the two sets of students together make over 400 posts on Blackboard discussion forums. As faculty, we post initial questions and, as noted above, allow students to create new threads of discussion. Although we have decided to stay out of the discussions themselves to encourage independence and openness among the students,[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref18">3</reflink>] we face a considerable daily time commitment in staying aware of how the discussions are progressing. Given that one of the educational objectives is to enable students to engage with and experience other cultures, we seek to ensure that no major "culture clashes" occur and to monitor for culturally insensitive posts; neither have been a problem to date. Both faculty comment in class sessions upon the progress of discussions, provide examples of effective posts and provide, via e-mail, comments to individual students when posts are especially effective, ineffective, or border upon culturally insensitive.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-11">Achievement of Educational Objectives and Student Feedback</hd> <p>While assessment also relates to design and process, we feel that this is such a major point that we are discussing it separately, focusing on two specific topics with regard to assessment: student achievement of educational objectives and student evaluations of the process and design of "discussions across borders."</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-12">Student Achievement of Educational Objectives</hd> <p>We assess student achievement of educational objectives through the discussions themselves and the writing assignment, measuring both against criterion-based rubrics. The discussions themselves primarily focus on Educational Objectives #1 to engage and experience other cultures, #4 to communicate sensitively and clearly online, and #5 to acquire and demonstrate substantive knowledge about course concepts. On the University of North Florida side, the most commonly earned student grade — based upon rubric criteria — is B+ or B−. Student posts generally demonstrate knowledge of the assigned readings and other students' posts, engage the perspectives of the Germans (through questions and the search for common ground) and demonstrate understanding of course concepts. As faculty, we are also especially pleased with students' efforts to incorporate outside research and knowledge into the discussions.</p> <p>In 2008, the University of North Florida course had far more students active in the discussion than the University of Muenster course, and it was harder for University of North Florida students to meaningfully engage online with German students than other American students, so student achievement of Educational Objective #1 was perhaps spotty: Some American students worked harder to engage the few German contributors than others. In the second year, however, the number of contributions from each side was more equal and students were able to engage with and experience other cultures through the discussions.</p> <p>On the German side, for which posts can no longer be graded, some students participate frequently in the online discussions with substantively excellent posts while others show an average performance, and others again barely participate. Student posts generally demonstrate knowledge of the assigned readings and other students' posts, engage the perspectives of the other side and demonstrate understanding of power, globalization, and other course concepts. As the German students also had plenty of opportunities to engage online with University of North Florida students, all educational objectives of the online discussions were achieved.</p> <p>We assign students a reflective essay because, in active learning, "experiential learning frequently occurs after, rather than during, an exercise" (Lantis, Kuzma, and Boehrer [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref19">4</reflink>], 4). While both sets of students have some in-class opportunities to talk about the progress of discussions, the writing assignment is the main opportunity for students to reflect upon the entire activity and to draw conclusions about the three weeks of substantive discussion. The assignment requires students to compare and contrast the contributions made by the University of North Florida and University of Muenster students and is intended to assess primarily Educational Objectives #2, #3, and #5 (understanding differing cultural perspectives, understanding anew one's own cultural and personal perspectives, and understanding course concepts).</p> <p>The University of North Florida students' essays demonstrate that most students achieve the objective of understanding differing cultural perspectives (#2). In 2008, student comparisons in the University of North Florida essays focused on differing national opinions of power, how different histories led to individual opinions, and the value of hearing from the German students, rather than just reading about German perspectives in textbooks. Given that the American course included content on Germany, the University of North Florida students found value in having discussions with people native to that culture and country. American students were somewhat surprised but also educated by the apparent discomfort of the Germans in discussing Germany's power. Many University of North Florida students were surprised by the similarities in opinions between the Germans and Americans — just as they were surprised by dissension among the Germans themselves. They recognized that opinions were individual and could not be stereotyped by culture/nationality alone. For example, in both 2008 and 2009, University of North Florida students concluded that University of Muenster students' opinions were not necessarily significantly different from their own, but rather all students' opinions were formed by factors such as life experience and access to information along with culture. The students from both groups learned that there was no uniform "American" or "German" view due to the variety of individual experiences affecting one's perspective.</p> <p>The University of North Florida student essays demonstrate that they achieved Objective #3, gaining a new perspective on one's own viewpoints, though perhaps to a lesser extent. In 2008, this was in part due to the lack of activity by the Germans in the discussions but also to resistance or close-mindedness on the part of some American students. In the final week's discussions of information technology — including that used by Barack Obama in the 2008 Presidential campaign — typically conservative Jacksonville, Florida students did not all appreciate the perceived "left of center" opinions of the Germans on the American presidential election.</p> <p>Finally, the University of North Florida essays reflected a solid understanding of Objective #5 regarding course concepts. All their reflective essays engaged the textbooks and demonstrated understanding of the concepts as they compared the two groups' contributions to discussion on the assigned topics. In 2009, many American students noted the value of the discussions as a form of globalization while in a course about globalization.</p> <p>The University of Muenster students' essays show that the participating students achieved the objective of understanding differing cultural perspectives, as well (#2). In 2008, the German students noticed that cultural differences were especially strong and visible when the discussions were about questions of national history and identity. Reflecting on the discussion on Germany's power, most students recognized cultural differences between German and American participants speaking about their own country. Thus, they reported, they learned that perceptions of self and others are embedded in different cultural beliefs and values. The discussion showed them that concepts such as "pride" have to be placed into national and cultural contexts. German students noted being startled by the Americans' surprise that not all countries are as openly patriotic as the United States. As the Germans grasped these differences between the respective cultural identities, an interesting discussion evolved on the mutual perception and validation of their own nation and those of their fellow students abroad.</p> <p>Differing cultural perceptions were highlighted in 2009 when University of Muenster students observed that University of North Florida students frequently linked the issue of a globalizing world with the spread of "Western values" and "U.S. hegemony." University of Muenster students identified different cultural perspectives to explain that the U.S. students did not perceive China as a serious competitor to U.S. hegemony. In this case, the German students did feel that the American students lived up to what they labeled as national stereotypes about the U.S. self-image. In the discussions and their essays, German students were more likely to question the universality of apparently "global values" and the possibility of a global civil society while Americans tended to be less able to remove themselves from the typical American view of "global culture."</p> <p>During the 2008 discussions on German power, University of Muenster students reflected in their essays about how their country was perceived by the University of North Florida students, but their essays also show that the German students gained a new perspective on their own cultural viewpoints as they were confronted with a foreign perception of themselves — with how Germany was viewed by outsiders. Thus, Educational Objective #3 was achieved. With regard to Objective #4, German students noticed how difficult it is to communicate their understanding of theoretical concepts like power, identity, or globalization to outsiders. German students realized the importance of cultural and personal viewpoints in the discussions on the implications of free trade and the possibility of a global civil society. On the anonymous evaluation sheet, one University of Muenster student commented that "discovering that stereotypes exist for a reason" was the best part of the discussions.</p> <p>The University of Muenster essays did reflect a solid achievement of Objective #5, as well. Students engaged the literature and demonstrated a critical understanding of the concepts as they compared the different theoretical notions of power and globalization and their applications in the discussions. In 2008, most German students focused in their reflective essays on Joseph Nye's concepts of hard and soft power. Other students reflected on the shortcomings of Nye's concept of power vis-à-vis other concepts that were discussed in class. In 2009, most German students did not engage the literature as much but rather reflected critically on the shortcoming that a too narrow theoretical background might prevent a meaningful discussion from occurring in the first place. All students from the University of Muenster voiced their criticism about the University of North Florida students' heavy reliance on the common reading assignments. However, some essays reflected on the importance of a sound theoretical foundation and precise definitions of core concepts — a much welcomed but rather surprising outcome for international course discussions.</p> <p>Overall, the students in both countries were surprised to discover that the other groups' views were not as different from their own as they expected, especially when the opinions of one country's students did not fit the preconceived stereotypes of the other. In their 2009 essays, many German students expressed their surprise to find their University of North Florida fellows to be rather close to their own point of view when the discussion moved towards global environmental governance, because they expected Americans to be less supportive of efforts to protect the global environment. Thus, many German students realized that their University of North Florida counterparts did not fit into their stereotypes as the latter demanded a stronger environmental commitment from the U.S. government as well.</p> <p>Students therefore had opportunities to achieve the objectives of understanding differing cultural perspectives and understanding anew their own culture's perspectives and to learn that sometimes those perspectives are more similar than expected. Some students accepted the lesson that people can be as much the same as different the world over. Others went a step further by questioning whether those similarities resulted from their commonalities: both groups being university students or coming from economically developed countries. Hence, many German students suggested collaborating with universities from non-Western countries in future discussions across borders.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-13">Student Evaluation of Cross-Border Discussion Design, Process, and Success</hd> <p>The students' evaluations on both sides showed some common points but also a few interesting differences. Table 1 summarizes the distribution of responses found on the Student Feedback Form (see Appendix 1). The anonymous University of North Florida student evaluations showed, on the whole, that students found the discussions across borders to be an effective learning experience that met the stated objectives. Across both years reported here, 45% of University of North Florida students strongly agreed and a total of 73% strongly or somewhat agreed that "discussions with students from a foreign university exposed me to cultural differences." Fifty-five percent strongly agreed that "discussions with students from a foreign university exposed me to differences in attitudes." Roughly two thirds of the University of North Florida students had already undertaken some form of study abroad experience, and 60% strongly or somewhat agreed that "if students can't study abroad, discussions such as this would serve as a useful tool to expose them to different cultures and attitudes." It is worth noting, however, that those students who disagreed (30%) did so quite strongly and noted that the two activities should not be considered comparable.</p> <p>Table 1. Student feedback</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>University of North Florida student evaluations</td><td>Common perspectives</td><td>University of Muenster student evaluations</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Effective learning experience</td></tr><tr><td>Include another country, specifically a lesser developed country</td></tr><tr><td>Limitations of technology</td></tr><tr><td>Frustration with asymmetries in participation (2008)</td></tr><tr><td>Intercultural sharing of ideas is "best part" of the activity</td></tr><tr><td>Different levels of preparation and background knowledge for discussions</td></tr><tr><td>Difficulty remembering to join the discussions</td></tr><tr><td>Suggest introducing live chats or a video-conferencing/Web-cam component</td></tr><tr><td>Frustration with posts that added little to the discussions</td></tr><tr><td>Dissatisfaction with one-week time limits for discussions</td><td /><td>Desire to have time off between weeks of discussion</td></tr><tr><td>Number of points attached to the assignments</td><td /><td>Comparative essay helped significantly in reflecting on the experience</td></tr><tr><td>Pleased to have been included in an experiment to improve teaching and learning at their university</td><td /><td>Americans gave stereotypical opinions</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Due to the small number of German students participating through all discussion rounds and completing the anonymous student evaluations on the German side, the evaluations cannot be considered statistically representative. Nonetheless, the University of Muenster student evaluations[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref20">4</reflink>] showed that, across both years reported here, students on average agreed that the discussions across borders exposed them to cultural differences as well as differences in attitudes. In general, the German students experienced the online discussions with the University of North Florida students as a means to engage with and effectively experience another culture. What is more, almost all of the University of Muenster students saw the discussions as a useful tool to expose students who cannot study abroad to different cultures and attitudes. Similar to the situation at University of North Florida, however, the one German student disagreeing with this proposition did so very strongly. In general, however, both groups of students almost unanimously identified the exposure to intercultural exchange provided by the online discussions as "the best part of the discussions."</p> <p>The evaluations of both groups of students also indicated a slight problem resulting from the different levels of preparation for the online discussions. University of North Florida students were somewhat dissatisfied with how well course readings and class activities prepared them for the online discussions. On the German side, there was a tendency among the students to judge the quality of their classmates' statements higher than that of the University of North Florida students' contributions (while also being critical of the sophistication of some of their own classmates' postings). Interestingly, both groups of students reported difficulty remembering to join the discussions — that there was a required online component to an on-campus course. Particularly in the German case, this turned out to be a real problem as students are used to seminars meeting only once a week with no activities except readings in between meetings. Furthermore, both sets of students also noted that they were critical of the quality of some of the postings. Specifically, there was substantial frustration over classmates' messages that said little more, substantively, than "I agree."</p> <p>The aspects of time management that caused student dissatisfaction were different. University of North Florida students reported frustration with the one-week time limits for discussions, as they felt faculty cut off discussions just when they were getting to the most interesting points. University of Muenster students, however, felt overwhelmed by the overall volume of online discussions in the limited time. They would have preferred to have the three discussions spaced a bit more apart from each other, with downtime in between each required discussion.</p> <p>Finally, some comments and criticisms were raised only by one or the other groups of students. Students at University of North Florida quibbled with the points value attached to the graded online discussions and suggested introducing a video-conferencing or other Web-cam component. Despite their many criticisms (mostly constructive), the University of North Florida students indicated that they were pleased to have been included in an attempt to improve teaching and learning at their university. German students, in turn, suggested live chats and highlighted the value of the comparative essay in helping them reflect on the online discussions.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-14">Conclusion</hd> <p>The difference that culture makes — especially its impact on differing interpretations of academic subjects and concepts — is hard to learn from a textbook. Exposing students to other cultures via active learning across borders proves in our case to be an effective way to let students in the United States and Germany experience other cultures, understand global issues from others' perspectives and gain new perspectives on their own perception of international relations and politics. As noted above, we find the discussions successfully achieve the defined learning outcomes, and we are especially pleased that both sets of students clearly achieved intercultural learning and generally gain a new perspective on their own culture and attitudes.</p> <p>We continue to learn and adjust the discussions, so as to improve the students' experience. We have taken student comments into account, adjusting where necessary and possible to improve the experience for all of our students within our original design. We also look forward to expanding our original design by finding opportunities to engage universities from other regions and/or incorporating live chats or Web-conferencing capabilities. At the same time, we continuously seek to refine student evaluations and assessments in order to receive more precise feedback from the students about the success of the learning outcomes.</p> <p>Challenges remain. We continue to seek ways to respond to student criticisms regarding the scheduling and length of discussion but are limited by the differing academic calendars. Each year, we discover new cultural and administrative differences between the two educational systems, which can complicate the extent to which we can coordinate assignments and requirements. We continually rediscover the universal desire to promote a higher academic level of discussion among our students. We wish to better assess the "value added" in terms of actual content learned or engaged through the discussions across borders. Future research on this topic could inquire into the extent to which learning outcomes of those students who have already travelled abroad and those who have not differ. Moreover, it would be interesting to compare evaluations of learning outcomes from a class with discussions across borders to those of one without, so as to get a better sense of the extent to which such an activity enhances political science learning.</p> <p>Challenges aside, technology and creativity can allow faculty to provide students — many of whom may never have the chance to study abroad — with internationalized educational experiences that go well beyond simply introducing international content into courses.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-15">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>We thank Erin Soles and Deb Miller of the University of North Florida for their technical assistance. We thank Darren Wheeler of Ball State University for sharing his instructions and rubric for online discussions, which we adapted for our own use. We also thank anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.</p> <hd id="AN0091809517-16">Notes</hd> <ref id="AN0091809517-17"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref3" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Our categories here are an adaptation of the "design components" utilized in Lantis, Kuzma, and Boehrer's <emph>The New International Studies Classroom: Active Teaching, Active Learning</emph> ([4]).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref7" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> We have limited our discussions to one week each, but students sometimes feel they are really getting interesting as they end. Moreover, German students often post early in the week while American students procrastinate until later in the week, frustrating the Germans.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref4" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> In the first year, the German students expressed a desire for faculty involvement, whereas the American students were equally divided among those who wanted faculty to join the discussions and those who did not. Later, the American students were universally against faculty involvement in discussions, and the Germans were split among those who believed "it is more lively when only involving students" and those who wished for more guidance or thought faculty involvement would enhance quality.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref14" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> University of Muenster student evaluations total <emph>N</emph> = 16 where <emph>n</emph> = 5 in 2008 and <emph>n</emph> = 11 in 2009.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0091809517-18"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Barber, Benjamin, MarkCassell, IsisLeslie, DeborahWard, StevenLamy, PamelaMartin, and ChristineIngebritsen. 2007. "Internationalizing the Undergraduate Curriculum."PS: Political Science & Politics40(January): 105–120.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bonwell, Charles C. and James A.Eison. 1991. Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. Washington, DC: George Washington University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jones, Rebecca.2008. "Evaluating a Cross-Continent EU Simulation."Journal of Political Science Education4(4): 404–434.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lantis, Jeffrey, LynnKuzma, and JohnBoehrer, eds. 2000. The New International Studies Classroom: Active Teaching, Active Learning. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref1" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Lovett, Clara.2008. "We Need a New Model of Global Education."Chronicle of Higher Education54(April): A40.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref5" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Martin, Pamela.2007. "Global Videoconferencing as a Tool for Internationalizing Our Classrooms."PS: Political Science & Politics40(January): 116–117.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref17" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Neill, James.2005. "Have You Ever? Description of An Icebreaker and Get-to-know-you Activity." <<ulink href="http://www.wilderdom.com/games/descriptions/HaveYouEver.html">http://www.wilderdom.com/games/descriptions/HaveYouEver.html</ulink>>. (January 26, 2012).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Nye, Joseph.2002. The Paradox of American Power: Why the World's Only Superpower Can't Go It Alone. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By PamelaA. Zeiser; Doris Fuchs and Stephan Engelkamp</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1024133
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Discussions across Borders: A German-American Partnership
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Zeiser%2C+Pamela+A%2E%22">Zeiser, Pamela A.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Fuchs%2C+Doris%22">Fuchs, Doris</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Engelkamp%2C+Stephan%22">Engelkamp, Stephan</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Political+Science+Education%22"><i>Journal of Political Science Education</i></searchLink>. 2013 9(4):474.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 13
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2013
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Partnerships+in+Education%22">Partnerships in Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Political+Science%22">Political Science</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Global+Education%22">Global Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22International+Educational+Exchange%22">International Educational Exchange</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Mediated+Communication%22">Computer Mediated Communication</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Practices%22">Educational Practices</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Active+Learning%22">Active Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Technology+Uses+in+Education%22">Technology Uses in Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Objectives%22">Educational Objectives</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scheduling%22">Scheduling</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Assignments%22">Assignments</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Group+Discussion%22">Group Discussion</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Feedback+%28Response%29%22">Feedback (Response)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Achievement%22">Academic Achievement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Evaluation%22">Student Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Participant+Satisfaction%22">Participant Satisfaction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cultural+Differences%22">Cultural Differences</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Florida%22">Florida</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Germany%22">Germany</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/15512169.2013.835574
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1551-2169
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This article reports on our experiences in a German-American partnership in internationalizing the curriculum. In a globalized world, engaging other cultures and identities as well as understanding global issues and events from other perspectives are important qualifications that allow students to gain different insights in political science. Yet, not all students have the opportunity to study abroad to achieve these goals. Today's technology, however, offers effective methods and techniques for internationalizing the curriculum and requiring students to think beyond their own national borders. Our "discussions across borders" show how communication technology can be utilized to create opportunities for international exchanges with students at a university in another country. Beginning in 2008, students at the University of North Florida and University of Muenster engaged in joint online discussions on international issues. Based upon the achievement of educational objectives, we consider these online discussions an effective way to increase student awareness of other cultures and perspectives as well as substantive course content. As such discussions could be replicated at other institutions, this article presents the educational objectives for, design and process of, assessment of, and challenges in carrying out discussions across borders.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 8
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2014
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1024133
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1024133
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/15512169.2013.835574
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 13
        StartPage: 474
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Partnerships in Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Political Science
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Global Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: International Educational Exchange
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Mediated Communication
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Practices
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Active Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Technology Uses in Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Objectives
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scheduling
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Assignments
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Group Discussion
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Feedback (Response)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Achievement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Participant Satisfaction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cultural Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Florida
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Germany
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Discussions across Borders: A German-American Partnership
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Zeiser, Pamela A.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Fuchs, Doris
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Engelkamp, Stephan
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2013
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1551-2169
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 9
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Political Science Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1