Point: Counterpoint
Multi-Country Study Abroad Programs
Responding to the Truths and Realities of Education Abroad
By JoAnn Wallace
Truth: Full immersion is clearly the best way to learn a language and adapt to a culture. This means being, for the most part, away from people of your own culture. It means living and studying (and eating and bathing and relieving oneself) just as the natives do.
Reality #1: Most abroad programs touted as full immersion aren’t. Students may attend classes at a university, but the classes are often designed especially for foreigners. Students may live in dormitories or student housing, but more often than not all the Americans are housed together; if not, they find each other and hang out together. Our program (Antioch Education Abroad) in Tubingen, Germany works well because we include a minimum of nine weeks of language preparation and university orientation. The director places students individually in dorms with German students and they are discouraged from spending time with Americans--except for group meetings where cultural problems are worked through. Students are expected to attend regular classes, but some accommodation is still made because U.S. students require grades for each course and German students take comprehensive exams only periodically.
Reality #2:. Successful long-term host family experiences are the exception unless the families have already made some adjustments to foreigners or are absolutely dedicated to turning students with wildly romantic ideas of the host culture into sensitive participants in the actual life in their country.
Reality #3: Rare is the U.S. student who has enough knowledge of another language to truly be immersed without someone to structure the experience for them--this structure can help them make the language transition and learn how to behave appropriately in the culture.
An example of a language immersion program we use is La Sabranenque. It is in a remote village, it limits the numbers of students, it requires them to participate in service projects, and it absolutely forbids the use of any language other than French. Students may not have books, magazines, or music tapes unless they are in French. This program works.
Reality #4: Financial concerns are limiting students to only one semester abroad. Academic semester calendars do not match, so students in direct-entry programs must select parts of year-long classes or “special” classes for foreigners.
Truth: Almost all institutions talk about wanting students to have international or at least multi-cultural experiences (whatever that means).
Reality #1: If we really want to increase the number of students who have international experiences, it is unrealistic to think that all will gain enough language proficiency at home to be able to jump into a university abroad.
Reality #2: Traditional language teaching in U.S. institutions does not prepare students to function in the language and culture of another country.
Reality #3: Many U.S. students study no language or do so for only one or two semesters.
Reality #4: Disciplines other than language studies also like to give their students the opportunity to get another perspective on their subject matter, to learn to do field research, and to see places, issues, and events first hand.
|
Multi-Country Programs
Given these realities about immersion, are multi-site or multi-country programs reasonable alternatives?
They are if:
- They have a central disciplinary focus.
- They require extensive pre-departure reading--and usually some writing--but do not require proficiency in a language.
- They provide traditional and immersion language instruction where appropriate.
- The provide knowledgeable leaders who model appropriate behavior in the culture.
- They use native informants (faculty and practitioners) for the major part of the teaching. Non-native leaders provide synthesis and comparative analysis.
- They provide a comparative perspective and experience with structured and non-structured observational research.
- They give students the opportunity to encounter each culture from a variety of perspectives: academic, professional, domestic, and yes, that of a tourist.
- They offer (at least) short-term homestays that whet the appetite for longer immersion.
- They often serve as a starting point for more extensive research (senior projects, theses).
- They provide an opportunity overseas for students who do not have language facility.
- They provide a transition to international experience that begins with the security of a group and ends with independent involvement in the culture.
- They are highly rated by students: “Hardest,” “Best experience of my academic career,” etc. (See write-ups in The Student’s Guide to the Best Study Abroad Programs by Tannen and Winkler, Pocket Books, 1996.)
They are not if:
- They skim over the top of several subjects.
- They use tourist-focused informants.
- They accommodate American tastes; students don’t really experience the daily living conditions--food, transportation, etc.--as natives do.
- The teaching is all done by an outsider--with little attention to how the subject is seen or taught in the country.
- Contact with culture bearers is limited to service personnel: tour guides, bus drivers, waiters, hotel staff.
- They have lower academic performance expectations.
- They believe that just “being there” is enough to receive credit.
- They reinforce U.S. stereotypes about the countries visited and hosts’ stereotypes about Ugly Americans.
- They are simply vehicles for a faculty member to get a free trip with a certain number of participants.
- They take anyone who is warm and breathing.
J.W.
|
JOANN WALLACE is the Director of Antioch Education Abroad, Antioch College.
|
