Collaborative Micro Courses – Globalizing the Curriculum Amy Burkert, Vice Provost for Education – Carnegie Mellon University Veronica Dristas, Director of Outreach – University of Pittsburgh Global Studies Center

Challenge: How can we educate all of our students to become informed, engaged, socially responsible, global professionals and citizens prepared to meet the needs of tomorrow’s world?

Traditional Approaches to Globalization General education requirements fulfilled by a full semester course Often limited in focus, early in curriculum, seen as a box to check, difficult to fit into intensive major curricula, faculty expertise in limited dimensions, limited exposure to contemporary issues and technical context Study Abroad for a semester or year Not accessible to all students, some majors more constrained due to curricula and research cadence, not all global experiences are global learning Living and learning communities with diverse students, staff, and faculty participants Difficult to scale and assure consistent participant engagement and impact

Collaborative Micro Courses - “Country Today” Initiative An innovative, weekend immersion, micro course model Capitalizes on faculty expertise both locally and globally Accessible to all students from diverse majors and experiences Partnership across divisions, institutions and communities Engages students in exploration, discussion, reflection and research Impact extends to additional global coursework and in-depth experiences

An innovative, weekend immersion, micro course model A community of diverse “students” learn together throughout the weekend Typical schedule is: Friday, 5:00-9:00pm; Saturday, 8:30am- 6:00pm; and Sunday, 9:00am-1:15pm Can be for academic credit (1CR), course audit, continuing education credit, personal enrichment Assessments include: pre and post testing, pre-read materials provided by course and library faculty, written reflections and discussion after each session, and research paper on course topic

Capitalizes on faculty expertise both locally and globally For the BRIC courses we have had Arvind Panagria

Accessible to all students from diverse majors and experiences Country Today initiative has been ongoing for 7 years with 1-2 micro courses per semester Students from all colleges and majors, both UG and GR Course learners have included over 2000

Partnership across divisions, institutions, and communities Capitalizes on the resources and expertise of two RC universities - Pitt and CMU Involves academic units ranging from Engineering to History to Business Bridges Academic and Student Affairs in micro course development and implementation Engages key constituents and regional partners including alumni, trustees, corporate partners, K-12 educators

Engages “students” in exploration, discussion, reflection & research

Impact extends to additional global coursework & experiences

Lessons Learned Constant iterative improvement needed Core faculty engagement is essential Active versus passive learning Applicable to other core competency areas such as environmental and entrepreneurial themes Helps us think about curricula in new dimensions; leverages resources Complements and can be a gateway to deeper study and experience

Anecdotal Evidence “I would like to thank you for the amazing day of lectures yesterday and the accompanying materials. I gained a great amount of knowledge on Central Asia from the go-to experts on the region.” “I really appreciate all your efforts to bring together such a wonderful weekend. Mike's presentation was well worth an early Sunday morning. I wish my students could have seen that! It would have blown their minds and would have reinforced what I always tell them about these contested narratives.”

Outcomes for Today Courses Survey- All student participants were asked to complete a pre- and the post- surveys online. In Part I (Quantitative), respondents were asked to rate from 1 (“extremely comfortable”) to 5 (“extremely uncomfortable”) their level of confidence relative to 16 questions deemed central to the mini- course goals. In Part II (Qualitative), respondents were asked to list 5 things that come to mind for each of the 4 questions deemed important for the mini-course goals. .All students were incentivized to complete the survey by offering 2 points upon completion of each survey. Students could receive up to 4 points added to their total grade. The questions were designed in consultation with the instructors for the course, and they varied in complexity as follows: questions 1-5 (general knowledge), questions 6-10 (intermediate), and questions 11-16 (complex). This portion of the survey was meant to complement the quantitative part, since respondents had to produce their own answers instead of simply “checking a box.” The advantage of this method is that it requires respondents to substantiate the claims made in the previous section, therefore reducing the effect of “score inflation” that often affects quantitative self-assessments. While harder to analyze, as it requires extensive coding, the qualitative evaluation offers a different perspective on the cultural understanding accumulated in the process of attending these mini-courses, especially by revealing participants’ assumptions.

Perspective questions that were qualitative in nature: From you point of view, list five things that come to mind about X, now from a “Chinese” point of view. For the students point of view five important social issues and then from the X country point of view The graph above illustrates that for complex-level questions, participants either gained significant knowledge (+2) or slightly lost some knowledge (-1) or (-2).