 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
Institute of
International Education
809 United Nations Plaza
7th Floor
New York, NY 10017
USA
Tel: +1 (212) 984 5367
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Communications and Team-Building in a Bilateral University Partnership |
|
|
|
|
|
By John E. Bonine
I. Background: University Partnerships
The idea of university partnerships has captured the interest of professors and funders worldwide. For example, University Partnerships in Cooperation and Development (UPCD), funded by the Canadian International Development Agency, promotes partnerships with institutions in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. The European Union’s ASEAN-EU University Network Programme promotes university partnerships between ASEAN and EU higher education, while the EU’s Asia Link takes in other parts of Asia as well.
For universities and colleges in the United States of America, the primary funder of university partnerships has been the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA, formerly the U.S. Information Agency) of the U.S. State Department. The Bureau also funds programs for business and professional leaders, individual scholars, and students. My focus here is on institutional linkages at the post-secondary (university) level.
The ECA programs have helped establish university partnerships throughout the world. The program has involved approximately 700 university partnerships over a 20-year period. The program in the states of the former Soviet Union has funded 181 university partnerships. Fully one-fourth of those were in Ukraine. The predominant fields for the 41 partnerships with Ukraine universities have been programs connected in some way with business (about 15), government and public administration (8), education (8), and law (6).
Goals of university partnerships include strengthened teaching, research, administrative, and public service capacity; reform of educational programs and teaching; collaborative research; and outreach beyond the university itself. A primary component of all university partnerships is exchanges of faculty members in both directions. In addition, partnerships have included publication of books, specialized trainings, team-teaching, and numerous other techniques. A key task of the partnerships is to help universities play a strong role in building democracy, free markets, and the rule of law.
II. Excitement over Success in a Partnership
The Oregon-Lviv University Partnership between the University of Oregon and its Ukrainian partners was funded during seven years. The level of growing excitement became obvious from comments by its participants, many of whom identified new skills in the use of technology as fundamental to their accomplishments. They used, and still are using, these skills to create broaden opportunities for others, from students and teachers throughout Ukraine to professional colleagues at meetings in such places as the USA, Canada, Hungary, the Netherlands, United Kingdom.
Halyna Kaluzhna has summarized her experiences this way: “participating in the Partnership [discussion] lists and attending the on-line course opened a new world for me.” She singled out the e-discussions for particular mention:
Participation in the Partnership lists brought the feeling of involvement. I remember reading Svetlana Markelova's messages when she went to Oregon three years ago and writing my own accounts of what I had learnt and seen when I was in Eugene myself. These were various things: describing the classes I visited and the places I saw, like Chinese and Japanese garden in Portland. I also remember how we shared our impressions about TESOL in Baltimore, writing "continuation" stories again and again. Feeling that you are a member of a bigger family, that there are things you want your friends from both sides of the ocean know was a new feeling for me.
Ms. Kaluzhna was invited to give a scholarly presentation in the United States about her work. She commented:
When I was presenting at TESOL Conference in Baltimore about the effects of e-mail collaborative exchanges on my students' attitudes I spoke about the increase in their interest to the country their partners were from, increase in their responsibility, improvement in their communication skills (I mean their skills in interaction), as well as increase in their cross-cultural awareness. I now feel that I am very similar to my students in this respect. Participating in Partnership lists made me a more educated, a more responsible person, a better person I would say.
In a message to the “olenglish” discussion list run by the Partnership in April 2003 Valentyna Maksymuk has described how the Partnership made her a “computer addict”:
It was the Partnership program which introduced computers into my life and professional activities. At first I felt very much computer challenged. To tell you the truth, I did not feel like working on a computer every day. I practiced it from time to time. Now I have a feeling that I cannot do without a computer every day of my life.
. . . A regional TESOL conference is coming and I can't imagine how it could be organized without e-mail connection. I am having now a Nicenet project between Ukrainian and Russian masters. It is a great challenge! I am also subscribed for some professional lists. I exchange information with my colleagues from different countries. I am going to take part in two conferences abroad. . . . The whole world seems to be opened for me.
She wrote in another message: “Now after two years of use of computer I cannot imagine how could I live without it.” She bought her own home computer as a result of Partnership activities. Others commented after reading Ms. Maksymuk’s message. For example, Olha Ivashchyshyn and Anetta Artyshevska replied:
Hi, Svyeta and anybody else!
We do understand and support your addiction to computer. In addition to all activities described by you, we can say that can not imagine our work with students without computers now. . . . Our students are fond of practicing grammar on web sites, reading stories and writing essays. More over, our methodology of teaching distance students has completely changed. Now it is much more effective since we are always in contact with distance students, can regularly check the assignments, show/inform them their mistakes and constantly (not only when they arrive for sessions) help them to acquire knowledge.
Ludmyla Poplavska similarly has written that the Partnership was “a breath of fresh air” and “The Partnership has greatly changed my life and my methods of working.” She said:
About two years ago I understood that I could not afford to be behind and miss the opportunity of update news and free teaching materials.
I was walking on air when I was invited to visit USA to obtain new knowledge on academic writing. But the fact that I knew a little about the computer frightened and upset me. What to expect when you go to another country? And I must say that our American colleagues were very friendly, welcoming and generous to us and helped me in adjusting to a foreign way of life, and this encouraged me.
It goes without saying that nowadays our students expect us to be educators in English more than simply English teachers. They are thirsty for new ideas, news, exchange visions of the future.
Svitlana Markelova exclaimed in a comment posted on our Web site:
Free Internet access and the modem for e-mail communication helped me in my professional development to become a modern University teacher and even TESOL-Ukraine regional coordinator (e-mail was one of the conditions for it).
Some Partnership members have taken their new skills abroad to conferences. Svitlana Markelova wrote, after she and two others traveled to Budapest for a conference, along with instructors from Oregon:
These were 3 unforgettable days full of workshops, presentations, discussions on teaching writing. . . . There were also some people from the post-soviet countries who got very much interested in our Partnership activities.
Other members of the Oregon-Lviv Partnership decided to travel to eastern Ukraine to teach a summer school for other Ukrainian university teachers, based on what they had learned in the Partnership. Halyna Kaluzhna reported afterwards:
The participants (most of them) were very enthusiastic about using new technologies in their classes, but they kept saying that teachers need more training. I have to say that we are lucky to have received a perfect training during our on-line CALL course. Most people are not so lucky. Maybe we could think about organizing workshops for teachers who are interested? That would make our Partnership bigger and also will give us a chance to meet people from other institutions in Ukraine. This could be a beginning of cooperation.
Oregon teacher Debby Coulthard commented on the same event:
I learned a lot from and really enjoyed watching my colleagues in action. My favorite part was in Halya’s workshop – I sat with three teachers and together we created a class using Nicenet – it was so much fun watching them figure out how it all works and what can be done with it – it was very brief, but just in the space of one workshop, I saw three teachers go from a little guarded, scared, unsure to wow, this isn’t so hard after all, wow, I can do this!!
Ms. Kaluzhna also reported earlier on a trip that she made to an international conference on Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) in Canada on the way back from a Partnership exchange visit to Oregon:
I was pleased to speak about the on-line CALL course that our teachers participated in within the partnership program. So, the biggest deal is "not how much technology you have, but what you do with it". By the way, this is a quote from Leslie Opp Beckman's work, and it was cited by a teacher from Kazakhstan.
Much of this conversation took place on the various electronic discussion lists used by members of the Oregon-Lviv University Partnership.
III. Communications and Group Dialogue
Simple, low-maintenance communication by electronic mail, organized into logical discussion lists (“listservs”), has been one of the primary keys to the success of the Oregon-Lviv University Partnership.
A. Origin of “e-discussions” in Oregon-Lviv Partnership
Members of the Oregon-Lviv University Partnership have regularly used both e-mail and e-discussions to engage in collaboration between professors in Oregon and those in Ukraine – co-authoring research articles and books together, planning joint participation in professional conferences, making detailed plans for exchange visit activities in advance, strategizing on educational reform, brainstorming on partnership activities, and sharing cultural experiences.
For example, one of the seven books published by the Oregon-Lviv University Partnership contained chapters written by authors in both Oregon and Lviv. Some of the others have English chapters summarizing the contents, which were co-authored across the Atlantic. Several professional articles have been published, with authors cooperating together between Oregon and Lviv.
We also have exciting indications that the Partnership has caused more collaborative work among faculty members inside Lviv University and inside the University of Oregon. Some of this joint work takes place as a result of the attention paid by the Oregon-Lviv Partnership to enhancing group dialogue through electronic communications.
The University of Oregon School of Law and two faculties at Lviv National University in Ukraine, along with additional partners first established the Oregon-Lviv University Partnership in 1998, with the support of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (then USIA). From the beginning, the founders of the Partnership planned the use of electronic discussions in group settings (“e-discussions”). The original grant proposal included a plan to experiment with distance-learning technologies that can introduce young faculty members and law students to worldwide electronic research through the Internet (WWW, library catalogues), promote online Oregon-Lviv discussion groups, and (ultimately) provide audiovisual delivery of lectures.
This plan was based upon several years of experience by the author in using some of these methods, as well as a belief in the viability of others. In 1989, even prior to the establishment of the public Internet, the current author and Partnership Co-Director co-founded the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide, based on long-distance collaboration through e-mail. In the intervening years this network has grown from a few lawyers in eight countries to more than 300 lawyers in 60 countries. They communicate with one another on a daily basis to seek help in their cases and law reform efforts. The same author established in 1990 a worldwide e-mail discussion list for environmental law professors (ENVLAWPROFESSORS) and another discussion list for American public interest environmental lawyers. Each of these efforts has been built on the principle of making e-mail communication more like a face-to-face meeting of several people and less like a letter sent from one person to another.
B. Discouraging point-to-point e-mail and encouraging e-discussions
We have several reasons for setting up lists rather than using cc's or single point-to-point messages. They include:
• Number of cc's would be too many
• Sender does not have to remember to "reply to all"
• List messages can be automatically routed into special folders upon receipt, separately from truly personal e-mail
• List messages in separate folders can be reviewed more easily
• New participants are guaranteed to have some Partnership mail
• It is easy to set up discussion lists at our university and then use them internationally
When using discussion lists it is critical to insist that people must write to one another through the list, even if the comment is intended for only one person. E-mails sent from one person directly to another “off the list” must be actively discouraged. When participants write to one of the directors on a matter that might interest others, for example, the messages should be forwarded to the list.
This emphasis on group dialogue has several purposes. First, a person who is new to the Partnership can be assured that messages to read will be present on a regular basis. This encourages new users to check mail regularly, which in turn gives confidence to others that he or she can be reached by e-mail. A new user who receives only mail intended specifically or him or her can easily lose interest in mastering e-mail, and stop logging in. When other people cannot be sure that our new user will check for mail, e-mail becomes unreliable as a means of reaching that person. Second, if messages must be sent to the list, the shy newcomer can see the discussions of others and slowly gain courage to participate. Third, messages sent privately usually involve matters that are actually of interest to more than one person. To have such messages go directly to the list informs others, and promotes a broader variety of responses than one person would write.
Group dialogue requires paying attention to several practical matters. First, a discussion list must be configured so that replies go to the list by default, not to individuals. It must be made difficult for people to write to one another individually. Even with the proper configuration settings for the list, there must be a continuing effort to channel newer users into the use of the discussion list, because for most it seems odd to send a personal message to a list that 60 other people may be reading. They will often make an extra effort to write only to one person, avoiding the list. We regularly forward such messages right back to the list, where they belong, until the person picks up the “list habit.”
Second, it must be made easy to write to the list directly. Therefore use of a moderator to filter messages before they are posted should be avoided. A “discussion list” (e-discussions) is different from a “mailing list.” The latter is used to distribute information, while e-discussions is used to generate information and ideas, and to promote solidarity.
Third, list participants must not be discouraged when they write something to the list that really should have gone just to one person (such as an e-mail requesting someone to go to dinner, for example). In the psychological state of new users of e-discussions they can be scared away from participation if they are chastised. Therefore these mistakes are fully tolerated. Furthermore, something that some might consider a mistake, such as congratulations on a birthday, can actually be seen as a proper use of networking, in that it builds a sense of camaraderie.
An almost infinite definition of “relevancy” can be adopted in order to resist the temptation to limit participation to only approved types of messages. In fact, the Oregon-Lviv Partnership makes a conscious effort to celebrate accomplishments on the discussion list, even personal ones such as the birth of a child or occasionally a birthday. Its e-conferences become like informal conversations of friends, sitting in someone’s living room and discussing both professional and personal matters.
Of course, this can theoretically lead to an excessive number of messages. However, it is better to help participants learn how to manage too many messages than to have too few.
C. The Need to Encourage Message Volume
It is important that the traffic on the Partnership lists become large enough to be constant. During a five-month period from March to September 2003 (excluding August vacation), for example, 95 messages were sent to the “orelvivfaculty” list by participants other than this author; 25 such messages to the “lvivfaculty” list; 45 to the “mediate” list; and nearly 100 to the “olenglish” list. This total of over 250 messages during 150 days involved about 20 different persons. If allocated among just the weekdays when messages are usually sent, the volume works out to 2 to 3 messages per day on average. This volume is enough to ensure that when a participant checks e-mail there will be something waiting, but not so high as to overwhelm a regular participant.
Achievement of adequate volume can be difficult at first and can require careful tending (as a garden). This must occur also with encouraging new participants to write, or simply to restart discussions after summer or winter holidays. We learned ask any new person on the list a question intended to draw the person into the group, ask the group to contribute ideas on a project, or even ask all the participants to comment on a proposed policy such as selecting someone to come to this Workshop.
When someone travels to the partner institution, those "back home" wait expectantly for "travel reports" about how things are going. When they arrive back home, their hosts check the list for reports of safe arrival. The lists are used for both professional work and some level of personal contact (such as congratulations on a marriage or new child). The mere existence of messages helps build the habit of discussion and a sense of community.
D. Filters, Folders, and “Rules” to Handle Message Volume
The enthusiasm for e-discussions presented above will doubtless raise questions in the minds of readers whose experience of e-mail is that all messages arrive in a single inbox, mixed in with all other messages. That is, messages can sometimes seem like more of a burden than a benefit, particularly if volume becomes large. In many cases, this stems from not having set up separate folders and automatic routing rules in the e-mail software, to put list messages in their own separate places.
The details on how to configure some e-mail programs to route messages automatically into folders for each list can be found in on the Oregon-Lviv website under “Technical Support”: http:\\orelviv.uoregon.edu. There we have placed pictures of the actual computer screen to show the needed steps, depending on which e-mail program is being used.
E. Technical Assistance
Technical assistance at the beginning is crucial for any previously unskilled participant, as well as follow-up troubleshooting. The Partnership hired an active participant as the “Partnership Assistant” in Lviv to provide technical help and training to participants – such as going to individuals’ homes to setting up e-mail and message filtering for e-discussions. An increasing number of Ukrainian participants have bought their own computers and in such cases the Partnership provides free modems and Internet access. One such participant comment:
I think I could share my good news with you. Today Andriy Andrusevych has joined my home computer to the Internet. And now I have an opportunity to read your messages at home. Thank you for your help with equipment. I would also like to thank Andriy. He is doing a good job for the partnership. As soon as I bought the computer he came to join my computer to the Internet. Well done it was - quickly and professionally.
Others have their access through their faculty or other work. In some instances we bought departmental computers for the kafedra and even strung wires to get the computer "online." Technical issues also received the personal attention of the Co-Directors, one of whom has more than 20 years experience in e-mail and networking.
F. Importance of using off-line POP mail, not Web-based mail
The concept of “appropriate technology” suggests that simple tools are sometimes the best tools. From the beginning, we discouraged Ukrainian participants in the Oregon-Lviv University Partnership from using Web-based e-mail accounts (such as Yahoo, Hotmail, or Mail.Ru). A visit to the computer laboratory of the Law Faculty at Lviv National University a few years ago exemplified the reasons. All around the room students sat, trying to get their Web-based e-mail or looking at pictures of fancy automobiles. The e-mail messages had to compete for “bandwidth” (the total space available for all communications in and out of a room, university, or city) with all the attempts to download pictures from the Internet. The entire University was sharing a single 56K modem to the outside world. Furthermore, all traffic from the entire city of Lviv was going through a satellite link that had the capacity of four modems in total, sharing the bandwidth and crawling at a snail’s pace. Of course, capacity has increased, but so has usage – so the Web is about as slow as ever in Lviv.
The use of “off-line” e-mail readers such as Outlook Express, Eudora, The Bat, or other programs avoids this problem. They allow the user to go online, download all e-mail into a mailbox in his or her computer, and disconnect. Replies can be written offline and then a brief connection made again to send the messages. Messages come through much faster than with the Web, there are fewer frustrations calls being disconnected because of bad telephone lines, and this method saves a great deal of money for faculty members using their own computers at home, and dialup accounts for which they must pay for every minute. Furthermore, the user can keep copies of old messages and use them later to clarify something.
In further pursuit of simplicity, accounts are configured by the Partnership to send only plain text, not HTML-encoded messages that look like Web pages. This keeps messages smaller, allows replies to be inserted easily into the text of messages in a conversational manner, and makes viruses less likely.
G. Oregon-based E-mail Accounts
Faced with the difficulties of obtaining e-mail accounts at Lviv University, the Partnership arranged for free POP e-mail accounts to be issued by the University of Oregon to all participants. This means that a Ukrainian associate professor (docent) of banking law may write to a Ukrainian assistant in international law and the messages for both are stored on a computer in Oregon. Of course, Internet access had to be provided in Lviv, but there was no reason at all for the e-mail mailboxes (POP accounts) to be located in Lviv or even Ukraine. Use of Oregon-based POP e-mail allows us to assign an account easily and to configure the person's software easily. The same accounts can also be accessed from the Web if a participant is at a conference or wants to check e-mail from another person’s computer. There are now about 60 Ukrainian teachers with e-mail addresses at darkwing.uoregon.edu, the e-mail server at the University of Oregon.
H. A Diversity of Lists
We established several different lists, set up according to topic and purpose:
• orelvivfaculty - for both Oregon (US) and Lviv (Ukraine) faculty (80 subscribers -- about 65 from Lviv, 15 from Oregon)
• lvivfaculty - for Lviv faculty only (plus a few Oregon people) (65 subscribers -- about 60 from Lviv, 5 from Oregon)
• olenglish - for English teachers in Oregon and Lviv (49 subscribers)
• olplanning - for planning individual exchange visits (visas, tickets, home stays, work plans) (at any one time, up to 14 subscribers for an upcoming trip to Oregon by 2 Lvivians)
• mediate - for work on our mediation project (10 subscribers)
I. Use of English
All discussions should be conducted in English, even when the discussion is entirely among Ukrainian participants. This promotes and emphasizes the importance of fluency in this international language. The Partnership even made classes available to participants to brush up on their English before going on an exchange visit, when needed.
J. Distance Learning
Some of the "distance learning" efforts by members of the Partnership became remarkable. Some learned to communicate with their own students in Ukraine through the Web and e-mail. Others set up international discussions with students in programs in other countries. These have had varying degrees of success.
IV. Conclusion
University partnerships can be much more than mere exchange programs. They can promote true collaboration and lasting professional relationships. They can be designed in such a way, and implemented with such passion, that they change radically a faculty member’s view and career. Careful and thoughtful use of electronic tools have an important role to play in this transformation.
Footnotes:
1. http://www.aucc.ca/upcd-pucd/index_e.html
2. http://www.deltha.cec.eu.int/aunp
3. http://europa.eu.int/comm/europeaid/projects/asia-link/index_en.htm
4. “The Humphrey Fellowships bring mid-level professionals from developing countries to the United States for a year of academic study and professional experiences.” http://exchanges.state.gov
5. The Fulbright Program is perhaps the most famous, providing grants for faculty members, scholars, and graduate students. Ibid.
6. See the Educational Partnerships Program at http://exchanges.state.gov/education/partnership.
7. In addition to ECA activity, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) since 1998 has also funded a smaller number, consisting of 160 partnerships with universities in 58 countries. These have involved more than 200 U.S. colleges and universities from 40 states of the USA.
http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/education_and_universities/partnerships.htm.
8. http://exchanges.state.gov/education/partnership/historical.pdf at p 45.
9. Ibid at pages 57-60.
10. Ibid.
11. http://exchanges.state.gov/education/partnership.
12. See, e.g., discussion in the Request for Grant Proposals for the FY 2004 Freedom Support Educational Partnerships Program with Eurasia, at http://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/dec05rfgp.htm.
13. Lviv National University is the primary partner. The Lviv Academy of Commerce, Ukraine Academy of Judges, and Ecopravo-Lviv are additional partners.
14. Message from Halyna Kaluzhna, Foreign Language Department of the Humanities, Lviv National University (LNU), October 14, 2003.
15. Ibid.
16. Message from Valentyna Maksymuk, Foreign Language Department of the Humanities, Lviv National University (LNU), April 10, 2003.
17. Ibid. Nicenet is a free web-based conferencing opportunity adapted to teaching.
18. Message from Valentyna Maksymuk, Foreign Language Department of the Humanities, Lviv National University (LNU), Oct. 5, 2003.
19. Message from Olha Ivashchyshyn and Anetta Artyshevska, Foreign Language Department of the Humanities, Lviv National University (LNU), April 11, 2003.
20. Message from Ludmyla Poplavska, Foreign Language Department of the Humanities, Lviv National University (LNU), Oct. 6, 2003.
21. http://orelviv.uoregon.edu/participants_markelova.htm
22. Message from Svitlana Markelova, Foreign Language Department of the Humanities, Lviv National University (LNU), June 27, 2003.
23. Message from Halyna Kaluzhna, Foreign Language Department of the Humanities, Lviv National University (LNU), June 1, 2003.
24. Message from Debby Coulthard, American English Institute (AEI), University of Oregon, June 1, 2003.
25. Message from Halyna Kaluzhna, Foreign Language Department of the Humanities, Lviv National University (LNU), May 8, 2003.
26. The law faculty of Lviv Academy of Commerce, the new Ukraine Academy of Judges, and Ecopravo-Lviv, a nonprofit environmental law group.
27. Grant proposal to USIA, “Oregon-Lviv Partnership: Law Curriculum Reform, Textbook Reform, Distance Education, and Law Clinics,” Tab D - Narrative (copy on file with author) (emphasis added).
28. See John Bonine, Internet Society News_, vol. 1, no. 1 (Winter 1992), p. 26, reprinted in “The Internet, the Environment, and the Law,” in Tracy LaQuey, THE INTERNET COMPANION: A BEGINNER'S GUIDE TO GLOBAL NETWORKING (Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 2d ed., 1992). http://www.urz.uni-heidelberg.de/Netzdienste/internet/what/companion.html
29. See www.elaw.org.
30. Message from Tetyana Fityo, Foreign Language Department of the Humanities, Lviv National University (LNU), October 10, 2003.
John E. Bonine, is Professor of Law at the University of Oregon, Eugene and Co-Founder, Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
