A Summer in London

When I interviewed for my position at the Louisiana State University I noted that several of my future colleagues regularly participated in study abroad programs. In fact, one of the potential benefits of coming to the university was the possibility of some day participating in one as well. As an assistant professor, I expected that once I gained tenure I might be able to get into one of the programs since they were quite popular among the faculty. I was thrilled when at the beginning of my fourth year I was asked by a professor of English to join her and another advanced assistant professor from the theatre department on the university's summer program in London. I agreed without hesitation, believing that the experience of leading students abroad would outweigh the loss of five weeks spent in front of my office computer. While my university is not “small, remote, or odd,” I do believe in making the most of opportunities like study abroad that come my way simply because I have the good fortune to be a professor (Durfee 1999).

While London might seem a dull trip to some of my colleagues, I was excited to escape my less-than-cosmopolitan surroundings for all of the advantages that a truly global city can offer. Johnston and Spalding (1997) and Mittelman (1989) note that nearly onethird of all U.S. students studying abroad have historically done so in the United Kingdom. Most of the rest study in another Western European country. Eurocentrism is an issue that study abroad programs and efforts to internationalize the curriculum definitely have to face, but I believe that our London-based program is still able to make world politics both relevant and real to my students. The London program was also typical of study abroad experiences in many other ways: it was a short, summer program, dominated by traditional, female undergraduates in their junior year at the university (Johnston and Spalding 1997, 420). Again, while the characteristics of these programs may not be ideal from a macro-level concern with the structure of American collegiate study, my micro-level experiences in a very typical study abroad program should resonate closely with my political science colleagues across the U.S.

Louisiana State University runs its own study abroad programs, but my advice should generalize to my colleagues who participate in programs run by a consortium of colleges or even privately managed programs.⁴

Integrating Coursework while Living Abroad: The Formation of a Learning Community

My view, which was shared by my fellow faculty, is that a study abroad trip should not be a vacation. We created our courses with the understanding that students in the London program would get the same basic content and skills as they would if they had taken the courses at home. This approach ensured that they would not be behind if they took subsequent courses in any of our departments. However, the benefit of being in London allowed us to provide vivid illustration and experience of the course material in a way that was not possible at home. In fact, tying a course to direct experience is a fantastic way to improve retention of both content and skills.

In an effort to further enhance the learning environment, we took the study abroad experience a step further by attempting to integrate our courses. Although we were not especially purposive in linking course content at the outset, what emerged as we taught these courses in London was a learning community. In retrospect, I wish we had engaged in more prior planning for linking our courses, but what we created still meets the definition of a learning community:

In particular, we formed a “learning cluster” learning community, in which a group of students enrolls in two or more discrete courses linked by common themes, issues, problems, or historical time periods (Gabelnick et al. 1990, 20). We told our students in the informational sessions prior to our departure for London that we would be integrating the courses to some extent. However, I do not think that we knew exactly how this would work. Our experience with a nascent learning community replicates others who “almost naively” began their own communities (Gabelnick et al. 1990, 54). We centered theatre at the core of this learning cluster and planned to see seven or eight plays as a group. A performance of Shakespeare's Richard III in the New Globe Theatre was an easy first link between our courses and the experience of living in the UK.

Richard III is often portrayed as a “Machiavel,” the epitome of Machiavelli's portrait of an amoral, powerhungry ruler made famous in The Prince. Myth and fact are often conflated in historical portraits of Richard III. Shakespeare drew on The Prince to create the character of Richard III despite the fact that he had been dead nearly half a century before Machiavelli published his work. My English and theatre colleagues already had discussions of Richard III worked into their courses. I was able to add some readings from The Prince into my introductory course because they fit nicely with a discussion of the realist tradition in international relations and foreign policy. My colleagues were then able to draw on my assigned reading of Machiavelli in their discussions of Richard III. We all talked about the play, the historical figure, and Machiavelli in our classroom discussions. However, being in England also allowed us to visit Warwick Castle, which figures prominently in the life of Richard III and many of the characters in Shakespeare's play. We also visited the Tower of London, where one of the most notorious legends surrounding Richard's reign was born—that of the murder of his brother's two sons who were in line before him for the throne. Finally, we made a trip to the National Portrait Gallery to see Richard III's portrait, which does not present him as hunchbacked or with a deformed arm as he is presented in Shakespeare's play. English, politics, and theatre merged seamlessly, as is the goal of any interdisciplinary learning community. The entire experience was heightened and made far more real and relevant than any classroom discussion of these topics at home by our presence in a study abroad program in London.

The Richard III connection was the only aspect of our learning community that was planned in advance. However, building the community around this play led us to adapt our coursework around other plays we saw while in London. We saw Shakespeare's Coriolanus at the Old Vic Theatre. As Wudel (2002, 217) nicely puts it “the more prominent themes of Coriolanus—the nature of ancient politics, political expertise, regimes, and the interplay of honor and ambition—make it well suited to the exploration of politics in general.” Coriolanus tied into our discussion of Machiavelli as well. We saw an outstanding performance of Henry V at the Royal National Theatre. We were in London the summer after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, so naturally, Henry's army dressed in American style combat fatigues. Henry's monologues were delivered on a large screen to simulate a televised press conference. The references to the war in Iraq were unmistakable. Ultimately, our students debated whether war was a glorious undertaking in service of the nation, a necessary evil, or perhaps even self-defeating in the service of vanity. War was obviously on the minds of creative people in London that summer. We also saw The Madness of George Dubya. It drew heavily on allusions to the 1963 movie, Dr. Strangelove. I was able to draw on Lindley's (2001) teaching guide to Dr. Strangelove to help the students understand that part of the play. Many had never seen the movie. They understood the context of the current crisis in Iraq, the parts played by Bush and Blair, and the reference to the movie The Madness of George III, but Stanley Kubrick eluded most of them. We saw many more plays that provided opportunities to demonstrate the connections between our disciplines. Our conversations with students and among the faculty were enriched by the connections made possible by the theatre.

More Techniques for Enhancing the Study Abroad Experience

The learning community that we created in the intersection of English, political science, and theatre courses in our London environment was probably the most rewarding pedagogical aspect of this study abroad trip. Both students and faculty grew from these connections. I would strongly recommend that others considering a similar strategy engage in more planning before leaving their home institution, yet still allow for flexibility in adapting to the study abroad environment. However, there are other techniques to use in your individual course, even if you do not consciously link to other courses offered on the trip.

My introductory course in international relations consisted of only onethird political science majors. Yet, the class had to prepare the political science majors to take upper division courses when they returned to the U.S. It also needed to take advantage of everything London and our trips in the UK had to offer. Three common techniques were particularly helpful in this respect: requiring students to read and discuss current events from the London newspapers, requiring students to analyze political cartoons, and integrating our excursions in and around London with the content of the course.

The use of the London newspapers in the classroom definitely helped students gain some perspective on how non-Americans view Americans and the activities of their government. It helped to overcome what Marks (2002) calls the “we problem” in teaching international politics. Who is “we” when you are in another country? Even students felt a bit audacious in speaking on behalf of all Americans through the use of “we” while in London. “We” could no longer refer to the people beyond the classroom walls while in another country either. The use of newspapers reinforced the need to consider that one person's perspective was not necessarily reflective of a wider group.

As Schattle (2003) points out, the use of newspapers in the classroom prompts a number of important questions concerning perspective. How are Americans or the U.S. government viewed by journalists, political and business elites, government officials, and the general public in another country? Students find that they reconsider their prior assumptions. Schattle's students made similar statements to those I heard in my classroom in London. For example: “I have to really step outside of myself to see how this country is viewed from a different point of view. I never realized how arrogance has much to do with being an American. This is not an intentional reaction, but just by being born here I have become blind to it” (Schattle 2003, 435). Given the shadow of the war in Iraq and the protests this created in the UK and Europe, my students were similarly “surprised to learn that public sentiment in the countries they studied turned out to be more supportive of the United States than they had expected” (Schattle 2003, 435). I also had students who challenged the press coverage of the United States. In particular, some students were bothered by the British press's characterization of U.S. soldiers serving in Iraq as unintelligent and easily misled. I think all of the students were shocked with the British press's criticism of Prime Minister Tony Blair and his cabinet versus the more deferential treatment afforded to President George W. Bush and his cabinet by the U.S. press at the time.

I required the students to read the newspapers not only for daily current events discussion, but to prepare to write a short paper after following an international story in the London papers during our stay. The purpose of the assignment was to draw student attention to the similarities and differences in the coverage of the story in Britain versus the U.S. Their papers were to address the following questions: Do the articles seem to be written at a higher/similar/lower level to those you have read in U.S. papers? Is the coverage Britishcentric? How do the editorials differ from those in U.S. papers? Can you discern a particular political slant (left, right, or center) to the articles and editorials? How is the United States portrayed (if applicable)? Most students followed some story related to the war in Iraq or terrorism. However, several others followed stories about African countries, since they were generally surprised to find extensive coverage in the newspaper about that continent. The combination of the daily class discussion and the short writing assignment really brought our textbook discussions to life. We could talk about the problems of peace in the Middle East, then walk through a demonstration by pro-Palestinian groups protesting Prime Minister Sharon's visit, read about it in the paper the next morning, and talk about it in class. The reality of the peace process made sense to them as a result of the combination of direct experience and classroom knowledge.

I also made explicit use of political cartoons in the newspapers, something that has also been recommended for use in the classroom at home (Dougherty 2002). I was introduced to the use of political cartoons in a graduate seminar on foreign policy with A Cartoon History of United States Foreign Policy from 1945 to the Present and have appreciated them as pedagogical tools ever since. As Dougherty (2002, 259) argues, political cartoons “are outstanding tools for developing critical thinking skills, facilitating discussions, and keeping current.” Political cartoons take on another useful purpose when in another country—they are a way of entering into a culture. Cartoons themselves are cultural artifacts, but political cartoons require an additional set of interpretive lenses. I required a short written assignment on a political cartoon from a British paper. The students were asked to explain the cartoon to the reader. Who is portrayed in the cartoon? How are the characters drawn? What is the context? What is humorous about the cartoon? Is the humor particularly British, or is it typical of something you might see in U.S. papers? Can you identify any unstated, takenfor-granted assumptions based on British culture that you must understand before you can interpret the cartoon? Does the cartoon reflect the editorial content of the particular paper? Does the cartoon seem a bit more biting or risqué than you would see in the U.S.? Students initially thought this would be a simple exercise, but as Dougherty (2002, 264) notes, political cartoons' “incisive, powerful messages have to be decoded by the individual viewing them, and explaining a cartoon nearly always confirms the observation that a picture is worth a thousand words.”

Another of Dougherty's (2002, 262) suggestions, that cartoons are a good way of allowing students to introduce controversial issues in the classroom since “it is the cartoon, not the student, making the argument” proved accurate. The war in Iraq and Bush's foreign policy positions were controversial in my class. Abstract discussions of these policies often became quite heated, yet focusing on a cartoon portraying Bush or Blair and some aspect of the war or foreign policy nearly always helped the students check their emotions and argue and evaluate from a more coherent, logical point of view.

Finally, one of the simplest ways to enhance the learning experience on a summer study abroad trip is to integrate daily and weekend excursions with the course material. This was very easy to do in an international relations course in London. A trip to the British Museum provided the opportunity to talk about imperialism, colonialism, and even Marxism after viewing Marx's reading desk. A trip to Parliament provided the opportunity to discuss the way that different forms of democratic governance can affect foreign policy formulation. Our class discussions of World War I and II benefited greatly by visits to the Imperial War Museum and Churchill's bunker, known as the War Cabinet Rooms. The examples of these types of excursions are too numerous to mention. However, my colleagues and I employed a simple formula to integrate these visits into our courses. Prior to each excursion, we picked something about the place we were visiting to discuss to draw students' attention, since many of the museums are just too vast to see in a day. We picked a meeting spot afterward to discuss what we had seen and to relax. In class the next morning, we drew the visits into the class discussion if applicable. In this manner, we were able to transform what might normally have been considered “touristy” type activities into part of the learning experience.