The track on Global Perspectives/International Models brought together faculty working in a variety of settings, including high schools, two- and four-year colleges, and research universities in the United States as well as overseas. But this diverse group was firmly rooted in the shared experiences of similar problems and goals and a commitment to undergraduate education. The track provided an opportunity for instructors of political science to exchange information, develop a series of recommendations, and lay the groundwork for a network of scholar-teachers.

One of the major problems discussed was the issue of relevance; making the connection between the classroom and the “real world” is an ongoing problem, one that was addressed by a number of instructors. Stefaan Fiers' paper on European citizenship reminded us of the continuing importance of political education. Specifically, Fiers asks what role education might play in the development of participatory citizens, even in the face of declining participation amongst young people who are favorably disposed to the project of European integration. Patrick Howell's paper similarly reminds us how politics impacts almost every aspect of the public world; Howell's particular problem focused on how to engage students who are most likely non-political science majors with international relations theory and its relevance in their area of expertise and interest. The importance of a broad education on international politics and global diversity is all the more striking given that Howell teaches at the United States Military Academy. His technique is to develop a network of information via web sites, in conjuncture with his colleagues, to help demonstrate how the interpretation of different international relations perspectives might be useful even if one were, for example, a nuclear engineer. While acknowledging the need and importance of disciplines, Scott Erb finds that his and his students' knowledge was enhanced through the use of interdisciplinary courses. Erb demonstrates that undergraduates more easily make cross-discipline, and cross-national, connections when he combines his teaching skills with those of professors from disciplines such as art, music, and early childhood education. Cirila Toplak also discusses the relevance of political science methods; noting the importance of communication to the discipline, Toplak employs the developing fields of facilitation and the hermeneutical cycle—the suggestion that the actual meaning of a text is contained in the intention of the author rather than in the text itself—to better develop students' critical thinking skills.

In an increasingly globalized world, the interaction of people from different backgrounds (be it ethnic, religious, or social) becomes ever-more relevant to the discipline. The track found that regardless of our teaching backgrounds, when it came to engaging students, pointing out differences, and making connections we each found what Denise DeGarmo refers to as “resistant populations.” DeGarmo employs a number of methods to engage students who have never traveled outside of their home state, much less to a foreign country, in international relations, global issues, and comparative politics classes. DeGarmo's use of simulations helps break down barriers to understanding and provides a shared experience through which both students and instructors can explore issues. Mark Sachleben also explores the value of non-traditional approaches for teaching about challenging issues, such as human rights abuses and genocide, and advocates the use of multiple teaching methods, ranging from lecture to novels to films and simulations. Danny Damron and Cindy Otis' brought their real-world experiences in leading internships at the Scottish parliament to a broader discussion of the importance of preparing and mentoring students for living and working abroad. In addition to the challenges of living abroad, including finding housing and transportation, Damron and Otis found that students were often unprepared to engage in an environment in which self-initiative was required. Damron, as mentor, has worked to maximize student learning from the experience by enhancing student cognizance of the link between the theoretical work of the classroom and the practical work of the internship. Tina Mavrikos-Adamou identifies the differences and similarities in teaching both in Thessaloniki, Greece, and Long Island, New York. Mavrikos-Adamou argues that while there are many differences between American students and students from Southern Europe, both groups suffer from misconceptions about the world and about others. Further, she highlights that while differences in political culture within a classroom can be an obstacle to effective teaching, recognizing such diversity within students' immediate community better enables them to appreciate and understand the global community.

A number of papers discuss how to make international issues relevant and accessible to difficult or resistant populations, and highlight the range of resources faculty can use to achieve these goals. David Mislan noted that the use of Model UN (and other retreat simulation conferences) has long been popular with students, even those who may not be particularly interested in international relations. Mislan proposes that we capitalize on the popularity of these extra-curricular programs and transform them into “co-curricular programs” by incorporating the experiences of students into the classroom. Glenn Hastedt has used The 9/11 Commission Report to help students think more critically about politics. Because the report is both an examination of processes and recommendations, negotiated and incomplete, it demonstrates to students the nuances of American foreign policy and the relationship between American politics and the international community. David Weiden has developed a simulation that explores an underappreciated realm: comparative judicial models. Weiden's simulation compares the inquisitorial model of trials, as is common in Europe but little known among American students, with the adversarial model of the United States. Michael Brittingham also developed a simulation to help students understand the politics of the Chinese politburo. Brittingham's semester-long simulation encourages students to develop writing, research, and critical thinking skills in conjuncture with exploring the intricacies and complexities of the politburo. Because of students' unfamiliarity with the subject, Lisa Fischler adopts non-traditional methods to teach the politics of China. Fischler uses role-playing and non-lecture techniques to point out links between Chinese students and her own; she reminds her students from central Pennsylvania that their counterparts in China are, in many ways, similar to them because their primary obligations are within the home. Maurice East and Charles Hermann used resources available to their universities to create a televised link between George Washington University and Texas A&M University. East and Hermann created a foreign policy seminar that examined the foreign policy challenges of the George H. W. Bush administration, and the technology proved invaluable in engaging students directly with leading members of the Bush foreign policy team.

The papers described above generated extensive discussion among workshop participants and resulted in a number of “lessons learned,” which can be organized into three basic categories—goals, methods, and community. In terms of goals, track participants began to recognize collectively what we had all known individually. Whether the specific subject we teach is U.S. foreign policy, Chinese politics, or international relations in general, our goal is to get students to recognize that there is a world beyond the boundaries of their own, often narrow, experiences. This challenge is the driving force behind our diverse approaches. Yet this task is easier said than done. All political science instructors encounter resistance and disinterest from students who believe that such issues are irrelevant to their lives or that they already have all the answers they need. Unfortunately, there are practical limits to our ability to overcome that resistance and disinterest—students who are determined not to learn will never learn. However, we increase our chances of success through creativity in the classroom and increased cognizance of the different backgrounds, experiences, and needs of our students. Despite the difficulty, the goal of international awareness is critical if students are to function in an increasingly complex, globalized world.

To evaluate whether we are succeeding in this goal, we must be more self-aware of the methods we use. This involves two things—assessment and “integrative learning.” In terms of assessment, we must be more self-critical: all of our creative classroom exercises, simulations, film analysis, etc. may not work as well as we think they do. While we all may have an intuition for what works in the classroom, we must develop more concrete tools of assessment to better tailor our methods to our goals. Such tools could be as simple as brief student surveys at the beginning and end of the term. These may also help us better understand the backgrounds of our students and develop new techniques for reaching them.

Just as important as assessment is “integrative learning”—i.e., integrating the classroom learning of comparative/international politics with subjects or skills outside of the immediate classroom experience. This can be done through the development of interdisciplinary courses that bring together different academic departments (e.g., political science and music), study abroad programs, and international internships. However, such approaches may reach only a relatively small group of students. Simpler methods may improve the experiences of all students—e.g., developing closer relations with librarians to aid in student research activities, or with other academic departments help identify potential research topics for non-majors. Improving our instruction methods through such integrative exercises, combined with more rigorous assessment, will help ensure that we succeed in our goal of broadening our students' perspectives.

Finally, the further development of a teaching community would greatly support the goals and methods discussed above. One of the most striking aspects of the Global Perspectives/International Models track was the enormous diversity in approaches. Indeed, most (if not all) of the participants would probably agree that the most valuable aspect of the conference was the opportunity to network and share ideas with others with similar concerns, but with such different ways of addressing them. The conference provided an opportunity to learn what others do, borrow from them, and develop new techniques. In order to continue this exchange between conferences, we must develop a community of teachers that can help broaden our own, sometimes narrow, perspectives on teaching. After all, if we expect our students to be more open to the world around them, we must lead by example.