Task Force Meeting

January 31, 2003

• What's happening on the campuses
• How the task force can be helpful
• Field of Asian Studies
• Off-campus study
• Possible products

Attending: Shiwei Chen (Lake Forest College), Gary De Coker (Ohio Wesleyan University), Suzanne Gay (Oberlin College), Elizabeth Hayford (Associated Colleges of the Midwest), Robert Marrs (Coe College) (Guest), Robert Moore (Rollins College,) Joan O'Mara (Washington and Lee University), Daniel Sack (Associated Colleges of the Midwest), Michael Schneider (Knox College), Robert Slagter (Birmingham-Southern College)

According to custom, the meeting began with people introducing themselves and their Asia-related programs. Elizabeth noted that the group represented a range of institutions, with a variety of types of programs, some quite strong and some fairly small. Despite the variety, however, interest in Asia is broad and deep. The Global Partners Project, entering its second phase, is reviewing international education efforts across the three consortia, seeking cost-effectiveness through collaboration. This phase will include regional alliances, which will look at ways to work together and share resources-particularly in regard to off campus study and curricular resources-in three regions: Eastern/Southern Africa, France, and East Asia. Each region will have its own task force. She defined East Asia primarily as China and Japan, but suggested that Korea, and possibly Southeast Asia, be kept in mind. Joan wondered how Taiwan fit; Elizabeth replied that it should be included.

Elizabeth observed that while some of the Global Partners schools have long relationships with East Asia, a lot of changes in the region and in the field have happened in recent years. Students today have more opportunities, more have the language skills, and more have already been to the region. Much of this growth has been driven by the work of the Asia Network and with the support of grants from the Freeman and Luce foundations. With all this change, it is particularly appropriate to think about working together. The goal of this meeting, then, would be to talk about our goals for collaborative reflection and our desired product.

Task Force members described what's happening on their campuses regarding East Asia

• Oberlin (Suzanne Gay): The college, in collaboration with five other schools, runs Associated Colleges in China (ACC), a study abroad program in Beijing. It is language heavy. Oberlin also sends students to CET, which is less language focused. It runs its own program at Yunan, but has found that an individual program is harder to sustain than a collaborative one. Oberlin Japan students go to Waseda and Kyoto. With a Luce grant the college has hired a Korean anthropologist and developed a link with Yonsei University in Korea. With a Freeman grant Oberlin will send students to China for the winter term.
• Washington and Lee (Joan O'Mara): Students interested in a short-term experience in Japan go to Kansai Gaidai or ICU; a program with Rikkyo is currently being evaluated. In China, W&L has worked in the past with Chung Chi in Hong Kong; that program is currently inactive. Students also studied in Taiwan through the U-Mass program. China programs are being reviewed this year. The college has been drawing back from exchange programs. Recently the college has organized a short spring course in Kanazawa in Japan. The program is interdisciplinary and language-based, teaching both China and Japan. There are currently six junior and senior majors.
• Knox (Michael Schneider): Schneider is co-director of the college's new Center for Global Studies. It has never had an independent Asia studies program. The college's Asian emphasis is in Japan; because it has had a good language instructor, Knox sends a lot of students to Japan, especially to Waseda. It has also made contact with Kansai Gaidai for short-term students. Some students have gone to Korea and China on ad hoc programs. Recently the college has initiated (with a federal grant) a "quick start" language program for faculty, which involves on-campus study and a visit to the region. Participants must integrate something from their study into their classes. A group of faculty chose Japanese; six will visit Japan this summer. The college hopes this will have an impact on students, and wants this program to develop.
• Birmingham-Southern (Robert Slagter): BSC has not done much related to Asia. Some students have done study abroad with Kansai Gaidai, and the college is looking to build a relationship in Southeast Asia. A consortium of Birmingham-area schools together offer an Asian studies major. The college needs to develop languages for students and development programs for faculty.
• Ohio Wesleyan (Gary De Coker): The university has developed an East Asian Studies major and minor, based on Japanese language study. There hasn't been a great deal of faculty interest, however. There are a few courses regarding China, but the focus is on Japan. · Earlham (Gary De Coker): The Waseda exchange is important to Earlham, but it also has a program in Morioka, where students serve as language teachers. It's also an effective faculty development tool. Earlham has a large group of faculty teaching Japanese and Japan-related countries.
• Rollins (Robert Moore): The college has only recently started paying attention to Asia. It has a paid dorm room in China which students use. The college is trying to get a chair for Chinese language study. There is greater campus interest in Latin America.
• Lake Forest (Shiwei Chen): The college has an East Asian major, but it is not a big program. There are now three tenure-track faculty, with seven majors and eight minors, so it is growing. With a Freeman grant it has sent five students to China, which has had a real impact on campus. The grant has also funded a center dedicated to Asia, with a full-time director. It is funded for four years. The center is also linked with the Asian community in Chicago. It will send students and faculty to China, and will use release time or money to encourage faculty to develop courses related to Asia. The college's weakness is language study; it has no full time faculty in the field. Chen hopes to develop a relationship with Peking University through its China Star program, which provides courses and internships for a semester or a summer.
• Coe (Robert Marrs): The college has an Asia Studies major, with about one student a year. It is an accidental program, based largely on personal connections. For instance, Marrs has paid visits to Inner Mongolia Normal University; in May 2004 he will take a group of students and have them teach English to the locals. His wife has worked with people at the Shenyang Music Conservatory, who are interested in setting up an exchange of students and faculty. The college hopes to build more such exchange relations. Currently they teach Japanese and send students to Japan, as well as receiving exchange students from Wasdea.

These reports provoked a few reactions.

• Gary wondered if there was an alternative to Kansai Gaidai for one-semester students, sensing that it did not provide an authentic Japanese experience for students.
• Elizabeth observed that Associated Colleges of the South colleges are interested in the Japan Study program, but there is no obvious network of people on those campuses.
• Elizabeth noted that Waseda wants special programs for their students in the US, including English as a Second Language, etc. Some of our colleges are providing those services, but is a challenge for many.

Elizabeth asked how the Task Force could be helpful to the Global Partners schools. She noted, for instance, there is a lot of interest in off-campus study, and that the Task Force could help exchange information and individual contacts. Many schools are wrestling with language study; they could benefit from working with the Project's Language Task Force and the consortial technology centers. Other possible issues include calendar concerns, faculty development seminars, and hooks to get students interested in studying in the region. Suzanne suggested that the project could establish programs if there is a need, either shared or consortial. Elizabeth pointed out that the joint ACM/GLCA Hong Kong program closed as mainland programs developed. They worked for a while with CIEE, but competing programs have proliferated. One result is that individual colleges cannot have much of an impact on the curriculum of a program. Consortia could create influence by leveraging their numbers. But every school does not have its own connections. Joan said that Asia Network is a good source of connections; it serves as a clearinghouse of ideas. She wondered if the Task Force could create a web site or an email list so people would know what programs others use. Dan pointed out that the Global Partners web site has an incomplete and idiosyncratic database of off-campus programs. Elizabeth asked what such a database should contain. ACM has a list of programs used by its schools, and would work with the other consortia to collect similar data. She also wondered if we should tally what languages are being taught.

Mike is concerned about how the field of Asian studies is developing. Grant money (from Freeman, the government, etc.) seems to be going into short-term programs and courses, but those kinds of things don't really support the development of Asian studies. More students are going to the region, but fewer are doing area studies. That means that fewer are studying the languages, Gary added; they are looking at regional rather than national issues. Shorter-term courses result in a more superficial approach. Mike wondered if the Global Partners Project could help to counter that trend away from area studies.

Mike pointed out that there are a number of schools in the consortia that are eager to strengthen Asia programs. Shiwei suggested using outside funding until the administration is convinced. Elizabeth asked about other ways to generate interest on campuses, like student symposia or arts series. Bob Slagter said that ACS has regularly had a student symposium series focused on Latin America, and wondered if that model would work for Asia. Gary noted that Wittenberg has a student-run Asia journal. Joan said that there is a Japan-American student conference.

Elizabeth asked if there is a preferable model for Asian studies. Is there a core to the discipline, or is it just chance? Bob Slagter said that a program could be built around any combination of available faculty. It was mainly chance. Mike said that schools like Knox will always just cobble something together; in time you have to train the faculty to get them concentrated. Joan said that would be a good use of Asia Network, which connects non-specialists interested in Asia. She added that Asianists need to be on hiring and tenure committees involving other Asianists, and that Asian studies should be represented in any meetings of department chairs.

A major developing issue, Elizabeth pointed out, is the length of off-campus study programs. Across the board more students are opting for shorter stays abroad-a semester rather than a year. Such programs are not as useful for language acquisition. Also popular are short-term stays, often connected with a course or a project. Such ventures are expensive, but colleges are investing in them. Joan noted that students respond to such programs, especially when they are subsidized by the college. Gary said that they are ambitious and expensive; sometimes they pay off, but he wondered if they are generally worth the expense. Bob Slagter pointed out that some students wouldn't go at all unless it was a short stay, and suggested that a short stay was better than none at all. Short programs, however, he stressed, should be intense and not a tour; students needed to be injected into the culture. Gary believed that short-stay students would go even if they had to stay longer. Mike stated that a proliferation of short programs would be bad for minority and poorer students. He wondered if we could help fund student participation, perhaps by establishing a fund or an endowment. Joan suggested focusing such aid on schools where financial aid is not portable.

Elizabeth replied that the Global Partners Project can develop an analysis and rationale, but not contribute money or set policy. Mike pointed out that we tend to go where the money is; we might prepare a statement that challenges these developments. Shiwei said that students want a flexible schedule, courses they want and need, and manageable language demands. He suggested collaborating around something like China Star. Lake Forest is going to set up a link; invited other schools to participate. Others were concerned about that program's lack of a language requirement. Elizabeth said it would be good to build a network of people from other campuses to help manage such a relationship.

The Task Force discussed at some length the possible products of its work. Among the suggestions were databases of East Asia faculty, departments, and off-campus study programs. A list of faculty could be useful for finding outside evaluators for programs, suggested Joan, or specialists to advise students, thought Gary. Members wondered who would create and maintain such databases. Elizabeth argued against creating lists for the sake of lists; instead, the data could be used to evaluate off-campus programs and advocate collaboration, for instance. Mike proposed an electronic exchange of what's happening on other campuses, so that faculty could share speakers, arts groups, etc. He suggested a designated contact on each campus. Elizabeth pointed out that the project is not set up to provide services to campuses, but to help colleges think about what they're doing regarding Asian studies and how to strengthen that work through collaboration. As the Task Force clarified its goals, working groups could develop White Papers on salient topics. Such topics might include different models of effective off-campus programs, and various models of developing stronger programs in Asian Studies.

Elizabeth asked when the Task Force should meet again. Joan suggested the spring meeting of Asia Network, April 11 and 12 in Greenville, South Carolina. Gary urged us not to duplicate Asia Network's work, but pointed out that the Global Partners Project is smaller than the Network, so it is more manageable. Shiwei said that the Network's most effective program are the grants that send peers or faculty and students to Asia; he wondered if the Project had grant money for a more geographically focused region. Elizabeth replied that the project did not, and wondered if it were available elsewhere.