Internationalizing a Journalism Curriculum Using Distance Education Technology: A Pilot Project Between Lebanese American University and the University of Missouri-Columbia
October 26-29, 1999, Beirut, Lebanon
— by Magda Abu-Fadil (Lebanese American Univeristy) and Roger Gafke (University of Missouri-Columbia)
The Pilot Project
Journalism faculty members at Lebanese American University (Beirut) and the University of Missouri-Columbia (USA), using the World Wide Web and e-mail, edited student news stories at the other university during the spring 1999 semester. The purpose of the project was to identify how to use a distant editor productively as a resource for a news writing course.
The 15 Missouri students were second-semester sophomores enrolled in one section of a three-hour, required news reporting and writing course. (There also was one graduate student in the course.) The course is the first news writing experience for many of the students. They must achieve a satisfactory grade in the course for admission to the School of Journalism the following semester. Most of the students were native-born Americans, most from the state of Missouri in the central part of the county. There also were students from Canada, Sweden, Norway, and India. English was the birth-language for all except the latter three. The LAU editor reviewed two stories from each student, one produced early in the semester and the other, the final project of the course.
The eight LAU students were seniors enrolled in an advanced reporting, editing and production course or a feature and magazine writing class. It was at least the fourth writing or reporting class for them. LAU students are of different nationalities and some are dual nationals, i.e. Lebanese-American or Lebanese-Canadian. They come from different education systems and different Arab countries. Although English is the language of instruction at LAU, it is the birth-language for only a few LAU students. For most, English is their second or third language after Arabic, French or Armenian. The Missouri editor reviewed two or three stories from each student.
The Missouri course makes extensive use of the World Wide Web, individual e-mail and an e-mail class discussion group for making news assignments, submitting and editing student work and discussing themes and trends. The technology makes it possible for the faculty editors to make assignments, set expectations, provide instruction and help, review student work and communicate with individual students or with the entire class outside of the scheduled class meetings. This Web-based delivery of the course could become the foundation for an international reporting and news writing course should this project be taken to the next step. The LAU editor copied Missouri student stories from the course Web pages, and returned her comments via email to the Missouri instructor, who sent them via e-mail to individual students. The reason: It was sometimes difficult to work directly onto the Missouri web site due to various technical problems at LAU.
The LAU students submit their stories as individual computer files. The instructor sent them as e-mail attachments to the Missouri editor. He made comments inside the text of each story and returned the annotated stories to the LAU faculty member, who distributed them to the students.
The goal for the project was to give the students feedback from the editor in a different culture about news values, how the story would play in the second culture and how cultural values might be buried in the text as fact.
For a Missouri story on X-ray examination of animal mummies, the LAU editor asked: "'Egyptian religion.' No such animal. It's misleading. If you mean ancient Egyptian religious practice, then indicate it."
For a Missouri story on a debate on expanding an Islamic center in Columbia, the LAU editor asked: "What's an Islamic education? Is it like Sunday school? Use familiar frame of reference. Explain."
For a Missouri story about mourning the death of a university student, the LAU editor observed: "American college students seem spoiled and immature when it comes to dealing with grief. They should see what's happening worldwide and appreciate what they've got and stop being so self-centered and parochial."
For a Missouri story about multicultural education, the LAU editor noted: "There's no mention of the teaching of different languages. Exposure begins with multi-lingualism and develops from extensive knowledge of geography, history and current affairs.... This is a very parochial approach."
For an LAU story about journalism education in Lebanon, the Missouri editor said: "I object to the content of the story...There is too much opinion from the writer here...Also, the writer quotes students from LU and faculty at LAU. That is not equal treatment."
For an LAU story about parking problems for students, the Missouri editor wrote: "If it were to run in a campus newspaper on our campus, I would want two primary changes: 1) I want the editorial comments from the writer removed or at least supported by facts and quotes from the reporting process. 2) The lead for this story is buried in the text."
For an LAU story about student parking, the Missouri editor wrote: "I think the two opening paragraphs do not get to the story quick enough. We call this 'writer's warm-up.' We writers often have to start with some beginning paragraphs that get left off or moved lower in the final version. The most important question I have about this story is what is the news? What is new about these two lots that warrants a story now?"
In addition to these global comments, both editors commented on errors in style, awkward usage, unanswered questions in the text and wordiness in the copy from both student groups.
The distance editing in both cases was completed after the actual editing/grading process for the stories was finished. Therefore, the editing in this project played no direct role in the development of the final stories. With no grade at stake, most students took little note of the editors' comments. The Missouri students most interested in reviewing the comments from the distant editor were those from other countries and those American students with previous international experience. They expressed particular interest in commentary on cultural and news values. The LAU students were all very interested in the comments by the Missouri editor and found him more lenient than their own instructor.
For a Missouri story about problems local farmers are having with international markets, the criticism from the LAU editor included: "Lead is too exasperatingly long and boring. Too many 'value-added' references in that lead without explaining what that means."
The student responded: "I'm quite embarrassed about my writing in this piece so I can understand all the criticism. The one thing that is missing is any cultural (comment). There is nothing to make me wonder how I did writing as a North American or as a Caucasian male."
The LAU editor found "convoluted" construction in some paragraphs of the first story from another Missouri student. Later in the semester from the same student, the editor noted much improvement in a story about step-brothers and sisters: "Very good topic. Really interesting and affects and touches many people. Well written and handled. Good quotes, good research. Good lead. Catchy."
The student responded: "[She] was thorough and helpful. I would like to have seen her comment on how she thought a Lebanese reader, or any other international reader, would react to my story."
For an LAU story on an increase in the university's financial aid budget, the Missouri editor commented: "If the story is intended for a student audience, a campus newspaper, the lead ought to be focused on student interest. I think this one has an administrative focus - how much the budget has increased."
The student responded: "Maybe I got a little carried away with the figures and what officials told me."
For an LAU story on the university's journalism program being one of the best in Lebanon, the Missouri editor said: "My objection to that is there are the three possibilities that are presented with none of them as a central focus for the story. The headline promises a story about the need to expand the LAU program. There is little of that in the body of the story."
The student concurred.