Keywords

Introduction

A team of three North Carolina Central University (NCCU) faculty and staff, Lenora Helm Hammonds, Dan Reis, and Emmanuel Oritsejafor, created a new course for a National Endowment for the Humanities project, Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL ). The implementation of the course resulted in globally networked learning environments among two international partners and North Carolina Central University. The course, structured for blended delivery (online and face-to-face classroom), was implemented in Fall 2012, featured asynchronous and synchronous learning tools, and required coordination of new media designers, faculty, instructional technologists, and international program administrators on three continentsFootnote 1.

Background

COIL (Collaborative Online International Learning), is a program that began in 2006 as a faculty-led initiative by Jon Rubin from the State University of New York (SUNY), in Purchase, NY, to support the development of collaborative online international courses. The initiative grew to attract substantial funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities, beginning a three-year project (2010–2013). The NEH funding resulted in SUNY developing the COIL Institute hosting a series of conferences and professional development trainings for educators. Each conference elicited a round of Call for Proposals, with initial rounds open only to SUNY system schools, and subsequent rounds for other U.S.-based colleges and universities. Winning proposals were selected and 23 institutions formed teams of COIL Fellows with international partners, with whom to design and implement collaborative online international courses in the humanities. The U.S.-based institution would serve as lead partner, charged with the responsibility to organize the international team, and attend planning and development workshops and training at the COIL Institute in NYC. After the planning and development workshops, the international teams participated in online training and mentoring via the COIL Institute Commons—a customized social networking platform. This training extended over an eighteen-month period throughout the design, implementation, and delivery phases of each course.

NCCU’s Assistant Professor, Lenora Helm, Hammonds received word of the COIL Call for Proposals through a friend and colleague living in Denmark—an American expatriate filmmaker and new media specialist—Lana Garland, and they began discussing the COIL opportunity. Lenora attended the COIL Institute informational workshop weekend for the COIL Institute in Spring 2011, and upon return, approached NCCU colleagues, Dr. Emmanuel Oritsejafor, then serving as Director, International Affairs, and Dan Reis, Instructional Technologist, to ask about possible international partners and their individual interest. Dr. Ortisejafor contacted University of South Africa, Pretoria (UNISA), an institution with whom NCCU had an existing Memorandum of Understanding, and the connection was made to Dr. Arisa Voges, Director of Directorate of Music/International Programs. The team chose Jazz as the subject of the collaboration based on the strengths of the partner institutions, and Lenora’s idea that Jazz would be a common denominator and unique cultural connector among the three countries. Lenora contacted a professional friend and colleague, NEA Jazz Master/American saxophonist/educator, Dave Leibman, who is also the founder of the International Association of Schools of Jazz. Leibman connected Lenora to IASJ member, The Royal Academy of Music (RAMA), Aarhus, Denmark, and Lana Garland (who speaks fluent Danish) reached RAMA’s Keld Hosbond, Head of International Relations, who enthusiastically agreed to participate. The NCCU team and Lana Garland began writing the proposal. The NCCU team’s winning proposal was chosen as one of 23 international COIL teams of Fellows—the only team with two international partners, and the only team with a subject based in the performing arts. The course was titled Jazz! Born in America, Created Internationally. Culminating the work of a 12-member team, the course established new paradigms in multicultural online learning environments. The purpose of this study is to explore best practices and implications for curriculum revisions focused on student-centered, multiculturally-designed, multimedia tools, uses of technological resources, technology-based music instruction, trends in student engagement in twenty-first century classrooms, team building activities, and assessment .

GLNEs—Definitions and Distinctions

A globally networked learning environment (GNLE ) refers to an environment for learning where students and faculty connect and engage in different parts of the world. The course objectives in GNLEs focuses on students gaining reflective learning and collaborative knowledge creation skills. The goal is that attaining these skills engenders global awareness and understanding of the participants’ cultures. Although the NCCU COIL Fellows’ course focused on Jazz, COIL participants were open to select from a broad array of subjects in the humanities. In a GNLE, the subject provides the context for multicultural exploration and cultivating student cultural competencies.

Typically GNLEs take place online,Footnote 2 through delivery media such as course websites, teleconferences or Skype sessions, linking face-to-face, geo-physically separate live classrooms. What is necessary is the establishment of cohorts of students from at least two cultures, with teachers actively present from these cultures. A blended approach to learning may be incorporated, with tools used in both online delivery and traditional face-to-face teaching. However, there is a particular emphasis on the integrity of content, intellectual sharing, and cultural representation by each cohort. The critical distinction is that GNLEs are not like online courses, in which students may be enrolled in the course from different parts of the world, learning the course content together according to the syllabus from one instructor. Rather, GNLE students are geographically apart from one another, and must have an instructor from the geographic area present as a co-designer, and/or as an instructor, fully co-teaching online for the duration of the course. The role of the geographically-placed co-instructors is to share responsibility for the integrity of the curriculum , to assure the unique cultural geographic perspective of their respective student cohorts. All students are enrolled in the course at their respective institutions. Thus, each instructor is solely responsible for grading the work of the students in his/her cohort, but expected to give feedback to the international students instead of official grades. The intent is for each student cohort to learn the course content through its own distinct cultural lens, and then exchange their perspective with the other student cohorts in the course (Starke-Meyerring et al. 2008, pp. 1–17)Footnote 3. Another important distinction of GNLE is the dual role of the course content. The content should be designed to include activities to facilitate and encourage intercultural exchange, as well as provide a vehicle for learning the chosen course subject. However, the course subject does not need to have an international focus—the intercultural elements should be embedded within the course syllabus. The course activities take place synchronously and asynchronously; each cohort of students sharing their cultural and experiential lens as they move together through the course content. The cohorts share individually and in teams (or performance ensembles), within and across the group, from their own perspective. When successful, a globally networked course should elucidate how the involvement of international students may energize a classroom—providing distinct learning experiences for students and faculty.

Choosing Jazz

As the team reflected and discussed the characteristic elements of the GNLE model, the selection of Jazz became a perfect subject for the partner institutions. The international partner institutions described the major influences and impact of Jazz in their respective countries, and these conversations unveiled opportunities to explore the intersection of Jazz music and culture. From these discussions, we agreed that Jazz music is a major cultural export of the United States, and communities around the globe have embraced this American cultural contribution. Our research and discussions opened many points of influence that also factored into our choice of Jazz. The export of Jazz has impacted the local, regional, and national economies of those countries that have fully embraced the music and musicians, as well as the tourism and intercultural awareness engendered in Jazz events and Jazz education. Jazz music has become a platform to coalesce divergent communities who become aware of, and gain respect for, otherwise separate cultures. Accordingly, Prouty (2012) asserts that Jazz has a profound economic impact, through the import of the music and musicians, and through the advent of numerous jazz festivals, events, and educational institutions offering Jazz to their regions (115–177)Footnote 4. Our course activities were designed with these factors in mind, and were the genesis of conversations about how student-centered learning could be reflected in creative, project-based assignments.

Challenges in Developing Globally Networked Learning Environments in Asynchronous and Synchronous Learning

The collaborative planning among the three universities was three-tiered: (a) administrative planning; (b) curriculum development; (c) implementation.

Each tier gleaned avenues to discover cultural connections through our course content, adaptable for distance education syllabi. The course content goals were also multi-layered, utilizing a constructivist pedagogical approach, opting to design project-based experiential assignments where multiple and different cultural perspectives informed learning and the understanding of course content. In identifying areas of assessment , the team focused on factors that could indicate success in creating an authentic setting for multicultural learning. In creating this course, the NCCU Fellows and their international counterparts had to: (1) navigate barriers and challenges to success in cultivation of institutional support; (2) access technological and funding resources; (3) cultivate access to professional development and technological pedagogical tools for participating faculty; and (4) synthesize educational theories and online teaching pedagogies to match the COIL and GNLE objectives.

Administrative Planning

Managing Institutional Paradigms and Program Structures

The team encountered a layer of challenges in that the structure of the humanities course offerings for each campus was starkly different. The University of South Africa, Pretoria (UNISA) is an entirely online campus, with no face-to-face instruction, and had just started planning jazz education syllabi. The Royal Academy of Music, Aarhus (RAMA) is a music conservatory that offers jazz and contemporary music coursework, and degrees at the undergraduate and graduate levels and had some experience in offering online courses. North Carolina Central University, a liberal arts institution offering doctoral, postgraduate, and undergraduate degrees, has both distance education courses, and a nationally renowned Jazz Studies program. In light of these organizational differences, we were able to transform the institutional cultures embedded in our habits of course design, and turn the challenge into the opportunity to design a globally networked learning environment in the COIL model. This was not an easy endeavor, and required a measure of equal parts compromise and consensus. We looked for the strengths from each institution. The UNISA students were distance education learners, and were accustomed to learning online. The team could also leverage the experience of NCCU’s distance education models of delivery and tools as they also offered courses and degrees online. RAMA had a strong network of international partnerships, and their students were accustomed to interacting with students from other cultures.

Coming to consensus about how to proceed was aided by the time spent together during the planning meetings and professional development training—the team members really wanted to make this course happen. After the team spent time together at a distance education conference in Denmark and the COIL Institute trainings, we were profoundly aware of what there was to achieve, both as contributions to our campus and for our colleagues in the field. At the risk of romanticizing the resulting process, likening it to the mindset of Jazz musicians, our discussions were void of rigidity about institutional culture or paradigms, and stayed firmly grounded in a core concept of jazz improvisation—what serves the music at this precise moment—hence, what would serve our objectives best? The Danish team had recently undergone a rigorous institutional self-study, adopting the Bologna Process (533–549)Footnote 5 as a lens for conceptualizing educational theories of curriculum planning and design. Their contribution to the discussion centered the team on the core themes of the learning cycles of knowledge, skill, and general competence, and how these themes could impact our planning and design.

Curriculum Development

Course Content and Design

The directive from the COIL Institute about team roles informed each member’s function. Research has proven that the support of senior administration, international programs staff, instructional technologists, and faculty working in tandem, is integral for a successful international education partnership. Absence of the support of either role could compromise implementation or course design (Sutton and Obst 2011, pp. 1–170)Footnote 6. Our team was fortunate that some of the roles overlapped at the institutions involved: Keld Hosbond (RAMA) and Emmanuel Oritsejafor (NCCU) both had faculty roles and international programs staff duties; thus, their expertise and input drove ideas about course design in meaningful ways. For instance, cultural considerations were discussed first in team meetings—an unusual initial focus for faculty in early course design stages. Once these cultural considerations were vetted, the team discussed appropriate choices for course content, e.g., music repertoire and reflection questions. A distinction of the COIL model is the democratization of course content, thus the expectation is all team members should contribute to the syllabus. At the outset of our planning discussions, this collaborative approach to course design proved easier for some team members than others. Initially, our instructional technologists seemed content to research software and give lists of ideas to assist faculty; international relations staff commented on a reluctance to infringe on course design—an area traditionally assumed the responsibility of faculty. COIL Institute cautioned teams early in the planning stages of the possibility of this dynamic being a barrier for course design, and luckily built necessary resources into our training. COIL provided all Fellows access to research, relevant readings and guided discussions, comparing design elements, thereby equipping the team and fostering a culture of collaborative course design. As the syllabus began to take shape, instructional technologists (Reis, Garland and Short) contributed ideas for lesson content utilizing technology, and researched software to assist learning outcomes . Subsequently, the experience of our international programs specialists (Hosbond and Oritsejafor) informed the team of international customs and sensitivities, and suggested course content engendering learning outcomes in cultural competencies. We had a unique addition to our team in American expatriate, Danish speaking filmmaker and new media specialist, Lana Garland, who, though not affiliated directly with a particular university, offered her services to the course mission and outcomes. She videotaped concert and workshop footage used in our course syllabus, and was a key player in the conceptualization and planning stages. Her professional obligations did not allow her to continue in full capacity with the team for the duration, but her imprint was an important element of the success of the course.

The subject focus of Jazz developed in the course content in two tributaries, which we called Level 1 (musicians or performers) and Level 2 (non-musicians or performers). The primary reasons for the subcategories addressed our student population, comprising music majors and non-music majors. We considered limiting the class to only music majors, but instead explored the affordance of replicating an authentic “real-world” community of music makers and music consumers. Our concern was the possible complication of designing a course for two student populations. However, the decision boded well as the mixed class make-up was a catalyst for stimulating conversations in Live Classroom. Student musicians were sometimes startled as their non-musician peers candidly expressed opinions about tastes in music, concert experiences, and musician stage habits. Iconic jazz artists had student loyalists in each culture, and students’ expressions of everything from career influence or family memories to legendary myths or cultural misperceptions—about American artists like jazz saxophonist John Coltrane and singer Billie Holiday, South Africa’s Miriam Makeba and Hugh Masekela, and Denmark’s Jesper Thilo—were pleasantly surprising to the entire team. Our faculty used these discussion moments to talk about cultural differences, race relations, and shared historical impact on topics ranging from gender bias, South African Apartheid, the Civil Rights movement, and the Nazi occupation of Denmark. The assignments ranged from students’ performances of songs composed by artists in each culture, mock and real-life jazz concert and event production, to attendance at jazz festivals or concert series. Each assignment gave instructions for the Level 1 and Level 2 students.

Team Meetings

During our planning stages, we used the access to Moodle (also a learning management system) and to COIL Institute Commons to begin gathering information and receiving training and resources from the COIL Institute. As our planning progressed and moved toward implementation, our team staggered between Google + and Flash Meeting for our weekly discussions, and for our small and large group meetings. We found Flash Meeting to be the most reliable and easy to use among the team.

Internet Access and Technology Team Roles

We chose the learning management system Lore.com, after our instructional technologists provided several sample formats to explore. It was important for the tools to be accessible in a variety of bandwidths, and for the access to be free. Also, it was important that the functionality resemble platforms with which the students were already familiar. Everything we needed was in Lore.com. However, the internet speed and accessibility were problematic for our South African partners. The time of day for our Live Classroom sessions was chosen based on the optimal times for connectivity on available bandwidth for South African students, and the United States and Danish partners had to adjust usual institutional class times accordingly.

Our connectivity was enhanced and facilitated through NCCU’s affiliation with nonprofit technology partner MCNC, operating a statewide research and education network called North Carolina Research and Education Network (NCREN). Through NCREN, the institutional partners were provided free connectivity to the weekly Live Classroom. The costs were covered by NCCU’s inclusion as a University of North Carolina institution, allowing all UNC system schools NCREN access. NCREN was able to connect our international partners to our Live Classroom each week, archive each class, and assured smooth transmission during Live Classroom. UNISA, being the largest distance education university in Africa, had students connecting from many regions outside of its Pretoria campus, and not all students had availability to the Live Classroom. Those few students either came to UNISA’s campus to the Live Classroom, or completed only asynchronous activities, such as watching archived classes and responding to peer comments, and participating after each class online in Lore’s timeline.

Real-time monitoring by NCREN staff in the event a lost connection occurred proved a critical benefit. NCREN provided a team, coordinated by NCCU’s teleconference specialist, Wanda McIver who would monitor and troubleshoot the weekly sessions among NCCU, UNISA, and RAMA. This technology team proved critical in facilitating Live Classroom, and freed up the faculty to focus during the class on teaching and student engagement . UNISA and RAMA also provided a teleconference person monitoring each class to interact with and respond to Wanda’s leadership. Additional roles of the instructional technologists included reviewing the equipment at each institution to insure the equipment and internet connectivity, organizing room assignments, and confirming weekly schedules, equipment and room availability.

The Twenty-first Century Learner in a GNLE

The COIL Institute course planning guidelines designated Fellows develop student-centered courses. Given that the majority of our students are considered “millennial learners” and consensus in academia is that millennial learners are changing the academic landscape, we realized we had to carefully consider our pedagogical approaches. The research about the characteristics of millennial learners, coupled with the rapid growth and daily use of social media, the internet, and the use of technology, impacts all educators around the globe. Emerging research suggests that asynchronous and synchronous learning environments are tools educators can use to bridge the generational gap between faculty and student, and maintain relevance to, and for, the millennial learner (Novotney 2010, p. 60)Footnote 7. The millennial learner’s world is largely a virtual world. Our goal in the COIL course was to achieve immersion of technological tools and new media throughout the course content for maximum student engagement , but not have technology dominate the engagement.

Even with our best effort and COIL professional development trainings, faculty preparedness and student willingness to use technological tools became an issue in the course. Again, we understood in our courageous effort to “guinea pig” the technological tools within the course content that we could meet road bumps. In our planning stages, the instructional technologists and new media consultant offered research to allay some concern about technological tools and multimedia infused curricula (Dorfman 2013, pp. 1–49)Footnote 8. As it turns out, millennial learners are not tech savvy—but tech dependent! Yes, millennia’s are more engaged when the activities require multimedia and social media websites (Novotney 2010, p. 60)Footnote 9, but some assignments incorporated music notation software, internet websites and music recording devices. We learned first hand that our students were not interested in the how-to of technology, and were barely impressed with some tools—they just wanted it to work—via their cell phone. The students complained in the beginning of the course about any tool requiring more than two instructions or trouble with accessing the course website on their cell phones!

Implementation of the Course

Course Description—Jazz! Born in America, Created Internationally

The course examined jazz music from the beginning of the twentieth century until the present. Although the core of the course was designed for online delivery, designated course-related activities occurred in classroom settings or on performance stages. We decided upon Live Classroom performances to the extent the performance would not be hampered by latency—a delay of several seconds that inhibits real-time responses. Also, some Level 2 students were only designated to perform in concerts—either because they did not have time compatibility in their schedule to officially participate in the course, but were eager to participate in the international collaboration, or because only a limited number of students were funded for study abroad to accept the invitation to perform in South Africa at the UNISA First International Jazz School residency. These designated course-related activities included master classes, workshops, performance combos, and concerts. Students utilized various technological tools, facilitating access to course content and activities. Students of all arts and humanities disciplines were encouraged to enroll. The class (Level 1) met online weekly in Live Classroom at a designated time to interact with international students between partner institutions, and were encouraged to participate in course-related activities with Level 2 student performers. The Level 2 performers were organized in several concert activities during the course, which were videotaped and uploaded to the Lore.com website. Level 1 students were then asked to write responses similar to concert reviews or course timeline comments after viewing the performances guided by related course lecture material.

Pre-Course Launch

The commitment of the three international partners for Jazz! Born in America, Created Internationally was clear from the beginning of the collaboration. All partners had representatives in Copenhagen, Denmark (August 2011) to attend a Distance Learning Conference in Higher Education in Music.

All partners also attended the COIL workshops (October 2011) in New York to engage in the groundwork for the course planning. These pre-course meetings and conferences were key components to the success of the course for several reasons. First, the partners were able to meet and digest the information while learning the elements of successful course outcomes. Second, the face-to-face time was important to build trust and understanding for academic congruency. This was useful when challenges came up in communications. Third, when personnel changes at each university created a shift in team dynamics, the core personnel were intact, and had fully informed their university administration about the COIL vision and potential. For such a large team, maintaining a shared vision was the glue upon which we relied, (and proved pivotal) given the seemingly insurmountable task of planning and implementing a globally networked learning environment between universities with very different program structures.

Preparation for students could only occur in ice-breaker activities of video bios in which students introduced themselves to classmates and shared any level desired about background in music, personal experience with online courses, and previous travel abroad. (A more comprehensive discussion follows of these activities.)

Course Activities

Jazz! Born in America, Created Internationally was ultimately a course designed to observe and explore the cultures of Denmark, South Africa, and the United States through the lens of jazz.

The significant course activities included:

  • a. weekly meetings via live teleconference sessions between international partners;

  • b. online chat during weekly teleconference sessions for students unable to attend in-person;

  • c. viewing videos of iconic jazz performers;

  • d. viewing of historical film footage;

  • e. course readings;

  • f. student-created video bios;

  • g. composing music and/or lyrics;

  • h. learning songs to perform together in class;

  • i. student performances during weekly live teleconference sessions;

  • j. short writing assignments;

  • k. listening to mp3s of jazz recordings for assignments;

  • l. analysis of jazz recordings and videos for assignments;

  • m. discussion of observations and perceptions of evidence of cultural customs in conversations, writings, and media.

Secondary course activities included:

  • a. performing in concert events at UNISA International Jazz School (for our Level 2 students);

  • b. attending in-person workshops at UNISA International Jazz School (for our Level 2 students);

  • c. conversations with NCCU Guest Faculty and Artist-in-Residence Branford Marsalis in culminating class;

  • d. viewing of concert footage of performances of student musicians;

  • e. viewing archived weekly live teleconference sessions (Live Classroom);

  • f. faculty-led workshops (Sean Adams at NCCU, and NCCU and RAMA faculty at UNISA)

  • g. internet research;

  • h. student-to-student informal discussions.

The primary and secondary course activities above were infused in the weekly assigned tasks during the teleconference sessions (Live Classroom) through access to course content on Lore.com, and during physical face-to-face visits in faculty-led student and faculty guest lecturer study abroad among international partners (UNISA to NCCU, and NCCU and RAMA to UNISA). The weekly lesson plans from the syllabus incorporated synchronous and asynchronous activities to allow students who were not able to join Live Classroom sessions to also experience the course content and engage in dialogue with their classmates. They achieved these tasks in two ways; by watching archived Live Classroom sessions (stored on MCNC’s servers and accessible with private access links), or by live-chat if geographically apart from their student cohort’s physical class. These extra connectivity features enabled RAMA, which had two campus locations, to have some students dial into our teleconference connection remotely.

Class Discussions

During the weekly live teleconference sessions, student cohorts and all faculty members discussed the assigned videos, course readings, and listening links (mp3s) related to each week’s topic. Our syllabus was divided into three modules (four weeks in duration), with faculty from each country leading the discussion for their assigned module, but with input from all faculty present in the session. The GNLE design calls for all faculty to interact with students in each class session. The discussions allowed the students to reflect on observations about numerous cultural comparisons and the impact of related historical events on jazz music. For example, a discussion ensued one week about the similarities and differences of treatments of American jazz musicians being discriminated against during Jim Crow, and South African jazz musicians during apartheid, and Nazi German officers who reportedly convened clandestine listening sessions to Danish jazz musicians during the German occupation in Denmark. Our weekly Live Classroom sessions were a strong component of the students gaining cultural competency because students could meet and interact as if they were in a physical classroom, sitting next to each other. All classes were in English, decided among the faculty as the common language for all students. Students participated by raising their hands, and if not physically present faculty not leading the discussion supported their colleague by monitoring the live chat feed on the Lore.com course page, to assure student questions on live chat were acknowledged in the classroom discussion.

Submission of Assignments

Short writing assignments (reflections and research), student-created video bios, and student compositions were submitted, and uploaded to Lore.com course web-page. Assignments uploaded to the Lore.com course website were viewed by faculty who provided feedback on the students’ work. Often faculty would comment publicly on student work on the timeline for all students to see, but again, grading for each student cohort was the sole responsibility of faculty of the university in which they were enrolled. Students were provided with detailed instructions (written by our instructional technologists) to upload assignments to Lore.com, how to create student videos and podcasts, and how to access archived classes.

Student-led Discussions

Informal student-to-student conversations took place on our course website, Lore.com, in a section called “Discussion,” similar to timeline status updates on social media websites. Students did not need faculty permission to create a discussion thread. Lore.com was chosen because it functioned much like Facebook ’s platform and as such, we had hoped it would enhance communication among students because of its familiarity. This hunch proved successful, and students freely took full advantage to interact offline and online, post comments, and respond to faculty prompts and peer comments. They also posted assignments and uploaded materials and/or results of their own research. Posts were not anonymous, but as Lore is a password-protected site—participants were only granted access as a result of being given a link to join—students’ work was secure.

Online Performances

Students were given assignments to create and submit compositions, or create derivative compositions based on traditional folk songs or traditional repertoire. Students performed these compositions during Live Classroom, or submitted them through student-created videos of their performance(s). They accomplished video creation by using simple recording devices on their telephones or personal laptops, then uploading to YouTube with an unlisted (private) link, subsequently pasting the link in submitted assignments or on the course timeline.

Guest Faculty Presentations and Interviews

Guest NCCU faculty, guitarist Baron Tymas and trombonist Robert Trowers led discussions on weekly live teleconference with students to facilitate a deeper experience of jazz history (Trowers) and jazz theory (Tymas). During the last class, world-renowned jazz musician, saxophonist Branford Marsalis, joined the class for a candid and lively discussion about global cultural perceptions of jazz music.

Live Concerts and Workshops

Travel between international partners allowed students and faculty to deepen relationships and perform together. These interactions were important later in the residency as we learned of the challenges with occasional online connectivity and access through Lore.com during the weekly teleconferences—especially for the South African students. However, some of the South African students attended the UNISA International Jazz School, and were able to meet and interact with the NCCU and RAMA faculty and Level 2 students, who traveled to South Africa for the UNISA International Jazz School, a ten-day residency of workshops and culminating concerts. UNISA hosted faculty from NCCU and RAMA, and NCCU obtained funding to take some Level 2 students to participate in the UNISA ten-day residency.

Icebreakers and Intercultural Interactions

The faculty decided upon an icebreaker required for students and faculty of a video bio, and the assignment was called, “Who I Am in Jazz.” This assigned task was done in the two weeks prior to the course launch, and designed as an informal and fun introduction between classmates and faculty. It was also a way to test the students’ comfort level with using video, using the course website, and using new media. Students that completed the task were very engaged with this exercise and found it interactive. Uploads of the video bios were required to Lore.com and remained there throughout the course.

The intercultural interactions were assisted by weekly assignments; many assignments required students to identify a comparative example of a concept or event represented in their culture. One example is a discussion about organizations that support jazz or promote jazz on television or radio resulting from an assignment to listen to an NPR (National Public Radio) segment dedicated to Louis Armstrong. Our initial discussions and inquiry of similar programs in Denmark or South Africa led to a short research excursion for Danish students, who returned in a subsequent week with information of their new discovery of a similar historical radio program and series in Denmark. Further intercultural interactions that were notable are discussions about South African icons—jazz singer Miriam Makeba and pianist Abdullah Ibrahim, and comparisons with American jazz singer Nina Simone and American (expatriates) in Europe.

Addressing Challenges and Solutions

We had two key areas of challenges: program structure differences and student expectations. We were unable to completely overcome our very different program structures. NCCU is primarily a liberal arts university with undergraduate and graduate programs, and our participants were music majors and non-music majors. The course was primarily offered as a distance education course—with the added feature of a weekly online meeting (Live Classroom), and with some student musicians recruited for the Level 2 component, to assure performers interaction with the student musicians at RAMA. Though it was a distance education course, most students were on campus for traditional courses. Many of the NCCU students enrolled in the course had never taken a distance education course, but were drawn to the course description and wanted to participate due to the nature of the globally networked environment feature. UNISA is a distance education university, and does not have students on campus. Additionally, the bandwidth capacity or accessibility for students was not consistent across students enrolled. Lastly, some students at UNISA commented about being VERY insecure about participating online or in weekly teleconference meetings citing that though they were interested to learn about Jazz, were classically trained and new to Jazz. Some were uncomfortable interacting face-to-face, citing that jazz was a very new field and area for them, and they instead preferred to take an observer-only approach. RAMA is a program designed entirely of music majors, and though the students were informed that the goal of the course design was to learn about each other’s culture through the lens of music, they were expecting to perform together with their international classmates in every class. Because of this expectation, the discussions and assignments that did not involve performing seemed less desirable to the RAMA students. However, many RAMA students stated that they enjoyed the exposure to cultural perspectives and related historical events, as well as learning about the iconic contributions of South African and American jazz musicians.

We tried to address the different program structures and student make-up in a two-tiered syllabus design (Level 1 and Level 2). Student performers and musicians would demonstrate jazz concepts, characteristic elements in jazz music, and create compositions and lyrics in weekly class sessions. All students would complete written assignments, reflections, and prepare to participate in discussions. Some students would travel to perform.

What may have created more realistic expectations for students is a pre-course discussion with students to reiterate the pros and cons of our GNLE course. Our team gained a clearer understanding of the need for integrative and comprehensive course outcomes specific to the collaborative online model during the reflection and analysis of our assessment data. Because some faculty came on board after the October COIL training workshops, there was a learning curve, and a training-after-the-training dynamic that undermined our course objectives, and was not fully apparent until the assessment phase of the project. Though we discussed the concerns for relevancy of course activities with respect to our subsets of Level 1 (music majors) and Level 2 (non-music majors), some of our objectives were overly ambitious. We discerned fewer activities may have been more effective, but were in agreement that having both music and non-music majors interacting and engaged together energized and informed the learning, and provided access for rich and rewarding cross-cultural connections.

Time Changes

A much unexpected challenge which should not have caught any of us by surprise (but did) was Daylight Savings Time . When the time changed in the U.S. and Denmark, the decision had to be made about whether to move the class time, and who would change. NCCU could not move the class—a direct result of the very different organizational structure. NCCU is a state-run university, bound by rigid rules determining course times and student responsibilities. The process of gaining permission to move institutionally-set class times is at the level above NCCU senior administration, requiring a lengthy cumbersome legal process via UNC general administration. UNISA’s students are all distance education students, so Live Classroom meeting times and student expectations of face-to-face meetings are easy to adjust. It was inconvenient for RAMA to change the time, but not requiring a policy change necessitating legal permissions. The easiest solution was for our European and South African partners to move their class meeting time.

Even though we had all discussed this expected change of time, some either missed the meeting, meeting minutes, or forgot the course would not have to be moved to the new Daylight Savings time. We chalked this problem up to a misunderstanding in communication—not an uncommon hiccup for such a large team. It was a scramble, and was somewhat frustrating for everyone. Eventually, we discussed a solution, and the RAMA students and faculty, in the spirit of cooperation, moved their class to accommodate the change. It was a learning experience for everyone involved, albeit uncomfortable. This is an example of organizational structure and dynamics creating challenges in course design.

Unexpected and Interesting Directions

Some interesting outcomes arose out of the students performing online together, and with students and faculty performing together in concert. Memories were frozen in time for some students, who never imagined traveling to South Africa to perform, or having the ability to perform with international musicians online in real time in-person. Students commented the course afforded a first experience of meeting someone from another country with whom to interact with online. Their emotions ranged from being amazed to elation at the commonalities in musical tastes they shared with their musician peers. Consequently, a kindred journey and shared interests emanated. The last class, which featured conversation with Branford Marsalis, was also a memorable and unexpected moment in the course. It buttressed the conversations that had evolved during the course content and provided the context for a strong closure.

Summary

Educators considering a GNLE must take into account the extraordinary amount of time needed for planning, discussion, evaluation, and conceptualization before curriculum design can begin. This project was largely successful because of the commitment of the team, where not only the faculty-led efforts, but the entire team effort was remarkable. Inherent in the mindset within Jazz is a predisposition to uncertainty and the need for adaptability. Because of the familiarity, whether as jazz performers or jazz lovers, faculty and staff in the NCCU-RAMA-UNISA COIL team of fellows demonstrated an innate ability to somehow move through challenges with calm and steadiness, as if performing an elaborate jazz solo. Though our planning and implementation was deliberate and calculated, a pervasive feeling that we could all flow, create, adapt, and recreate was sustained throughout the collaboration. Everyone expressed having their creative needle move and their cultural lens sharpened.

Developing the culture among faculty and staff to facilitate the successful design of a collaborative teaching model required a mentoring relationship and structure to support, and in some instances coddle, our international team. The COIL Institute was responsible for the successful foundation upon which Jazz! Born in America, Created Internationally was built. Educators endeavoring to adopt a GNLE model must above all else develop these foundational pillars gleaned from the COIL research of best practices: (a) All stakeholders must adopt a thorough understanding of the core GNLE operational construct—student cohorts guided by faculty present geographically developing cultural competencies using the course subject as a learning tool; (b) Technological tools used in GNLEs must feel invisible to the learner and instructor in order to avoid the usual pitfall of thinking one must become a technology expert; (c) Prepare students to interact with their international classmates by developing “rules of engagement”—discussing cultural sensitivities for written and spoken communications, providing ice-breaker tasks, and encouraging offline opportunities to engage directly with classmates; (d) Faculty and staff should meet weekly in the planning stages, allowing at least one full year prior to the course launch and at a minimum bi-weekly during the course; (e) Keep the course design as simple as possible!

Our assessment data reflected student engagement and demonstrable learning via the course subject was greatly aided by multimedia and the use of technological resources with which the students were familiar. When the assignment called for photos or recordings to create podcasts, we provided instruction on YouTube account management, uses of GarageBand, iTunes, and photo document management. By mid-course, students were posting music, news articles, and Facebook postings about Jazz artists and current events, or extending in-class discussion onto the Lore.com course equivalent to FaceBook-esque timeline. One particular point in the course was especially gratifying when faculty observed students’ postings during the class in real-time resulted in a competition for who would be the fastest student to find and post relevant materials about the partner countries on the course discussion. This reflected a sense of students wholly embracing ownership of the class experience and moving from no knowledge of cross-cultural events, to feeling responsible to “find what there was to know” about each country and its culture. The students commented they gained confidence in talking about cultural experiences and perceptions as a result of the course content—a marked difference from comments in the ice-breaker essays at the beginning of the course. Students also observed and commented the project-based nature of the assignments required more substantial use of technology than some other courses. The specific competencies most consistently reported were researching historical Jazz and music film footage, utilizing websites such as www.jazzstandards.com and/or library resources at their institution.

The performing arts presented an interesting challenge simply because demonstrable learning can be hard to detect in certain music contexts. Research in the last decade has encouraged educators who are using technology-based music instruction in project-based learning activities with multi-media resources (Dorfman 2013, pp. 1–49). The knowledge base for musicians, though broad, is consistent on foundational elements, ex. skills per instrument, fundamental theory and sight-reading abilities as basic requirements, especially at the collegiate level. However, the individual student range of performing talent can vary greatly directly impacting the ability of faculty to assess student outcomes across a single class, not to mention across cultures. Our students knew the same songs; it is expected all jazz musicians know the canon of Jazz standard repertoire. The cultural perspectives and skill level were obvious when performing together (online and in-person) and required adjustments (and rendered discussion) on all sides. For instance, personality traits like assertiveness or creative expression were often misread. How do you assess perception? “Aggressive” was the descriptor used by a Danish participant for a style of Jazz music known as be-bop, (a fast paced and challenging Jazz style) and other students held a quite different perception and descriptor. Does this mean the student did not learn what Jazz be-bop music really is at its core, or is the perception in Denmark of be-bop music a reflection of cultural differences? With divergent opinions such as these, it is clear that the pre-course relationship building activities among faculty would have benefited students.

Though the COIL Institute training was comprehensive, the field of research for best practices in GNLEs is very new. We were warned our work was in a pilot phase for collaborative online learning. In hindsight, the pedagogical content knowledge across the team and divergent educational theories were counterintuitive to the GNLE construct. Music instruction can often operate in a “top-down” teacher-student environment—a “sage on the stage” philosophy. The GNLE model supports a strong “guide on the side” constructivist pedagogical approach. Because we chose an improvisational art form—Jazz—we expected to avoid the troublesome linearity inherent in performing arts instruction. Teaching and learning in an online environment requires specificity and orchestration in every stage of planning in conjunction with an openness to create in the moment—akin to Jazz improvisation. The myth about Jazz, and particularly about improvisation, is creating an improvised solo means musicians are doing whatever they want. To do so would be a recipe for disaster, not to mention a bad jazz performance ethic! The prudent Jazz soloist must have full command of the theoretical and harmonic infrastructure of the genre to reap a cogent performance, and must then fire that performance with creativity, before the freedom to create spontaneous composition—a more factual definition of jazz improvisation—can be mastered.

The collaborative approach to course design and implementation, and the geo-physical requirement for faculty and staff representing each student cohort, prevented an American hegemonic presence, ushering in an innovative heterogeneity in our course design. The project-based activities also facilitated a heuristic experience for students who traveled to South Africa to participate in concerts and workshops, and intertwined cultural and global awareness via Live Classroom with a virtual study abroad experience. The qualitative assessment data implicates a premise for further research that globally linked classrooms may be a possible answer for creating study abroad experiences for students. We worked extremely hard, and made the commitment to sustain the collaborative relationships for future courses.

Two such courses with the same three institutions (and modifications where necessary according to subject in faculty assignments) were designed and delivered in Fall 2013 (Composing, Arranging & Song writing in a Global Network) and Spring 2014 (Global Guitar).