Study Abroad Student Learning Outcomes
Integrated into departmental curricula, short-term programs should provide the opportunity for faculty to explore pedagogical methods and approaches that are otherwise impossible in a classroom-based course.  Short-term programs can be scheduled flexibly and ideally involve the cooperation of two instructors teaching two courses from within their disciplines that complement each other as well as the destination.  Depending on the offerings, each student earns credit for one or two courses, and pays a program fee that covers all aspects of travel and living abroad.  Most short-term study abroad programs run between ten and twenty-five days during the January or Summer break.  Course proposals will engage the location, through regular engagement with local people and groups and/or sites of interest in order to enhance opportunities for learning.

Proposals must incorporate the Study Abroad Student Learning Outcomes into the proposal and syllabus and must show how the course will/can attract students. Proposals that meet or exceed expectations in three of the six student learning outcomes below may be recommended to move forward:
 
  1. Knowledge of cultural worldview frameworks
    1. Meet Expectations: Demonstrates adequate understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of another culture in relation to its history, values, politics, communication styles, economy, or beliefs and practices
    2. Exceeds Expectations: Demonstrates sophisticated understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of another culture in relation to its history, values, politics, communication styles, economy, or beliefs and practices.
  2. Understanding Global Systems:
    1. Meet Expectations: Analyzes major elements of global systems, including their historic and contemporary interconnections and the differential effects of human organizations and actions, to pose elementary solutions to complex problems in the human and natural worlds.
    2. Exceeds Expectations: Uses deep knowledge of the historic and contemporary role and differential effects of human organizations and actions on global systems to develop and advocate for informed, appropriate action to solve complex problems in the human and natural worlds.
  3. Cultural Self-awareness:
    1. Meet Expectations: Recognizes new perspectives about own cultural rules and biases (e.g. not looking for sameness; comfortable with the complexities that new perspectives offer.)
    2. Exceeds Expectations: Articulates insights into own cultural rules and biases (e.g. seeking complexity; aware of how her/ his experiences have shaped these rules, and how to recognize and respond to cultural biases, resulting in a shift in self-description.)
  4. Applying Knowledge to Contemporary Global Contexts:
    1. Meet Expectations: Plans and evaluates more complex solutions to global challenges that are appropriate to their contexts using multiple disciplinary perspectives (such as cultural, historical, and scientific).
    2. Exceeds Expectations: Applies knowledge and skills to implement sophisticated, appropriate, and workable solutions to address complex global problems using interdisciplinary perspectives independently or with others.
  5. Cultural Diversity: 
    1. Meet Expectations: Analyzes substantial connections between the worldviews, power structures, and experiences of multiple cultures historically or in contemporary contexts, incorporating respectful interactions with other cultures.
    2. Exceeds Expectations: Adapts and applies a deep understanding of multiple worldviews, experiences, and power structures while initiating meaningful interaction with other cultures to address significant global problems.
  6. Independence:
    1. Meet Expectations: Beyond classroom requirements, pursues substantial, additional knowledge and/or actively pursues independent educational experiences.
    2. Exceeds Expectations: Educational interests and pursuits exist and flourish outside classroom requirements. Knowledge and/or experiences are pursued independently.
 
Additionally, faculty must consider the following when developing a short term study abroad program:
Purpose and Focus
  • Interest among students and faculty: Is the destination and the course of interest to the Gonzaga community?
  • Marketability: Does the proposed course have a target audience?  Do the faculty making the proposal demonstrate that they will be able to recruit a minimum of 10 students? Faculty with accepted proposals will be required to actively participate in recruitment.  If a course does not meet minimum requirements it will be cancelled.
  • Curricular and strategic-goal fit: Does the proposed program enhance or compliment the departmental, College, School or University curriculum and/or strategic goals? Will courses meet other curricular requirements?
  • Study Abroad student learning outcomes: Does the proposed program and syllabus show how it will meet the study abroad student learning outcomes?  

Program Design
  • Experiential Learning: How course(s) will engage experiential pedagogies, taking advantage of on-site learning opportunities and facilitated experiences should be described in detail in the proposal narrative and articulated in the syllabus.  In other words, how do(es) the course(s) you are proposing engage the location to enhance learning?
  • Logistics/feasibility: Is the proposed travel itinerary do-able and does it support sound academic goals?  For GIF courses, is any travel or field-placement coordinated with the Florence campus?
  • Cost: Is the proposed program within financial limits of Gonzaga students in general?
  • Appropriate length: Typically, programs run for 3-4 weeks during an inter-semester period.  Does the length of time abroad/in the field seem reasonable for the learning goals proposed?  Are class meetings scheduled on campus to offset a shorter experience abroad?
  • Itinerary: Is the proposed itinerary well thought out and researched? Is the itinerary clearly listed out in the syllabus calendar?

Rationale
  • Use of site: Does the itinerary and syllabus calendar evidence good use of local resources and events?  How the sites to be visited are linked with the academic content of courses?  Are students encouraged to link the experience of travel with the cognitive/reflective aspects of courses?  How?
  • Engagement with local society: Are there opportunities for students to work and/or interact with local community members?