One
of the often cited weakest links in
the American education system is the
lack of international teaching, in history,
languages, social issues and just about
every other realm. When Americans do
tend to study the rest of the world,
we tend to focus on those events, moments,
or programs that we created turning
a deaf ear to many other noteworthy
endeavors. The European Union is definitely
an endeavor as such and it deserves
our attention, yet its complex and ever-changing
structure makes it difficult for Americans,
and many Europeans, to understand.
As
of 1998, the EU took an important step
towards countering this trend. In both
1998 and 2001, Brussels approved funding
for the Network of European Union Centers.
These 15 centers are based on college
campuses, bringing together groups of
experts on the European Union. Although
these experts teach and develop curricula
for their respective universities, their
efforts are by no means contained within
their respective campuses.
Great
Results so Far…
Herein
lies the astonishing potential for the
EU Centers; in the conclusion of the
2003 Impact Report it states that the
Centers have, “successfully educated
and impacted hundreds of High Schools
and colleges across the US, re-shaped
many professional training programs
to include the EU and prepared next
generation teachers at all levels who
will educate and research the EU.”*
As the quote highlights, the two necessary
roles for these centers are firstly
to educate and secondly to perform research
and communication (with the media, politicians,
and businessmen thus enabling an articulation
of the US opinion regarding EU matters).
But
a Choice between Education and Research
Must be Made
The
problem with the EU Centers as they
are currently organized is that each
center plays both roles at the same
time. All 15 are asked to be both educators
and researchers, dividing resources
across state lines and minimizing potential
benefits that could be drawn from specialization.
We suggest that the Centers
be redistributed such that there is
a clear split between the research/communication
centers and the purely education-based
programs, with an emphasis on education.
In the end the EU will only become visible
in the U.S. if it is studied by students.
Thus it is in the interest of the EU
to support academic activities above
all else. Research should only be supported
when it is needed for communication
purposes. Other organizations and instruments
do exist to implement research on the
EU in the USA; the EU Centers are not
made to replace or substitute them.
With
this type of dichotomy, the centers
would be able to be more autonomous,
thus moving away from their dependency
on the Commission’s funding hence
increasing there collective ability
to create dynamic change in EU studies
in the US. Obviously, these new specialized
centers would be connected via the larger
network and as such they would still
share certain resources.
Of
course all EU Centers do not perform
the same and herein we already have
examples of certain programs specializing
and thus outperforming their counterparts.
Several have quite stellar records,
such as the University of Pittsburgh
and Johns Hopkins University; others
have developed very large outreach programs
serving the Centers’ objective
of education and communication, such
as the University System of Georgia.
The
EU Needs to Strengthen and not Kill
Motivation
Whether
or not you agree with us on the need
to split and specialize is not the most
important of issues. One thing is for
sure though, the current rule stipulating
that within a short period of time EU
sponsored programs must become completely
self-sufficient and funded is going
to be the death of the EU Centers. Too
many programs started by the EU with
the goal of bolstering the transatlantic
dialogue are short-lived thus creating
a ridiculous loss of money, time and
resources.**
Today,
through the EU Centers, there is an
amazing opportunity to enhance the transatlantic
dialogue and to promote interest and
understanding of the EU in America.
If the EU cuts the life-line to these
programs, we have to ask ourselves what
will happen in the next five to ten
years? Our guess is that the programs
will disappear in those schools where
they are the least influential and those
that work will be swallowed up by purely
American projects, more EU money down
the drain. It is now more than ever
the time to re-infuse the EU Centers
with a sense of importance, for people
on both sides of the Atlantic.
*Check
out the 2003
Impact Report for yourself
** TIESWeb
, which now operates with 100% on private
funds, is the only project that remains
from the 1990’s EU sponsored New
Transatlantic Agenda, the rest having
seeing there last days as the EU support
dried up.
Paris,
Franck Biancheri
Nicholas Reed