Dr. Stefan Zagelmeyer, Reader in Comparative and International Business at Alliance Manchester Business School (AMBS), has extensive experience in international higher education and research. He leads multiple programmes at AMBS and serves as the Teaching & Education representative on the executive board of the Academy of International Business UK and Ireland. His research focuses on international business strategy, comparative institutional analysis, international human resource management, and business and human rights

Introduction

Alliance Manchester Business School (AMBS) has a long-standing tradition of delivering transnational education (TNE) programmes—study programmes where learners are located in different countries. Drawing on a decade of experience as a course unit coordinator for the International Business Strategy course unit within the Global MBA programme, this blog will critically examine the challenges of coordinating transnational teaching and learning processes across diverse locations. It will also offer practical, actionable guidance to successfully navigate these challenges.

Coordinating courses across multiple locations is inherently complex due to variations in institutional, cultural and organizational contexts. TNE providers must ensure compliance with quality standards, deliver a curriculum that is relevant to all students, create effective learning environments, accommodate diverse teaching styles among instructors, and address the varied learning styles of students. Addressing these challenges requires careful planning, effective leadership, collaboration among stakeholders, innovative teaching designs, and robust quality management systems.

The International Business Strategy (IBS) course in the Global MBA programme is offered each semester and delivered by a team of faculty and adjunct staff through a blended learning approach that combines self-directed study, online lectures, and three-day on-site workshops across multiple global locations. As course unit coordinator, the role involves overseeing curriculum design and revision, engaging with professional services staff, providing online lectures and virtual office hours, and maintaining the Blackboard platform, including the discussion board. The subsequent sections critically explore the teaching-related coordination activities across four stages of course unit management.

Stage 1: Coordination of Semester Planning and Scheduling

Approximately nine months before the start of a new semester, the course coordinator receives information from programme management regarding the number and schedule of upcoming workshops. At this point, potential instructors must be informed, their availability assessed, and their assignments to specific workshops finalized.

This stage requires balancing competing priorities, as workshop tutors have specific preferences for scheduling and locations that cannot always be accommodated, potentially affecting their engagement. Additionally, external constraints, such as business school and local centre requests—such as minimizing travel costs or meeting student preferences for specific instructors—further restrict assignment flexibility.

Effective decision-making during this stage depends on balancing the diverse interests and preferences of stakeholders.

• Open communication is essential, involving regular, transparent discussions both in one-on-one meetings with instructors and within the broader teaching team.
• Fairness and transparency in decision-making are also critical, ensuring that all allocations are perceived as equitable and based on objective criteria.
• Proactively identifying and resolving potential grievances early helps maintain team morale and cohesion.
• Fostering a collaborative and supportive culture, the allocation process can achieve both instructor satisfaction and the delivery of high-quality student experiences.

Stage 2: Coordination of Workshop Planning and Implementation

The workshops take place across multiple teaching locations over (usually) a six-week period. Before they commence, the course coordinator collaborates with the teaching team to determine the structure, content, and assignments. Teaching materials, provided in a tutor pack, include case studies with assignment questions and model answers, the workshop schedule, slides, teaching videos, and instructional materials for experiential exercises. These materials are prepared and distributed to instructors in advance.

A major challenge lies in ensuring that all workshops consistently prepare students to achieve the intended learning outcomes, particularly given the complexities of TNE. Full standardization is neither feasible nor desirable due to variations in instructors’ teaching styles and students’ learning preferences. The diversity of the student cohorts further complicates the process, as some workshops may consist primarily of local students, while others include internationally diverse groups with varying professional and cultural backgrounds, levels of experience, and educational needs.

Workshop preparation is an ongoing, iterative process that involves continuous evaluation of teaching content and methods:

• Developing materials includes scanning for new resources, refining existing ones, and collaborating with the teaching team to ensure relevance and quality.
• Decision-making is a collaborative effort, with the teaching team engaging in discussions about strategies and workshop design to foster a sense of shared ownership.
• The course coordinator provides ongoing support by being available for discussions and queries leading up to the workshops, often through group or one-on-one briefings with instructors.
• Throughout the workshop period, the coordinator continues to support tutors by addressing questions, and ensuring the workshops are implemented smoothly.

Stage 3: Coordination of Formative Feedback and Assessment

The workshop assessment involves a group work assignment that is marked by workshop tutors. The use of a workshop-related group assignment brings several challenges, including the risk of plagiarism, variations in feedback quality and marking standards, and the need to balance practical relevance with academic rigor.

One of the primary challenges is the risk of plagiarism, particularly when the same case study material is used across all workshops within a semester. Another challenge is ensuring consistency in feedback quality and grading. Tutors may differ in their academic backgrounds, perceptions of academic rigor, and approaches to marking, which can result in disparities in average marks, marking ranges, and the proportion of distinctions awarded. Such inconsistencies may affect student perceptions of fairness and undermine learning outcomes. Additionally, revising the course unit assessment to better align with intended learning outcomes in an MBA context often requires balancing practical, operational relevance with academic, analytical rigor.

• To address the risk of plagiarism, workshop materials can be diversified by introducing different case studies and configurations for each location. This approach promotes independent learning and helps maintain academic integrity
• Ensuring consistency in feedback and marking standards involves several key strategies. The implementation of a standardized marking rubric with clear performance illustrations establishes consistent expectations. This rubric should be introduced during tutor and student onboarding sessions and reinforced through regular training.
• Shared principles for feedback structure, content, and time allocation can be collaboratively developed among tutors to align their practices.
• Additionally, leveraging technology platforms such as Cadmus can streamline the formative feedback process, offering tools for feedback delivery, analytics on student engagement, and efficient administrative support.

To help tutors adapt to revised assessments, continuous engagement and clear guidance are crucial. Tutors should receive support during onboarding sessions and have opportunities to discuss and co-develop teaching practices that balance academic rigor with practical relevance. Encouraging collaboration and knowledge-sharing within the teaching team fosters confidence and consistency in meeting the revised assessment standards.

Stage 4: Coordination of Student Feedback and Course Unit Revision

Coordinating teaching activities across multiple countries poses significant challenges for gathering student feedback and revising course units—two essential components of quality management in higher education.

The transition from paper-based to online student feedback questionnaires has led to a noticeable decline in student response rates, which have dropped from 90-100% to 40-80%. A troubling correlation was observed in some workshops, where higher student feedback scores coincided with higher workshop assignment marks. This correlation raised concerns about grade inflation and inconsistencies in marking.

Student feedback is also crucial for revising the course, but the suggestions provided are often highly varied and, at times, contradictory. For instance, students in one country frequently request more lecture-style teaching and fewer experiential exercises, while other groups prefer the opposite. These differences reflect the diversity in learning preferences across the student body, complicating the process of workshop redesign.

To address declining response rates, workshops now include a dedicated time slot at the end of each session for students to complete the feedback questionnaire in-class. This approach has significantly improved participation rates. The issue of grade inflation has been mitigated by restructuring the timing of feedback collection and grade release. Workshop marks are now released only after the end of the workshop. Students receive formative feedback during the workshop, complete their online feedback forms, and submit their assignments afterward, reducing the potential influence of grades on feedback.

Student feedback continues to play an integral role in workshop revisions. Insights gathered by program administrators are shared with the IBS teaching team, where both student and instructor suggestions are considered. While balancing the diverse and sometimes conflicting perspectives can be challenging, these discussions ensure that workshops remain relevant and high-quality, meeting the needs of the Global MBA’s diverse cohort.

Conclusion

Coordinating teaching activities in transnational education programmes across multiple locations is a complex task that requires careful consideration of institutional and cultural diversity, as well as the unique characteristics and preferences of both instructors and students. These challenges can be effectively managed through strong leadership by the course unit coordinator, who fosters a supportive environment by maintaining timely and frequent communication, defining clear roles and expectations, and promoting a culture rooted in collaboration, participation, flexibility, openness, and innovation.

Further reading:

Bovill, C., Jordan, L., & Watters, N. 2015. Transnational approaches to teaching and learning in higher education: challenges and possible guiding principles. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(1): 12-23.

Leadership Foundation. 2016. Challenges for the leadership of transnational education: Balancing risks and innovation.

Tran, N. H. N., Amado, C. A. d. E. F., & Santos, S. P. d. 2023. Challenges and success factors of transnational higher education: a systematic review. Studies in Higher Education, 48(1): 113-136.

Wilkins, S., & Juusola, K. 2020. Transnational Education (TNE). In P. N. Teixeira, & J. C. Shin (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Higher Education Systems and Institutions: 2649-2656. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

Related