For
the past 10 years, I was a teacher at three different international
schools. Each school was very different in terms of facilities, my
job description, resources available, student background, parental
expectations of education, and local culture. However, each school
espoused a belief in their mission statement that in some way, they
were shaping global citizens. I was not sure what that meant at the
time, and I continue to struggle with this.
When searching for news
articles on globalization, I went to the newspaper I read as an
international teacher entitled TheInternational Educator.
I had assumed that I would find many articles, but there were only
about six articles that used the term global - although many
advertisements used the term. One article I found especially
interesting was “The Challenge of Global Citizenship in our
Schools” by Bambi Betts (2007). She stated, “A substantial
percentage of international schools claim through their mission
statements that the school will strive to help students become global
citizens . . .As elusive as it may be, if it's in your mission, your
school MUST do three things: define what it means to be a global
citizen, determine how students will be taught to be global citizens,
and the piece we find most difficult, decide how to determine the
type and extent of progress students are making.” With all of the
other demands of schooling and school policy making, I wonder how
many schools actually tackle this issue?
As
I was reading the texts about the historical context for
globalization, I was struck by the cyclical nature of our world.
Tilly (2004) states, “Any time a distinctive set of social
connections and practices expands from a regional to a
transcontinental scale, some globalization is occurring.” Did the
Romans and Arabs agonize over the idea of globalization? Tilly goes
on to talk about the flow of migration, ideas, trade, and capital as
part of globalization. For the international schools I worked at,
much of the unwritten curriculum is an enculturation of American
values and educational priorities. We had to educate both parents
and students how we “do school” the American way, which included
projects, group work, disagreeing with the teacher and others and
supporting your own opinion. We gave workshops and handouts about
homework, reading practices and bullying. By doing this, we were
preparing students to fit into American universities and (we assumed)
international universities.
But, I wonder how is that creating
global citizens? In actuality, like the Romans did as they conquered
other peoples, we (at international school) were creating citizens that could fit into our
American society. And yet, the local community and culture, along
with the tertiary school culture (made up of locals, third country
nationals, and Americans), had a strong influence on how we
interpreted American education in that context. As Lee and LiPuma
(2002) said, “these interpretive communities determine lines of
interpretation, found institutions, and set boundaries based
principally on their own internal dynamic.”
Once
I entered graduate school and encountered Marxism for the first time, I
was confronted with the idea that international schools are actually
an unfair practice. Tilly (2004) stated “as of 2000, the world
economy displayed startling inequalities.” A classmate of mine
challenged me to think of international schools as a colonization
technique – another way of subjecting the local population to an
inferior education. I have to admit, I was appalled to think of it
this way. However, in reflection, I see many of my schools'
practices to be just that.
Within
a country, an international school often has unique ties to the local
government – which I saw in the three I worked at, and heard about
from others. Often, the government has to sanction the formation of
an international school, which for developing countries, means
creating and passing new laws. Implicitly, this means the ruling
body agrees with the fundamentals of having foreigners educating the
youth in the country. Which, conversely, indicates that the local
educational system could not handle the demands of the foreigners in
the local schools. By creating separate schools, the nomadic
foreigners are insulated from the context of local society, which
does, (in many cases) create resentment. In my last schools, most
students were bussed directly to the school. A few students, who
spoke the local language, would take the public buses. However,
they would cover or take off their uniforms because they would be
harassed by local students about being “Preppies” or the rich
kids who go to the school that anyone can buy their way into. The
international schools are generally better funded, are able to import
supplies and materials easily, sometimes get special treatment from
the government (taxes, educational requirements etc), can hire more
educated faculty and the students come from a higher socioeconomic
class than the local population.
To
combat this resentment and to create “globally aware citizens,”
many international school require community service projects for the
students, which, in theory, gives back to the local community.
However, I have seen it, at times, create a greater sense of
superiority in students and faculty, rather than empathy. As Bauman
(1998) says, “Globalization divides as much as it unites; it
divides as it unites.” (p. 2) When shopping for gifts for the
poorer local kids, some students bought inferior gifts than if buying
for their own friends, assuming that since the local kids had little,
any gift would be appreciated.
Rick
Steves, a travel writer stated, “Most cultural groups develop
separately, with their own logical (as far as they're concerned)
answers to life's basic needs. While every culture is ethnocentric,
thinking "we do it right," it's important for travelers to
understand that most solutions to life's problems are neither right
nor wrong.” Sometimes, when confronted with confusing actions from
the local communities, parents, faculty and students assume that the
local population is ignorant of the “right way” to do something.
Instead of creating acceptance and tolerance, this can lead to
greater division.
Bauman
goes on to cite Dunlap's principle of the company belonging to the
shareholders, not the workers or locality. This is true in a lot of
schools, yet I think, more evident in international schools –
especially in the schools where the student population is
overwhelmingly foreign as opposed to local. Generally, the school
board is elected of and by the parents. This board sets policy,
approves hiring, budget etc. Often, the parents will only be
in-country for 2-5 years, so their agendas are short term - “what's
best for my kid.” It is difficult to get long-term programs and
ideas to move forward, because the student body and faculty turn over
every 2-5 years. There can be a sense of “freedom from the duty to
contribute to daily life and the perpetuation of the community”(p.
9) along with “no need to engage, if avoidance will do.” (p.11)
I know several of my students would not become involved in local
sports or hang out with neighborhood kids because the students knew
they would move away eventually. As they said, “So what's the
point?” I also know that programs I started, such as visits to a
local orphanage and offering professional development to local
teachers, ended as soon as I left.
So,
how should international schools create global citizens? I think,
first, the schools must engage the students (and faculty) in becoming
local citizens – to care for and about the issues, ideas and people
of their host country. This means greater ties to the community, and
not just in service projects, but through social events, shared
entertainment and sports, and academics; to combat the superiority
complex. A school must be grounded in the local, with mutual respect
and understanding, so that both the international and local
populations benefit and learn from the interaction.
References
Bauman,
Z. (1998). Globalization:
The human consequences.
Cambridge, Polity.
Betts,
B. (April 2007). The challenge of global citizenship in our schools.
The
international educator.
25.
Lee,
B. & LiPuma, E. (2002) Cultures of circulation: The imaginations
of modernity. Public
Culture 14(1):
191-213.
Steves,
R. (2008). Culture shock and wiggle room. CNN.com.
Accessed
Oct. 13, 2008
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TRAVEL/10/13/culture.shock/index.html
Tilly,
C.. (2004). Past, present and future globalizations. In:
Steiner-Khamsi, G. The
global politics of borrowing and lending.
New York: Teachers College Press. 13-28.
