draft of 23 November, 2001)

Download 384.55 Kb.
Date conversion15.05.2016
Size384.55 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10


R. Freeman Butts identified three main elements to international education (in Deighton, 1969, p 164-179) ÒThe first [element] is the objective study of other societies in the curricula of domestic schools and colleges in order to impart accurate knowledge to students at all levels... The second element is the opportunity for students, teachers and scholars to study at educational institutions outside their own countries.... The third element is the educational assistance given by wealthy nations to help improve the health, economy, educational opportunity, and general well-being of poorer nations.Ó (p. 166) Butts also observed ÒIf the term international education is used generally to cover every kind of educational influence among societies and civilizations, it tends to become coextensive with the whole history of education. In a more restricted sense, international education did not appear until modern nation-states did; therefore, the term more usually refers to the educational relations among modern nation-states from the sixteenth century onward.Ó (p 165)

Butts (in Deighton 1969) viewed the historic rise of international education and the tension that existed with the rise of nationalism in the following manner; ÒIn the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the appeal for greater cooperation among the scholars and educational institutions on nations began to grow more insistent. French philosophes, German cosmopolitans, and English internationalists of the Enlightenment began to speak of the necessity for transcending national barriers through educational understanding. In general, however, their voices were drowned during the nineteenth century by growing claims that education should become an instrument of national policy rather than of international understanding. (p. 165)
R.F. Butts was very busy writing about the foundations of international education in 1969. In an historical survey of thirty years of international educational research and publication Butts (in Shane 1969) first reviewed the defining of international education by Brickman (1950), Scanlon (1960)0 and Spaulding et al (1968) and the went on to stipulate a definition of international education for the Sixty-Eighth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Shane 1969) in the following manner: Ò...the writer believes that the term Ôinternational educationÕ has emerged in the late 1960s as a kind of all-embracing concept to refer to the various deliberate ways in which nations use educational means for educational ends in their efforts to (a) learn from or borrow from one another, (b) influence or assist in the development of one another, and (c) respond educationally at home to actions and ideas emanating from outside their borders, e.g., by reshaping or modifying their curriculum and their teaching in schools and in higher educational institutions.Ó (Butts 1969, p 9) Butts then went on to stipulate a definition: ÒIf the scope of this inquiry is thus limited to the somewhat more manageable proportions of Òorganized educationÓ international education may be thought of as embracing the programs of activity which identifiable educational organizations deliberately plan and carry out for their members (students, teachers and closely related clientele), with one of (or possibly both) of two major purposes in mind: (a) the study of the thought, institutions, techniques, or ways of life of other peoples and of their interrelationships and (b) the transfer of educational institutions, ideas, or materials from one society to another.Ó (Butts 1969, pp 12-13)
In June of 1969 James Becker (1969) of the Foreign Policy Association published a landmark research study of the Òobjectives, needs and priorities in international educationÓ in U.S. public schools. The study set out to first answer the question; What is international education? and also to answer the question; how can international education be most fruitfully defined or conceptualized.? Becker set out through interviews, conferences, and meetings to Òlay the foundation for a continuing and systematic examination of the needs, objectives, and priorities in international education.Ó Becker described the prevailing conception of international education in 1969 in the following manner: ÒA survey of the curriculum guides, teaching materials and approaches used in many schools suggests the existence of two widely prevailing operating conceptions of international education. The first (and the one that seems to have traditionally dominated much of elementary education) is the idea of international education as education about other lands and peoples. The second (and not unrelated) conception is the perception of international education as the instruction that occurs in certain specified courses or domains of traditional academic concern such as foreign area studies, international relations, foreign policy, cross-national comparative studies, and world history.Ó (Becker 1969, p 17) Becker then critically observed such conceptions: ÒBut our conceptions of things can be correct and at the same time incomplete or inadequate. Such would seem the case with the notion of international education as education about other lands and peoples. Specifically, this approach fails to highlight the fact that contemporary children and young people need to develop some understanding of the relationships and interactions among the worldÕs national societies and cultural regions, some understanding of the expanding network of trans-national organizations and associations that link together all regions of the planet, as well as an understanding of the similarities and differences that characterize the worldÕs local societies and cultural areas. In short, the traditional conception of international education fails to highlight the growing global interdependence that characterizes the historical lot of modern man.Ó (p 18) Becker argues that international education should be an approach which concerns itself with Ôworldminded frames of referenceÓ and should also, at the level of curriculum integration seek to utilize the disciplines normally associated with international studies (that is area studies, foreign policy, comparative studies, international relations, among others) which lead Becker and his group of associates to develop a provisional definition: ÒInternational or world affairs education refers to the learning experiences which children and adolescents undergo both within and outside of the school, that affect or condition the orientation they develop toward the international dimension of the social environment.Ó This definition would, by the end of the research project, be substantially revamped. (Becker 1969, p 19)
It can be noted that the 1969 report by Becker and the Foreign Policy Association came face to face with a mythology at the level of the nation-state which was largely reinforced by an abiding sense of self-sufficiency by the citizens of that nation. Global interdependence, gradually undermines the mythology of self-sufficiency and this erosion of a civic mythology results in strident attempts to save or return to a former state of national pride. This also results in a reluctance to view the human processes in a global context. As Becker noted: Ò... we confront the hard and complex question of what basic purposes underlie and guide our efforts to educate young humans about the world into which they have been cast. Can the underlying purpose of international education be legitimately restricted to the development of an aggregated fund of knowledge about the different elements that make up the world, or, should our ambitions extend to the development of some understanding of the world perceived at a totality?Ó..... The implications of this concept for the problem of defining international education are, in principle, clear. A definition appropriate to the needs of the time should illuminate the global interconnectedness that characterizes the contemporary world and point up the fact that the form of Ôinternational understandingÕ required by tomorrowÕs citizens consists of some understanding of the world perceived as a totality or as a whole.
BeckerÕs (1969) working group later defined international education in the following manner: ÒInternational education consists of those social experiences and learning processes through which individuals acquire and change their orientations to international or world society and their conception of themselves as members of that society.Ó (p 30) The provisional definition later became a more final product upon which the Becker study proceeded was based upon the notion of international education as education about the world system: Òwe.... conceptualize international education as - The social experience and the learning process through which individuals acquire and change their images of the world perceived as a totality and their orientation toward particular components of the world system.Ó (Becker 1969, pp 64-65)
Robert Leestma, (1969) an associate commissioner for International Education in the U.S. Office of Education writing in a special issue of American Education devoted to international education described the working definition of international education in his perspective: ÒPerhaps the most fundamental definition of international education is any experience that reduces ethnocentrism. In this sense international education aims at developing an understanding of the values, perspectives, and life spaces (the personal environment of the individual) of those who are different from ourselves - whoever, ÔweÕ may be. It also implies an enlightened concern on the part of the more advantaged citizens of the world community for the less advantaged, for those who suffer from hunger, disease, or other forms of human misery, whether abroad or at home.Ó (p 6) Leestma also provided six categories that international education would include at the level of curriculum which included: 1) the study of other lands, 2) the interdisciplinary study of world affairs, 3) comparative and cross-cultural studies, 4) educational exchange and study abroad, 5) technical assistance to educational development in other countries, and 6) international cooperation in intellectual cooperation. (ibid)
James Becker and Lee Anderson (1969) in a special issue of American Education highlighted the results of a major research report by the Foreign Policy Association by observing the failures of the educational system to prepare children for a future world: ÒThe whole idea of international education is confused in its objectives and fragmented in its curriculum. To say it bluntly, schools are failing to educate children and young people adequately for the world of today or of the future. Scrapping the segmented view of earth that is our legacy from schools and maps and prespace-age thinking, let us consider the lunar view of this world as a basic unity and examine its implications for education.Ó (p 2)
Harold Shane (1969) stipulated a definition of international education by first noting that is was, at best a Ôbasket termÕ which was associated with several different meanings and connotations. Having noted that weakness of definition Shane then went on to stipulate a definition as Òthe accumulating body of accurate information and mind-opening experience, selected and directed by the school, which determines the attitudes and the actions of student in matters related to the peoples and policies of nations beyond the borders of his own country.Ó (Shane 1969, p 273)
In his 1969 critical survey of international education curriculum efforts Harold Shane suggested several ÔpremisesÕ and related teaching practices which Òhave a bearing on the international education of our elementary and secondary students: Ò1) OneÕs membership in a culture determines his values, influences his sensory input, shapes his responses, and governs his communication with others. 2) International understanding - that is, an international education - will be strengthened by a curriculum which purposefully uses Ôschool livingÕ (i.e., non-academic school experiences of children), the language arts, and social studies as a particularly useful means of fostering intra- and intercultural insights.... 3) Reduced interpersonal friction among children and youth and increased evidence of their mutual trust, good will, acceptance, and co-operation are an indication of readiness for developing international understanding. 4) One index to the increasing sophistication of the learner will be his awareness that much behavior is culturally derived and his application of this knowledge to a continuing evaluation of his own actions and reactions as well as to an analysis of the behavior of others, locally, nationally, and internationally. 5) The best approach to understanding world microcultures is to design curricular experiences that first introduce young people to the intrastructures of their own national subculture and related subcultures. 6) The Ôbasic human activitiesÕ as identified by anthropologists are to be used as the best available ÔmapÕ of the cultural terrain to guide curriculum planners in a more culture-centric restructuring of studentsÕ educational experiences.Ó (Shane 1969, p 291)

Gordon Swanson of the University of Minnesota, writing in Paulsen (1969) spoke optimistically of the potential of the positive impact of the 1966 International Education Act. He noted: ÒThis act marked a significant step in the direction of international understanding. If this legislative program succeeds, our institutions of higher learning will acquire a new dimension. Universities will become increasingly international in outlook. And at last, those working in higher education will accept the ideal of Comenius, the great Moravian educator, who pointed out the pansophic character of learning. As Comenius saw it, higher education should be concerned with all knowledge. Higher education should be free form national bias, and it should be truly universal.Ó (Swanson 1969, p 3)

Following the efforts in 1968 by UNESCO to further define international education (stated as Ôeducation for international understandingÕ) a text was drawn up by a meeting of experts in August, 1970 under the title of ÒSome reflections on the meaning of education for international understanding and peaceÓ (cited in Unesco document 17C/19, Annex II, page 22, Appendix 2 found in UNESCO 1972) The text agreed to by the meeting of experts reflects to a large degree the results of research undertaken in the years before 1970 by Becker, Anderson and others and is unique in its depth of treatment to the defining of a term so closely associated with international education: ÒInternational understanding is taken here to mean the capability of people to comprehend the complexity and variety of human relationships affecting trans-national and international relations, whether in cultural, social, economic or political matters; to see these relationships in a world-wide context; and to see the necessity of adjusting them in such a way as to advance human welfare within a peaceful world order. International understanding also involves a feeling of oneness with humanity and the initiation of behavior patterns appropriate for the furthering of human welfare as a whole. To designate these objectives Unesco is urged to find a more pithy and pertinent phrase than Ôeducation for international understanding.Õ [#]Obviously education for international understanding must be described in different terms for different age groups. Essentially, however, it means bringing children and young people to understand that although we live in different communities, with different social systems and ways of life, we must now for certain purposes think of humanity as a unit, a single whole; that there are certain universal human rights; and that as a society, humanity is slowly developing international traditions, laws and institutions which nevertheless permit the continued existence and progress of national traditions, laws and institutions in sovereign States. In sum, education for international understanding means instilling a certain conception of the world and of human relations and shaping of habits of thought and behaviour which will further the achievement of a peaceful world order. [#] The task of education for international understanding should not be to encourage pupils to approve or condemn other systems and ways of life without discernment, but rather to lead them to appreciate how and why they differ, and to convince them that these differences form part of the wealth of the human heritage. Further, everyone must be convinced that any conflicts which might arise from the differences should never be resolved by war, but by looking to see how the institutions can be adjusted to work for peace and widely-shared prosperity. [#] Everywhere, directly or indirectly, an effort is made to initiate young people into the life and values of their national communities. This is a part of moral and civic education in both its cognitive and its affective aspects. While in a sense it is true that a childÕs awareness extends gradually from the family through the community and the school to his national society and to human society as a whole, a consciousness of the world can nevertheless be developed from the earliest stages of education. The childÕs own curiosity and relative freedom from prejudice are important assets at this period. Each year of schooling should add something to his world-mindedness so that it is based increasingly on expanding knowledge and maturing attitudes. Children and young people respond readily to discussion of issues that cross national boundaries, and not least to their moral aspects, when these are linked to their own interests and problems and lead on therefrom to the world outside.Ó (found in Unesco document 17C/19, Annex II, page 22, Appendix 2 cited in UNESCO 1972)
Stephen Deutsch (1970) in his often cited study of international education begins his work with a detailed consideration of the meaning of the term Ôinternational educationÕ in order to frame his work: ÒEven a brief review of the literature reveals that Ôinternational educationÕ has been used as a generic term to include: the study of non-Western cultures; education for world understanding; American studies abroad; programs of educational exchange, of both students and teachers; and university programs such as educational technical assistance and institution-building in developing nations. Since the term 'international educationÕ has been used so broadly, it would be meaningless if not audacious to restrict its use to some very limited area..... We are concerned with those efforts to educate persons through actual experience in other countries or though education at home geared to super-national or other-culture frameworks - perhaps what Useem [1963] calls the ÔThird CultureÕ (Deutsch 1970 pp1-2) In the same text Deutsch then reflects on the Ôgoals of international educationÕ: ÒThere are several perspectives from which international educational goals are commonly viewed. One of the most prominent is the philosophy-of-education view stressing individual cultural enrichment, cross-national perspectives (or what has been called Ôworld outlookÕ), and a combination of cultural relativism and cultural transcendentalism....... Another point of emphasis stems from the Ôworld outlookÕ viewpoint, namely, the pedagogically justifiable argument that an education in the modern world should go beyond the classic learning based on Western civilization.Ó (Deutsch 1970, pp 8-9) In summarizing his work, Deutsch outlines his view of the mission of international education: ÒInternational education does not have one single mission; clearly this multifaceted subject addresses a host of problems, although they are interrelated.... The context of international education is the world, and as Boulding [(1964)] makes clear, the meaning of the twentieth century is manifest in the rapidity of change, the linkage between the have and the have-not nations and people, the dilemmas of population growth, and the capabilities of worldly destruction.Ó (Deutsch 1970, pp 192-193)
Griffin and Spence (1970) in setting out to describe the results of a world conference on the topic of ÔCooperative International EducationÕ held in 1970, offers a survey definition of the term Ôinternational educationÕ: ÒThe term international education has been used to refer variously to curriculum content that deals with other countries and societies, with international relations among countries, exchange of students between countries, assistance to other countries for educational development, training of specialists for diplomatic and other international work, cultural relations programs between nations, and the general informing of the public on world affairs....Ó (Griffin and Spence 1970, p 1)
R.F. Butts in a 1971 Encyclopedia article on international education gives a broad historical context for the field when he noted: ÒIn a more restricted sense, international education did not appear until modern nation-states did; therefore, the term more usually refers to the educational relations among nation-states from the sixteenth century onward.Ó (Butts 1971, p 165) Butts also identified three elements of international education as: ÒThe first is the objective study of other societies in the curricula of domestic schools and colleges in order to impart accurate knowledge to students at all levels.... The second element is the opportunity for students, teachers, and scholars to study at educational institutions outside their own countries.... The third element is the educational assistance given by wealthy nations to help improve the health, economy, educational opportunity, and general well-being of poorer nations..Ó (Butts 1971, p 166)
David King writing in 1971 of the landmark study of international education by James Becker in 1968 further elaborated on the definition of international education that was presented in the 1968 report by the Foreign Policy Association:; Ò...schools must help children and young people to develop an Ôinternational understandingÕ; and not an international understanding in the way that we have traditionally used it - the sort of strange - lands - and - friendly - people approach. Instead the implication is that students must be led toward an understanding of the world as a single unit so that the schools will be, in effect, Òtransmitting to the next generation a rich image of the total earth. (Becker 1968, p 71) King then observes that the 1968 report: Òconcluded that there were three general contributions that the curriculum should make to this understanding:: one, an understanding of the earth as a planet; two, an understanding of mankind as one species of life; and three, an understanding of the international system as one level of human social organization.Ó (King 1971, pp 15-16) As a final clarification of the definition of Ôinternational educationÕ King notes: ÒAccording to the definition of the Study, international education is not designed to foster a sense of world citizenship that competes with the nation-state for the individualÕs loyalty, but to develop citizens who are capable to seeing that the nation is not the only Ôbasis of organizing to carry out the functions of societyÕÓ (King 1971, p 19) In summarizing the goals of international education from the Report King itemized them as: Ò1) A curriculum that will give students the ability to look at the world as a Ôplanet-wide society,Õ one of a number of types of human societies. 2) The teaching of a set of skills that will enable the individual to learn inside and outside the school and to continue learning after formal education is concluded. 3) The development of programs that Ôavoid the ethnocentrism inherent in sharp divisions between the study of American and non-American societies.Õ(Report p. 64) 4) The integration of international studies with the trends and discoveries of other disciplines. 5) A curriculum that stresses the inter relatedness of man rather than simply cataloguing points of difference or uniqueness. 6) A curriculum that is oriented toward the exploration of future alternatives. 7) The selection of subject matter and methods that are relevant for people who will be living in a global society that will be characterized by change, ambiguity, growing inter relatedness and continued conflict.Ó (King 1971, pp 20-21)
In surveying the history of defining the term Ôinternational educationÕ Arum and deWater (1992) cited King (1971) definition: Ò... the social experience and the learning process through which individuals acquire and change their images of the world perceived as a totality and their orientation toward particular components of the world system.Ó (p. 14)
Robert Matthews (1971) in an unpublished doctoral dissertation on the model of international education developed by the Harvard researcher, Robert Ulich, drew extensively on both an analysis of UlichÕs body of work as well as an in-depth interview held with Ulich in 1970. Matthews cites UlichÕs definition of Ôinternational educationÕ from that interview: ÒAccording to Ulich, education for mankind, or international education, is an instructional effort intended to develop Ôan appreciation of different national and cultural activities in terms of politics, religion, and other expressions of human productivity.Õ It is education consciously conducted to evoke a sense of human unity, or ÔuniaÕ, among peoples. It is that directed toward creating Ôa readiness to accept [cultural] differences, [among all men, and a readiness] to encourage and be happy in these differences, [while] at the same time [developing a capacity] to see the amazing similarity among men.Ó (Matthews 1971, p 18) Matthews later summarizes UlichÕs definition of international education in the following manner: ÒIn brief, then, Robert UlichÕs theory of international education becomes the following: international education is the attempt to use formal schooling to develop and [sic] appreciation and acceptance of foreign cultures, a sense of unity with humanity, and a commitment to its tasks by evoking an internationally extendable sense of openness toward, oneness with, and responsibility for others through a certain scheme of experiential and academic-vocational instruction.Ó (Mathews 1971, p 39)
R. Freeman Butts (1971), like many other researchers in international education, took a long historical view of the present conditions in the world that compel the aims of international and comparative education: ÒThe unevenness of the modernization process has produced enormous gaps between those societies that are still largely traditional and those that have become largely modern. The resulting differences in the human condition between the more highly developed nations and the less developed nations lie at the root of some of the most serious and hazardous problems of international well-being now facing the peoples of the world. [#] Of momentous significance for us as educators is the growing recognition that , somehow, differences in education have been responsible in the past for a large share of the differences now apparent in national well-being and that therefore education can and should play a strategic role in overcoming the differences or narrowing the gaps in the future. This predicament in the human condition represents one of the imperatives which the educators of the world cannot ignore. I believe it provides the overall social setting within which comparative education and international education must necessarily find their rationale and their fulfilment.Ó (Butts 1971, p 19) Butts then takes a broad view of education and places international education within both a process of analysis and a process of work: ÒWe must not only advance the analysis of education; we must promote the work of education. In this task comparative and international education can nicely complement each other. Comparative education will seek by systematic analysis and inquiry to describe the role of education in the transforming processes of social change at particular moments in history wherein different peoples or nations are moving at different rates and in different stages from traditional to modern forms of society and of culture. It can also seek to formulate theoretical generalizations and policy proposals that can be tested in societies at various stages of civilizational development. [#] International education [emphasis added] will be particularly concerned with the study of the role of education as an international force in the modernization process, i.e., with the international (or intercultural or inter social) processes of civilizational interaction or transaction whereby one society is affected educationally by another. International education will also embrace direct preparation and specialized training for active participation in the international processes whereby educational personnel, institutions, or ideas are deliberately emulated or borrowed by one society from another or transferred from one society to another with a view to conscious adaptation or modification.Ó (Butts 1971, pp 33-34)
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10

The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page