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

Philip Altbach (1986) distinguished the work of comparative education and international education in the following manner as part of an extended editorial in the Comparative Education Review in the 30th anniversary issue: ÒTraditionally, the comparative educators have been scholars working mainly in universities, training graduate students, and producing research and scholarly articles. It is fair to say that a majority - although perhaps a decreasing one - of the authors of articles in this journal come from the ranks of comparative educators. Internationalists, on the other hand, are considered to be the users of research rather than the producers of scholarship. This generalization, if indeed it was ever true, has blurred considerably in recent years as, for example, staff members of the World Bank have become engaged in high-quality research that not only has enlightened World Bank evaluations and policy but also has constituted an important contribution to the field of comparative education..... Frequently ÔinternationalistsÕ are graduates of some of the best comparative education graduate programs in major universities. They are intelligent users of research - and they produce in-house research of their own.Ó (Altbach 1986, pp 6-7)
Stephen Lamy of the University of Southern California provides a conceptual approach to modelling the approaches to Ôglobal educationÕ programs in the United States: ÒThe three paradigms from which most global education programs are developed reflect different views of how the international system is or is not working. The view of one faction, the maintainers, favors the status quo. A second view suggests that the system clearly needs reform, without which instability and conflict will result. The third and final view supports a complete and radical transformation of the system. A basic understanding of these paradigms, from which more specific world views emerge, should be part of any global education program. The world views which come out of these basic paradigms are comprised of contending positions on major world issues, systemic conditions, and important international events. These substantive factors, and the competing assessments which emerge from each paradigm, are discussed more thoroughly in the next few pages....Ó (Lamy 1987, p 2)
Harnessing nationalism to promote internationalism meant for [Issac Leon] Kandel that students first needed to have a positive view of their nation through emphasis on peace not war, showing how different people in a nation contributed in various areas to their national welfare. Once this was accomplished, the focus could turn to an international education which depicted oneÕs nation working in harmony with other nations to achieve international cooperation based on international understanding. The study of other nationÕs peace heroes and the contributions of scientists, writers, musicians, poets, educators and inventors could take place. Thus, after a student learned how his own nation contributed to the advancement of civilization and the betterment of humanity, he would learn how other nations through their citizens, also contributed to global advancement. Kandel turned the pejorative emphasis on nationalism around, made it a positive construct and developed it as having a key role in his methodology. He used it as the basis for and a springboard to teaching international education. (Pollock 1989, p 151)
Judith Torney-Purta of the University of Maryland presented a detailed view of a definition of international education through a background statement of Ôgoals and valuesÕ with regard to a proposed ÒAlliance for Education in Global and International StudiesÓ in North American in 1989: Ò...... an education with a global perspective develops in students the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required for living successfully and responsibly in a changing nation and world. Global education is multi-disciplinary, offering instruction about a changing world in the arts, humanities, sciences, and technical sciences, as well as in the social sciences and in foreign languages. It is also an education which provides opportunities for students to examine complex issues from a wide range of views and value positions, requiring educators to nurture a free and responsible exchange of ideas.Ó (Torney-Purta 1989, Attachment 1) The background material on the proposed Alliance also includes a highly structured statement of education goals for global education: ÒIn pursuit of these goals, we seek an education which develops in elementary and secondary: 1. A knowledge of the histories, languages, and institutions - political, economic, religious, artistic, humanistic - of other cultures, as well as their own; 2. A knowledge of the interconnections among world regions, events, and peoples, and an appreciation for the complexity that is inherent in these relationships; 3. An understanding that contemporary issues and world cultures have been shaped by a multiplicity of historical, religious, political, economic and geographic factors; 4. An ability and willingness to consider historical and contemporary world events and issues from the perspectives of peoples whose culture, value orientations, or life experience - gender, age, opportunity, ethnic background - are different from their own and , in so doing, develop a deepened understanding of their own standards and goals; 5. An understanding of the nature of conflict and of approaches from managing it constructively; 6. An ability to think analytically about complex national and international issues, to distinguish fact from opinion, and to recognize bias, advocacy, and propaganda; and 7. An ability to make informed personal and public policy decisions and to participate in local, national, and international decision-making processes.Ó (ibid)
In a landmark collection of essays on international education (Jonietz and Davis 1991) Grey Mattern, the former head of the European Council of International Schools ÔruminatedÕ extensively on the meaning and implications for international education: ÒIf I had a pound for every essay that has been made at defining international education, I would surely be a good deal richer than I am now. If I had read them all, however, I am not sure that I would be much further along towards a comprehensive definition: what constitutes or should constitute an international education remains a complex and controversial matter. Much more research and experimentation are undoubtedly required, but needed even more are greater imagination and bolder outreach.Ó Mattern then cites a previously published article on the same question: ÒWe must become a truly discrete branch of the profession, committed to the identification of those elements which are basic to the concept and practice of global citizenship, and skilled in the art and science of transmitting them to those for whose education we are responsible.Õ (Mattern, p 209) After reviewing a number of different type of approaches to international education found among international schools worldwide Mattern painted a portrait of his view of international education in practice: ÒFinally, I could hope there might be some schools and teachers bold enough to ask their students to explore one further element in a system of values which, if not totally universal, certainly has very good credentials. It is that factor in relations between people which moves beyond the legalistic, mechanistic, systematic, logical and purely intellectual - which the Greeks called agape, which Confucius referred to as the need for respect and benevolence, which both Jews and Christians enjoined on men as ÔLove thy neighbour as thyselfÕ, which Kant embodied in his insistence that human beings owe one another both love and respect; and which has in our time come to underpin virtually all of the great documents dealing with the affairs of nations, in which the common condition of mutual responsibility for oneÕs fellow members of the race are taken as essential of the social fabric. [#] I believe, indeed, that there can finally be no meaningful or effective teaching about internationalism which shuns the matter of values. Schools are deluding themselves and cruelly depriving their students if, no matter what the rest of the curriculum, they fail to give young people such a firm place on which to stand. A sense of values is needed to inform both all the rest of their studies and their life purposes as well. Without it, they may be clever, knowledgeable, even wondrously creative, but they will never become citizens of the world nor give it their gifts as should those who have know a true international education. (Mattern 1991, pp 215-216)
The research problem with regard to defining international education became more visible in the 1990s, Arum and deWater (1992) approached the problem of definition most directly: ÒWhat is international education?Õ We use the term more and more yet seem to pay less and less attention to what it means. Why? Do we assume everyone know what it means and agrees with the way we use it? Has it become so generic that id does not require any definition? Or is the term Ôinternational educationÕ so ambiguous, so nebulous, that it defies any easy definition so it receives none at all?... As we look into the future, it is increasingly important to define the terms that define our emerging profession and work toward a higher level of understanding regarding what we mean when we use the term Ôinternational education.Õ (Arum and deWater 1992, p 191) Arum and deWater then reflect upon the use of the term in the context of the U.S.: ÒInternational education has become a common term in U.S. higher education. It has gained widespread acceptance, although the generic use of the term causes considerable confusion, because it is employed in a variety of ways that may be conflicting or at least inconsistent. The concept Ôinternational educationÕ means different things to different people. In article after article, in report after report, and at conference after conference, the terms used to refer to the international dimension of education vary tremendously..Ó (Arum and deWater 1992, pp 192-193) The authors then refer to Butts (1969) who believed that it had an Ôimprecise meaning.Õ: ÒTo be sure, it often had an imprecise meaning, because so many different people have assigned different enterprises to it in the course of its usage... Much of the trouble in the past has been that the term has had multiple and often vague connotations for many different types of activitiesÓ (Butts 1969, p 7 cited in Arum and deWater, p 193) Arum and deWater then observe: ÒTo make matters worse, professionals and non-professionals alike use some of the following terms interchangeably: international education, international affairs, international studies, international programs, global education, multicultural education, global studies, the international perspective, and the international dimension.Ó (p 193) The authors then attempt to provide some framework to the defining exercise: ÒIn the literature on international education there are two types of definitions: one type discusses the ultimate purpose or rationale for all the people and programs involved in international activities and the other focuses on who is involved, the people and the programs, and how they are organized and structured.Ó (Arum and deWater 1992, p 194) Arum and deWater then compare the rise of international education relative to other disciplines: ÒInternational education is now a general term used in the same manner as biochemistry and cultural anthropology, but it does not serve to define an area or sub-unit of an academic discipline. It is seldom used to refer to the international aspects of the curriculum, programs and services of a college of education. Its use is in a broader framework, referring to the international dimensions of the entire institutionÕs curriculum and diverse programs, services and activities that are international in focus.Ó ( p 200) In the end Arum and deWater (1992) decide to stipulate a definition of Ôinternational educationÕ as Òrefers to multiple activities, programs and services that fall within international studies, international educational exchange and technical cooperation.Ó (p 202)
Stomfaz-Stitz (1993) indicates that the hidden strands of the history of international education may have yet to be discovered and treated in a serious fashion. What is considered a progressive attitude toward a global approach to international educational planning today has its roots in international educational efforts from the Victorian Age.
Global education has been described mistakenly as a child of the post-World War II era or even the 1960s. Yet the roots of a global perspective undergirded the idea of world citizenship advocated by many peace educators of this era [1901-1930] Historic parallels between this era and America in the 1990s now seem more logical as events on the world scene change with ever greater rapidity and highlight the interdependency of nations. (Stomfay-Stitz 1993, pp 86-87)
Education for the multinational or transnational business corporation is yet another form of international education. This rapidly growing area of economic activity involves economics, management, advertising and marketing. It represents the involvement of worldwide corporate financial interests and conglomerates. Educators associated with international education have often overlooked the importance of this new form of international business or tend to see its profit-making objectives as contrary to the more altruistic motives associated with peace education or global education. However, the multinational corporation has been a force for creating greater economic interdependency. It should be considered a contributor to the dynamics of a new kind of world economy.... (Gerald Gutek, 1993, p 30)
In his teacher-training text, American Education in a Global Society: Internationalizing teacher education, Gutek (1993) identified a series of academic disciplines and activities which have, over the past century been related directly or indirectly to what has been known as Ôinternational educationÕ. GutekÕs list included;

Comparative Education

Foreign Policy Studies

Regional or Area Studies

International Development and Development Education

Peace Education

International Exchange Program

Global Education

International Business Education
Gerald Gutek provides one of the few examples of an attempt to stipulate a definition of international education in his 1993 teacher-training text. He detailed international education as education that examines:

1) the informal, nonformal, and formal educational relationships

among peoples of various nation-states;
2) those issues that are global in nature and transcend national boundaries;
3) the emergent trends that are creating greater interdependency

and interrelationships among people as members of a global society.

Gutek then goes on to explain the thinking behind the construction of such a definition; Such a definition avoids the egocentrism of the older, nationalist view of education. It also avoids the Òwishful thinkingÓ of those who take a view of international education that neglects the reality of the nation-state. It is both content and problem centered. While considering the impact of historical forces, it also anticipates the emergence of new economic, political, social, and educational configurations. It recognizes the reality that we are all both citizens of nation-states and participants in a global society. It further recognizes that there are and will be inevitable tensions between these two ideational foci of our lives, but also that there are many creative possibilities that grow out of this tension. (Gutek 1993, pp 33-34)
Farmer (1993) focuses on two aspects to define international education: Ò...international or global education is study which enables the student to acquire a global perspective and a sense of worldmindedness.... Education for a global perspective examines the interdependence of all the nations, cultures, and peoples of the world..... education for worldmindedness...is the affective part of international education.Ó (Farmer 1993, pp 52-53)
David Wilson (1994) while President of the Comparative and International Education Society, undertook in the official journal of the organization to provide an historical genealogy to what he termed Ôthe twin fieldsÕ of comparative and international education. He pointed out that Òthe very nature of comparative education suggests that its historical antecedents are more clearly identified, since they have been the subject of a great deal more scholarly inquiry. In contrast, the applied nature of international education has meant that many of its activities have not been documented, at least not in a form accessible to anyone wishing to study the field.Ó (p 454)
In a critical assessment of the ÔutopianÕ visions of international education, Gilbert Sewall offered the following: ÒIn acting to increase student familiarity with the rest of the world, and promote productive international education, educators and other citizens might consider the following precepts: (1) International education should start with the development of textbooks that explain in vivid ways why the world and its many cultures are so important to all American students..... (2) International education should be alert to the place of English and foreign languages in the world community and, for all students, encourage fluency in at least one tongue.... (3) History and geography should provide the organizing principle of international education.... (4) International education should highlight the evolution of Western political and cultural institutions since 1500 in order to explain the world that all humans now live in.... (5) International education should avoid subject bias that by design or accident frightens children.Ó (Sewall 1994, pp 51-53)
In an historical summary of international educational activities from the 1920s to the 1950s, Andrew Smith (1994) summarized the field of international education in the United States: ÒWhile international education efforts in the United States have roots extending back to the 1920s and 1930s, these activities were at best tangential to the traditional curriculum of elementary and secondary schools. A major change occurred after World War II. The educational efforts of UNESCO and the U.S. Commission for UNESCO, a quasi-governmental body created by Congress in 1946, were influential during the early international education efforts. [#] These post-war efforts were based upon idealistic values, and were, in part, interested in promoting peace and harmony throughout the world. As Ôwar begins in the minds of menÕ the schools were the logical place to inculcate values which would eventually promote peace and justice. There was also a belief that if we only understood each other better, there would be fewer conflicts. There was no single organized attempt to infuse these beliefs into the schools, and these values were promoted by a wide range of political, community and religious organizations. Some supported the notion of Ôone worldÕ; some promoted teaching about Ôworld federalismÕ; others encouraged teaching about international organizations, particularly the United Nations and its specialized agencies. Still others promoted international exchanges in order to promote peace, one person at a time.Ó (Smith 1994, pp 2-3)

Theodore Vestal (1994) in an often-cited review of international education at the university level in the United States described the responses to economic realities that fuel international education programs: ÒThe history of international programs in U.S. universities is, for the most part, one of origins and support from off-campus sources. International studies entered U.S. higher education because of the needs of society as reflected by financial assistance from private foundations and the federal government rather than because universities found them to be inherently valuable. In developing or changing international studies, universities have generally responded to outside stimuli rather than defining the necessary changes themselves.Ó (Vestal 1994, p 119, cited in Swenson 1999, p 17) In the opening page of VestalÕs historical survey he immediately confronts the lack of a coherent definition for international education: ÒInternational education has different meanings for different people. As an academic subject, the field has been plagued by the use of a multiplicity of definitions. Such terms as Ôinternational studiesÕ, Ôinternational programsÕ, Ôintercultural programsÕ, Ôtransnational programsÕ, Ôforeign area studiesÕ, Ônon-Western studiesÕ, and Ôinternational relationsÕ are used interchangeably. One of the most succinct definitions is that of Harvard historian John K. Fairbank, who defined the subject matter of international studies as Ôthe non-usÕ of humankind. The vagueness of meaning, leaving room for different interpretations of Ôinternational equationÕ has haunted federal initiatives in the field...Ó (Vestal 1994, p 13)

Vestal (1994) also utilizes Groennings graduate class notes to (cited on pages 14-15) to summarize a framework of international education into two ÔdomainsÕ: ÒSven Groennings contends that international education encompasses two domains different in tradition, substance, constituencies, finance, and policy development. One domain is the education component of cultural diplomacy and nation-building. This focus is related to foreign policy, diplomatic history, technical assistance under contracts with governments and foundations, and related issues involving the university in world affairs. Much of the field of exchange of persons, including the Fulbright program and International Visitors, is conducted within this framework of foreign policy. [#] The other domain is campus-based and focuses on curricular developments and strategies that promote the learning of international substance within the disciplines, on interdisciplinary bases, and within broad fields ranging from the liberal arts to professional schools; foreign language study and English as a second language (ESL); study abroad; foreign students; and institutional planning of internationally focused studies and programs. In this domain the federal governmentÕs policy is significant, defining the legal parameters for foreign studentÕs stay and providing limited financial support for area studies, undergraduate program development, international business education programs, and institutional linkages abroad. [#] Groennings believes that because of the split traditions, international education is broadly regarded not as a distinctive field but rather as a collection of topics or problems having international aspects, an approach applicable to a great number of fields, or even a movement: ÔYet there are growing professional organizations and networks; central administration of disparate international programs and activities is increasingly common on campuses; integrated planning of all such activities is becoming more widespread; and an emerging literature suggests that international education is becoming a field of study.Õ (Groennings summarized and cited in Vestal 1994, pp 14-15)
Merry Merryfield (1995) provides a succinct definition of international education which Òprovides knowledge, skills, and experiences that come from in-depth study, work and collaboration in education in other countries and with international students and scholars in American institutions.Ó (Merryfield 1995, p 1)
In general, new educational proposals for the global economy include lifelong learning, learning societies, international and national accreditation of work skills, multiculturalism, international and national academic standards and tests, school choice, and economic nationalism. (Joel Spring, 1998 in Education and the Rise of the Global Economy, p x)
Josef Mestenhauser (1998a) of the University of Minnesota and former president of NAFSA-Association of International Educators, presented a 50-year historical review of the activities of international education in North America: ÒInternational education does not fit neatly into the categories and units into which our educational system is currently organized. Since the field is ÔinternationalÕ it covers the entire universe; because it is also ÔeducationÕ it addresses all levels of instruction (formal and informal) in addition to several disciplines that inform the educational process. The genuine conceptual confusion surrounding international education thus places a special burden on international educators to explain themselves and their ÔfieldÕ to others. Their efforts to explain and to define imply that international education fits into a single definition that can be inserted without too much fuss into an existing curriculum.Ó (Mestenhauser 1998, online p 3) To give evidence of his concept of Ôinternational educationÕ as a Ôsuper goal of higher educationÕ Mestenhauser provides a listing of a range of disciplines and courses needed in any comparative study of societies that would be the basis of international education: international affairs, area studies, history, sociology, literature, geography, languages, cultural anthropology, cross-cultural communication, political science, cognitive psychology, anthropology, social psychology. Mestenhauser (1998a) provides a range of possible purposes which may well be ÔunrelatedÕ to the organizational structure of universities: ÒThose purposes may just as easily be expressed in policy goals that focus on a range of local and universal issues, such as developing friendly relations among people; promoting democracy and a market economy; gaining competitive advantages; achieving global cooperation; promoting and protecting human rights; doing missionary work abroad; advising and monitoring foreign students; transferring knowledge and technology; facilitating intercultural communication; assisting developing countries; or promoting national interests.Ó (Mestenhauser 1998a, online p 8)
In a critical analysis of international education in higher education, Josef Mestenhauser observes: ÒMuch of what I see in international education in the United States is minimalist, instrumental, introductory, conceptually simple, disciplinary-reductionist, and static. There is an urgent need to study international education on the highest level of sophistication as a multidimensional, multiplex, interdisciplinary, intercultural, research and policy-driven system of global scope at all levels of education.Ó (Mestenhauser 1998b, p 7)
The exploding growth of access to a profoundly widening information network in around the globe has accelerated both the deepening of the contours of academic disciplines and at the same time provided an effective vehicle for the study of relationships between and among disciplines. International education, historically identified by the association of a wide constellation of disciplines (such as comparative education, international studies and international exchanges) it may be important now, with the experience of close to a century of work, to consider the entire territory that international education claims as its own.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10

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

    Main page