C.M. Ferrari J.B . Fine

Through the Crossroads: Short-term Study Abroad

Promoting Educational Leaders’ Global Perspectives andSelf-Authorship Capacity

C.M. FerrariJ.B. Fine

Purpose1) To measure and describe changes that occurred during a two week study abroad educational leadership course in Rome, Italy over three consecutive summers, 2010, 2011, and 2012 as measured by the Global Perspectives Inventory (GPI) and a qualitative follow-up survey exploring self-authorship capacity.

2) To discuss how P-12 educational leaders and student affairs professionals build a locus of decision-making that stems from their own values, beliefs, and internal voice which affects the cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal dimensions of their development.

3) To display the parallel expectations for graduate preparation programs in both P-12 educational settings and higher education regarding the knowledge, skills, and dispositions expected of educational professionals, as delineated in respective professional competencies and standards.

4) To argue, based on the results, that short-term education abroad is an effective educational experience for educational leaders to develop a global perspective and promote self-authorship thereby meeting the required competencies of the respective professions.

P-12 Administrators & Student Affairs Professionals

• Defined as Educational Leaders

• Similar commitments to social responsibility and being globally aware

• Required to be self-aware and act authentically when making decisions

• Limited research and opportunities for short-term study abroad programs exist for graduate students

Aligned Competencies & StandardsProfessional Competency Areas for

Student Affairs Practitioners Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education (NASPA) & College Student

Educators International (ACPA), 2010

P-12 Educational Administrator StandardsInterstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC), 2008& Educational Leadership Constituents Council (ELCC), 2011

Personal Foundations:Articulate awareness and understanding of one’s attitudes, values, beliefs, assumptions, biases, and identity as it affects one’s work with others; take responsibility to develop personal cultural skills by participating in activities that challenge one’s beliefRefashion personal beliefs and commitments in a way that is true to one’s own self while recognizing the contributions of important others (e.g. self, peers, family, or one or more larger communities)

ISLLC Standard 5, Function A: Model principles of self-awareness, reflective practice, transparency, and ethical behavior

Ethical Professional Practice:Articulate one’s personal code of ethics for student affairs practice, which reflects the ethical statements of professional student affairs associations and their foundational ethical principlesDemonstrate an understanding of the role of beliefs and values in personal integrity and professional ethical principles

ISLCC Standard 5: An educational leader promotes the success of every student by acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner

Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion:Analyze the interconnectedness of societies worldwide and how these global perspectives affect institutional learningArticulate a foundational understanding of social justice and the role of higher education, the institution, the department, the unit, and the individual in furthering its goals

ELCC Standard 5.3:Candidates can understand and can safeguard the values of democracy, equity, and diversity.ELCC Standard 5.5:Candidates understand and can promote social justice within a school culture that individual students needs inform all aspects of schooling

So what?• P-12 and higher education have similar goals and its professionals

require similar abilities and skills

• Currently, there exists little research on the effects of short term study abroad programs, particularly for graduate students

• This presentation offers insight into the developmental effects of study-abroad on education graduate students regarding their global perspectives and capacity for self-authorship

Global Perspectives Inventory• The purpose of the GPI is to measure students’ capacity for a global

perspective at the cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal levels.

• Consists of 40 items utilizing a five point Lickert scale.

• Administered as a pre-test prior to the study abroad experience, and as a post-test administered at the conclusion of the study abroad experience.

• Administered in study abroad programs (American undergraduate students in mostly semester abroad programs).

What is a “global perspective”? A global perspective is the capacity for a person to

think with complexity taking into account multiple perspectives, to form a unique sense of self that is value based and authentic, and to relate to others with respect and openness especially with those who are not like her.

A global perspective includes both a domestic focus on multicultural education and diversity and an internationalization focus that includes global trends and relationships among nations.

The Need For Global Perspectives

“ [An] essential learning and developmental goal—which we call global perspective—can be enhanced if it is further interpreted within the context of educating students to be citizens of a global society.”

Source: Art Chickering and Larry Braskamp (Peer Review, 2009, p. 27.)

What is the GPI?

Cognitive Dimension ScalesKnowing. Degree of complexity of one’s view on the

importance of cultural context in judging what is important to know and value.

In different settings what is right and wrong is simple to determine. Cultural differences make me question what is really true.

Knowledge. Degree of understanding and awareness of various cultures and their impact on our global society and level of proficiency in more than one language.

I am informed of current issues that impact international relations. I know how to analyze the basic characteristics of a culture.

Intrapersonal Dimension Scales

Identity. Level of awareness of one’s unique identity and degree of acceptance of one’s ethnic, racial, and gender dimensions of one’s identity.

I have a definite purpose in life. I can explain my personal values to people who are different from me.

Affect. Level of respect for and acceptance of cultural perspectives different from one’s own and degree of emotional confidence when living in complex situations, which reflects an “emotional intelligence” that is important in one’s processing encounters with other cultures.

I often get out of my comfort zone to better understand myself. I see myself as a global citizen.

Interpersonal Dimension Scales

Social Responsibility. Level of interdependence and social concern for others.

I work for the rights of others. I consciously behave in terms of making a difference.

Social Interactions. Degree of engagement with others who are different from oneself and degree of cultural sensitivity in living in pluralistic settings

Most of my friends are from my own ethnic background. I am open to people who strive to live lives very differently from my own

life style.

Loyola University Chicago: School of Education

Summer Rome ProgramThe course:

• 2-week summer class at the John Felice Rome Center in Rome, Italy

• Highly experiential with site visits and co-curricular experiences infused into the content

• Course title: “Instructional Leadership: Cultural Context for Informed Decision Making”

Course Connection to GPI• Learning outcomes were intentionally designed to develop the

cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal competencies as measured by the GPI

• This study abroad experience integrated Curricular, Co-curricular, and Community domains of learning and development

• Short-term intercultural immersion in Rome became students’ “learning laboratory” and served as the immediate cultural context

MEANS

ENDS

Cognitive Curriculum Co-Curriculum Community

1. Discover, become aware of, and better understand diverse perspectives, worldviews, social interactions, values, and cultural practices.

2. Understand one’s own cultural background when compared to another.

3. Increase awareness of self and “other” and boundaries of tolerance. Examine education’s response to fundamental difference.

4. Understand national destiny and historical honesty. Be aware of how the school curriculum treats expressions of historical tragedy, and healing and forgiveness.

5. Examine how perceptions about “the other” are constructed, particularly in the school setting.

6. Examine the repercussions of constructed perceptions of “the other”, particularly in the school setting—better understand education’s role in identifying who will be in positions of influence over the well-being of society.

Site-based Intergroup Dialogue at:

-Vatican Museum

-Coliseum

-Jewish Ghetto

-St. Peter’s Basilica Capitoline Hill

-Piazza Minerva

-Pantheon

Cultural immersion:

-Daily travel

-Restaurants

-Weekend travels

-Teach-us Sessions

-Daily bus travel

-Site-based activities

-Faculty walks

Curriculum

MEANS

ENDS

IntrapersonalCurriculum Co-Curriculum Community

1. Through study of new and different interactions with American peers, and Italian citizens, become conscious of, analyze, and gain a new perspective on one’s own world views.

2. Increase self-confidence in negotiating cultural difference.

3. Construct and trust in one’s self-identity through comparisons with diverse others.

Course activities:

-Journaling

-Debates

-Teach-us Sessions

-Site-based discussions at Vatican Museum, Coliseum, Roman Forum, Jewish Ghetto, Piazza Minerva, etc.

-Intergroup Dialogue

-Meetings with local students, educators

-Weekend travel

Community within:

-Picnic

-Opening lunch

-final dinner

-Faculty walks

-Papal audience

Co-curriculum

MEANS

ENDS

InterpersonalCurriculum Co-Curriculum Community

1. Increase ability and comfort in interacting with persons from different cultural backgrounds, especially in one’s role as a school leader.

2. Ability to assist others in adapting to various situations representing cultural difference, especially in one’s role as a school leader..

3. Develop acceptance, tolerance, and respect of others with perspectives, values, worldviews, and social and cultural practices different from one’s own.

4. Assist others to develop acceptance, tolerance and respect of others with perspectives, values, worldviews, and social and cultural practices different from one’s own, especially in one’s role as a school leader.

-Debates

-Teach-us Sessions

-Site-Based Intergroup Dialogue

-Meetings with local students, educators

-Weekend travel

-Interactions with local Italians, and fellow students

-Decision making for school/district

Community

GPI Strongest Areas of Growth

GPI Scale

Loyola University ChicagoSchool of Education Summer Rome

Graduate Program2010, 2011, 2012:

Pre-test Post-test Difference

Intrapersonal: Identity 4.12 4.34 0.22Intrapersonal: Affect 3.72 4.11 0.39Interpersonal: Social Responsibility

4.03 4.13 0.10

Compare to Norms**Norms consisted of 42,138 undergraduate students who have completed the GPI from 2008

until 2012 (Braskamp, Braskamp, & Merrill, 2013)

GPI Scale

Rome Graduate Program Differences 2010-2012:

Global Perspectives Inventory

Normed Differences 2008-2012:

Intrapersonal: Identity 0.22 .15

Intrapersonal: Affect 0.39 .10

Interpersonal: Social Responsibility

0.10 .06

Average Responses

GPI Scale

Rome Graduate

Program 2010-2012 Average Responses (out

of 5):

Global Perspectives Inventory 2012-2013Average Responses

(out of 5):

Intrapersonal: Identity 4.34 4.09

Intrapersonal: Affect 4.11 3.79

Interpersonal: Social Responsibility

4.13 3.69

Conclusions from GPI

• Rome study abroad participants exhibited the highest growth in the Identity, Affect, and Social Responsibility scales.

• The differences for these scales were significantly higher than the normed differences.

Developmental Pathways Toward Self-authorship

Solely External Crossroads Solely Internal (Self-Authoring)

Trusting External Authority (Ea) Questioning External Authority (EI)

Trusting the Internal Voice (Ia)

Tensions Trusting External Authority (Eb)

Constructing the Internal Voice (E-I)

Building an Internal Foundation (Ib)

Recognizing Shortcomings of Trusting External Authority (Ec)

Listening to Internal Voice (I-E)

Securing Internal Commitments (Ic)

Cultivating the Internal Voice [I(E)]

Global Perspectives Inventory Self-authorship TheoryCognitive: Understand the importance of cultural context in judging what is important to know and value

Cognitive dimension: Develop an internal belief system via constructing, evaluating, and interpreting judgments in light of available frames of reference

Intrapersonal: Level of awareness of one’s unique identity and degree of acceptance of one’s identity

Intrapersonal dimension: Choose own values and identity in crafting an internally generated sense of self that regulates interpretation of experience and choices

Interpersonal: Level of interdependence and social concern for others. Degree of engagement with others who are different from oneself and degree of cultural sensitivity in living in pluralistic settings.

Interpersonal dimension: Capacity to engage in authentic, interdependent relationships with diverse others in which self is not overshadowed by a need for others’ approval, mutually negotiating needs, and genuinely taking others’ perspectives into account without being consumed by them

Follow-up Survey DesignHow educational leaders made decisions

(Cognitive) based on individually defined values and beliefs (Intrapersonal) that promoted social responsibility (Interpersonal)

How the Rome study abroad experience influenced this process and promoted educational leaders’ self-authorship capacity.

Follow-up Survey Design

• Online, qualitative survey with six open-ended questions sent to all Rome 2010, 2011, and 2012 participants in February 2013

• Received a response rate of 38% (n=15)

• Responses were then coded using self-authorship theory as the interpretive framework

Results from Survey

NA22.8%

Crossroads29.7%

Internal Meaning-Making47.5%

External Meaning-making

0.0%

Selected Responses

• Question 1: Since you returned from your LUC School of Education Rome experience, please describe a situation where you solved an issue using multiple perspectives

• Response A (Red)

• Connection to Self-Authorship: Understanding the needs and viewpoints of constituents and how they might be affected by the decisions is crucial, especially regarding policy decisions.

• Question 2: Was there anything in your Rome study abroad experience that influenced the way you solved this issue?

• Response B (Blue)

• Connection to Self-authorship:By looking critically at past situations in which affective decisions were

made that resulted in helpful or harmful circumstances for others, this individual was able to enter into personal and professional situations with a more reflective outlook.

Selected Responses

• Question 3: Since you returned from your Rome study abroad experience, please describe a situation where you decided to stand up for the rights of others by taking action regarding a social, ethical, or civic challenge.

• Response C (Green)

• Connection to self-authorship: By confronting colleagues and acting from a place rooted in core values are suggestive of self-authorship because the individual is trusting their internal voice sufficiently in order to “craft commitments into a philosophy of life to guide how to react to external sources” (Baxter Magolda, King, Taylor & Wakefield, 2012).

Selected Responses

• Question 4: Was there anything specific in the Rome study abroad experience that influenced why you took action in this situation?

• Response D (Orange)

• Connection to Self-Authorship: Exposing themselves to new cultures and exploring how injustices from various points of history relate to their personal and professional circumstances allowed these individuals to form connections to their role as educational leaders and advocates for social justice and to consider an alternative worldview that students or parents may be experiencing.

Selected Responses

• Question 5: In the situation in which you took action, how did you decide to listen to your internal voice, which may have been at odds with outside influences?

• Response E (Purple)

• Connection to Self-Authorship: By drawing out the lessons learned in Rome and building on a commitment to speak up for others, this response suggests that the experience in Rome not only had an impact, but it helped this broaden this individual’s perspective. The crossroads phase of one’s self-authorship journey often is sparked by a dissonant experience such as feeling “otherized,” particularly if a person has not had that experience before. This individual went abroad and when immersed in foreign culture the challenges of not belonging became apparent. Connections to marginalized populations in the education system suggest a consideration for multiple perspectives and a reconfiguration of values or internal beliefs.

Selected Responses

• Question 6: In what ways, if any, did the Rome study abroad experience increase your ability to trust your internal voice in everyday decision making?

• Response F (Brown)

• Connection to Self-Authorship: The site visits to significant historical, cultural, and religious sites as catalysts for reflection and the ways in which different groups have oppressed different populations and the role in which institutional authorities play in either promoting or discouraging such behaviors and practices.

Selected Responses

Conclusions• Educational leaders in the P-12 sector and higher education require self-

authorship meaning making processes.

“The heart of education is enabling and encouraging young people to apply the knowledge and skills they are developing—not merely for their own success an satisfaction, but to serve the common good” (Blankstein & Houston, 2011, p.125).

“Unless we can envision more effective change processes for faculty and administrators––that is, support their own learning and development––the best prediction we can make about students becoming cognitively mature and secure in their identities and relationships is that they will have to continue working it out largely on their own. In a sense, the shape and pace of [students’] development is dependent on the shape and pace of our development.” (Bekken, B. M. & M. J. Meszaros, 2007, p. 16)

Conclusions

Study-abroad programs that are intentionally designed with high-impact learning practices become a vehicle for development, using multiple frameworks (GPI and self-authorship)

What does this mean for our profession?

Discussion Questions• How can we help expose students to multiple

perspectives on an issue or topic?

• How can we help students develop more complex views of themselves, identify their values, and foster their internal voice?

• How can we assist students to develop a commitment toward the common good, social responsibility, and living a life of integrity and service to others?

Further Research

1. Explore short-term study abroad2. Explore graduate students abroad3. Connection between GPI and self-authorship4. What effects occur from intentionally designed,

high-impact practices that are grounded in theory and an assessment framework?

Thank you!

References• ACPA & NASPA (2010). Professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners.• Chickering, A.W., Braskamp, L. A. (Fall 2009). Developing a global perspective for personal and social

responsibility. Peer Review. Vol. 11, No. 4 • Council of Chief State School Officers. (2008). Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium: Standards for

School Leaders. Washington, DC: Author.• Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student development in college: Theory,

research, and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. • Braskamp, L. A., Braskamp D. C. & Merrill K. C., Engberg, M. E. (2012). Global Perspective Inventory. Chicago:

Global Perspective Institute. http://gpi.central.edu.• Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2008). Three elements of self-authorship. Journal of College Student Development, 49(4),

269-284. • Baxter Magolda, M.B., & King, P.M. (2012). Assessing meaning-making: Theory, research, and application. ASHE

Higher Education Report, 38 (3).• Baxter Magolda, M. B., & King P. M. (2004). Learning partnerships: Theory and models of practice to educate for

self-authorship. Sterling, VA: Stylus. • Blankstein, A.M. & Houston, P.D. (Eds), (2011). Leadership for social justice and democracy in our schools.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.• Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (2008). Retrieved from www.ccsso.org.