9
This article was downloaded by: [Texas A&M University Libraries] On: 12 November 2014, At: 14:58 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK The Social Studies Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vtss20 Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation John T. King a & Steve Thorpe a a School of Education, Southern Oregon University , Ashland , Oregon , USA Published online: 28 Feb 2012. To cite this article: John T. King & Steve Thorpe (2012) Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation, The Social Studies, 103:3, 125-132, DOI: 10.1080/00377996.2011.596858 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2011.596858 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

  • Upload
    steve

  • View
    213

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

This article was downloaded by: [Texas A&M University Libraries]On: 12 November 2014, At: 14:58Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Social StudiesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vtss20

Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential SkillsMovement and the Challenges of TransformationJohn T. King a & Steve Thorpe aa School of Education, Southern Oregon University , Ashland , Oregon , USAPublished online: 28 Feb 2012.

To cite this article: John T. King & Steve Thorpe (2012) Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement andthe Challenges of Transformation, The Social Studies, 103:3, 125-132, DOI: 10.1080/00377996.2011.596858

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2011.596858

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Page 2: Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

The Social Studies (2012) 103, 125–132Copyright C© Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 0037-7996 print / 2152-405X onlineDOI: 10.1080/00377996.2011.596858

Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon’s Essential SkillsMovement and the Challenges of Transformation

JOHN T. KING and STEVE THORPE

School of Education, Southern Oregon University, Ashland, Oregon, USA

In January 2007, the Oregon State Board of Education mandated a new Oregon diploma that strengthened high school graduationrequirements with the aim of improving student readiness for college and career. Among the major changes was a requirement thatstudents demonstrate proficiency in nine “essential skills” that included the expectation that students must “demonstrate globalliteracy.” This article examines the process through which Oregon developed and plans to implement the essential skills and comparesits conceptualization of global literacy with alternate models of global education in other states and nations. The authors identifypolitical and institutional factors influencing the shape and direction of those efforts and offer recommendations regarding a potentialframework for defining, implementing, and assessing global literacy in Oregon high schools.

Keywords: global literacy, global education, essential skills

A Brief History of Global Education in the United States

Global education has received an ambivalent recep-tion within the United States over the years. Althoughsome teachers, policymakers, and community membershave enthusiastically embraced global education, othershave adopted a more reserved or suspicious stance towardthe field. As a whole, the field of global education hasevolved greatly since World War II, progressing throughthree distinct stages, each with differing aims, methods,and content foci. First, in the immediate postwar years, thefield known as international education was generally com-posed of preprofessional training targeting a small groupof elite individuals seeking futures in the foreign servicesor international trade (Kirkwood 2001). Language skillsand knowledge of particular cultures and political and eco-nomic institutions were primary areas of emphasis, withimmersion programs and internships common means ofstudy.

Second, with the deepening of the cold war and the bur-geoning peace movements of the late 1960s, the focus ofwhat became known as global education shifted to morebroadly based goals of promoting attitudes, relationships,and systems conducive to cross-cultural understanding andappreciation as well as nonviolent conflict resolution. Re-flecting a desire to effect beneficial societal outcomes rather

Address correspondence to John T. King, Southern Oregon Uni-versity, School of Education, 1250 Siskiyou Blvd, Ashland, OR97520, USA. E-mail: [email protected]

than serve narrowly individual and instrumental purposes,the movement spawned efforts to conceptualize and teachelements of an attainable global perspective (Hanvey 1976),build a global civic culture (Boulding 1988), and cultivatea sense of global responsibility (Reardon 1988).

Third, responding to the increasingly transnational na-ture of systems, problems, and opportunities, global ed-ucation since the 1990s has begun to evolve in ways thatcombine elements of each of the former approaches. Globaleducators today employ a diverse set of methods and cur-ricula to strike a balance between goals that include bothworkforce readiness and responsible citizenship in a globalsociety. Preparing students to “work with, travel to, and un-derstand people oceans away” (Wisconsin Department ofPublic Instruction 2010), states, school districts, and indi-vidual teachers have initiated curricular reforms that teachstudents to understand global challenges, connections, cul-tures and world areas (Bragaw 1998). Global educators alsoseek to engage students in cross-cultural interactions andteach them to access and appreciate multiple perspectives;analyze the interconnectedness of transnational systems;institutions, and problems (Merryfield and Kasai 2004);and engage in committed action regarding issues of globalconcern (Rischard 2003).

From the outset, efforts to promote global educationwithin American schools have been challenged on bothacademic and political grounds. Educational traditionalistshave long been deeply suspicious of what they regard as aconcerted “radical revisionist attack” on the classical lib-eral tradition (Ravitch 1978), which they charge with hav-ing weakening academic standards and cultural cohesion

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tex

as A

&M

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

14:

58 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 3: Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

126 King and Thorpe

(Bloom 1987; Hirsch 1996). Drawing particular ire havebeen changes in the study and teaching of the social sciencesarising from innovations within these disciplines such as so-cial history, critical theory, and ethnic studies, all of whichhave been met with charges of pandering to student inter-est, diluting the curriculum, promulgating identity politics,and contributing to the balkanization of American society.Critics in the 1980s (Cunningham 1986; Schlafly 1986) andin the present era (Burack 2003) associate global educationwith these wider culture wars and denounce “global edu-cation ideology” for promoting hostility toward America,espousing moral relativism under a “mindless mantra oftolerance” and advocating a rejection of the nation state infavor of loyalty to transnational institutions (41).

England, Canada, and Australia in the 1980s experi-enced similar value conflicts over global education (Calder2000; Hicks 2003, Pike 2000). According to David Hicks(2003), conservatives in England attacked world studieseducation, peace education, and multicultural educationas politicized indoctrination that had faulty pedagogy andled to poor learning outcomes for students. Graham Pike(2000) suggests that the American proponents of globaleducation tended to react to the political challenges dif-ferently than did their colleagues in Canada and England.Although Americans promoted approaches to global ed-ucation that emphasized commonalities among peoplesaround the world and downplayed inequities among na-tions and peoples that might bring up issues of conflict,Canadians and Australians were more willing to concen-trate on inequities and to deal with the resulting areas ofconflict. The tendency to shy away from controversial issueshas emerged as a common theme within current efforts todefine and promote global literacy within Oregon.

Global Literacy and the Essential Skills Movement

Despite this mixed history of acceptance and resistance,efforts to include global education within the public schoolcurriculum have increased in recent years as political, busi-ness, and educational leaders have acknowledged the needto prepare future workers and citizens to function within aglobal society. This recognition has taken root amid grow-ing concern regarding the effectiveness of the America’spublic schools in graduating students ready for entry intoeither college or the workforce. This concern arises from theapparent convergence of two trends disturbing to Americanemployers and policymakers. First, changing economic re-alities have provided employers increasing access to workersworldwide to the detriment of individuals deemed lackingin high value-added skills. At the same time, internationalcomparisons of student performance seem to indicate thatU.S. students are slipping behind those of other nations inacquiring the knowledge and skills most highly valued inthe global economy (National Center on Education and theEconomy 2007). Taken together, these trends have caused

policymakers and employers to worry that an increasinggap exists between what public schools in the United Statesteach and what colleges and employers in the United Statesdemand to the extent that some assert that “America’s highschools are obsolete” (Gates 2005).

Educational responses to these concerns have centeredlargely on raising high school graduation requirements andincreasing the measurement of and accountability for stu-dent progress toward demonstrable academic standards.Although the task of setting specific graduation standardshas largely been left to individual states, many interestgroups have taken the approach of identifying “essentialskills” deemed necessary for success in college and career.Common to those efforts is an emphasis on teaching andassessing core academic knowledge and skills in Englishlanguage arts, mathematics, science, literature, history, andthe arts as well as employability skills such as personal com-munication, cooperation, and responsibility (Barton 2006).Some proponents advocate conceptualizing essential skillsmore broadly to include key cognitive strategies and aca-demic behaviors in addition to contextual skills and aware-ness (Conley 2007). In the midst of this national clamor forhigher standards and essential skills, only one national-leveladvocacy group, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills(2008), has incorporated interdisciplinary themes of globalawareness and civic literacy into its list of recommendedessential skills for high school graduates.

The state of Oregon became involved in the movementto raise high school graduation requirements after formerGovernor Ted Kulongoski attended the National Educa-tion Summit organized in February 2005 by Achieve, Inc.,for high-level business leaders, civic leaders, and educa-tional policymakers. With the backing of Governor Ku-longoski and the Oregon Legislative Assembly, the OregonState Board of Education approved a new Oregon Diplomamandate for all high schools in the state (Silverman 2007).The new policy increased high school graduation re-quirements from twenty-two to twenty-four with extra,higher level credits added in math, science, and English. Inaddition, the new diploma plan included the requirementthat students demonstrate proficiency in following essentialskills (Oregon Department of Education 2008):

1. Read and comprehend a variety of texts2. Write clearly and accurately3. Apply mathematics in a variety of settings4. Listen actively and speak clearly and coherently5. Think critically and analytically6. Use technology to learn, live, and work7. Demonstrate civic and community engagement8. Demonstrate global literacy9. Demonstrate personal management and teamwork

skills.

The majority of this list is similar to the skill setsrequired by the other thirty-five states participating inthe American Diploma Project Network. However, only

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tex

as A

&M

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

14:

58 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 4: Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

Searching for Global Literacy 127

Oregon has included global literacy among the skills re-quired for high school graduation, though some degree ofglobal knowledge and skills are now included in the cur-riculum standards or graduation requirements of elevenstates (Longview Foundation 2010).

As Oregon’s process for developing the essential skillshas unfolded, its definition of “global literacy” has un-dergone significant revision. Beginning in 2007, the Ore-gon State Board of Education convened an Essential SkillsTask Force, which developed draft definitions of each ofthe essential skills that were then disseminated for publicreview and comment through focus groups and an onlinesurvey. The task force, composed of representatives fromthe business community, K-12, community colleges, andhigher education, spent much of 2008 reviewing public in-put and making modifications to their initial drafts, and inJune 2009, final definitions were adopted by the state boardof education.

The November 2007 initial draft of global literacy readas follows (Oregon Department of Education 2008):

• evaluate the impact of globalization and the interdepen-dence among nations as evidenced in their economic,political, and environmental systems

• understand the local community, state, and nation frommultiple socioeconomic and cultural perspectives in or-der to learn from and work collaboratively with diversecultures, religions, and ways of life in a spirit of mutualrespect

• study a second language to open opportunities for un-derstanding, future jobs, and collaboration within aglobal community

• demonstrate understanding of diverse cultural and artis-tic expressions

• understand the impacts of global power, resources, andopportunity distribution

• analyze how world history, physical geography and cul-tural systems affect the nation, state, and local commu-nities

By final adoption in September 2009, the defining el-ements for global literacy had been trimmed to the twoitems identified below (Oregon Department of Education2009):

• demonstrate knowledge of diverse cultural, linguistic,and artistic expressions

• apply a global perspective to analyze contemporary andhistorical issues.

As Oregon moves forward in its plans to require that stu-dents demonstrate global literacy to graduate from highschool, three critical issues remain to be resolved. First,how will the definition of global literacy be operationalizedwithin an instructional context? In particular, will the ex-isting definition be construed in narrowly academic terms,or will a more comprehensive approach that includes au-thentic applications to both workplace and civic settings be

adopted? Second, given that demonstration of the essentialskills will be required for high school graduation, how willglobal literacy be assessed, and how will assessment proce-dures be aligned with classroom instruction and students’opportunity to learn? Finally, what support will be avail-able to teachers, schools, and districts as they develop theircapacity to teach and assess global literacy?

The Road Ahead

To ease the transition to the new graduation requirements,the Oregon State Board of Education has elected to phasein the essential skills requirement over a number of years:students will be required to “read and comprehend a vari-ety of text” in 2012, “write clearly and accurately” in 2013,and “apply mathematics in a variety of settings” in 2014.Phase-in dates for the remaining essential skills have yet tobe determined, and further work on the remaining essentialskills now falls to a separate body, the Assessment of Es-sential Skills Review Panel. With the work of this workinggroup primarily focused on preparing assessment optionsfor the first three essential skills, and with a separate re-view process underway for the Oregon social studies stan-dards, the path ahead for global literacy essential skills isunclear.

The choice of the three essential skills selected for initialadoption can, in part, be attributed to institutional expedi-ency in that the skills are more closely aligned with currentinstructional practices and thus require less adjustment onthe part of teachers, schools, or districts. In preparing toadopt the essential skills, the Oregon Department of Educa-tion contracted West Ed, a nonprofit educational researchgroup from San Francisco, to review the Oregon curricu-lum standards in English, math, science, and social scienceto find out where the essential skills appeared in the currentset of curriculum standards. Released in 2007, the West Edreport stated that the first essential skill, “read and compre-hend a variety of texts,” was present within 16 percent of theexisting Oregon curriculum standards; “write clearly andaccurately” within 13 percent; and “apply mathematics in avariety of settings” within 32 percent. By contrast, “demon-strate global literacy” was found within only 6 percent ofthe Oregon curriculum standards, all of which were lo-cated within the social science standards (West Ed 2007, 9).This relative lack of integration within the existing contentstandards, as well as the concentration within a single sub-ject area, is problematic given the Oregon State Board ofEducation’s intention that the essential skills be the follow-ing (Oregon Department of Education 2008):

• skills that are deemed essential for success in college,work and civic life

• process skills that cross all disciplines, not content spe-cific

• embedded in content standards and curriculum

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tex

as A

&M

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

14:

58 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 5: Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

128 King and Thorpe

• able to be demonstrated in a variety of courses, subjectsand settings.

To meet the expectation for connections to more than onesubject area, either the existing content standards will needto be revised or new content standards developed withglobal literacy connections in subject areas beyond thesocial sciences. Because global literacy is less frequentlytaught and assessed as of now, its adoption as a graduationrequirement threatens to be potentially more disruptive ofcurrent practices within schools and, thus, requires a greaterinvestment of time and money to build the institutional ca-pacity necessary to teach and assess effectively.

A second reason for the delay in the work concerningglobal literacy, in particular, appears to be the complexand contested nature of the skill itself. As previously de-scribed, Oregon’s working definition of global literacy un-derwent significant revision as it moved from initial concep-tualization to public review, task force modification, andfinal adoption. Garnering particular attention and even-tual elimination were any elements that asked students toexamine or evaluate possible value conflicts or trade-offs:discarded from the initial definition were requirements thatstudents “evaluate the impact of globalization,” employ“multiple socioeconomic and cultural perspectives,” or ex-amine “the impacts of global power, resources, and oppor-tunity distribution.” In the context of historical approachesto global education within the United States, it appearsthat Oregon policymakers wish to frame global literacynarrowly in terms of workforce preparation and to avoidmore the more value-laden and potentially contentious is-sues associated with a more civic-minded approach.

From a pedagogical standpoint, such a choice may beperceived as an opportunity lost. A growing body of re-search in civic education reveals myriad benefits that can re-sult from engaging students in teaching and learning aboutcontroversial issues. Patricia Avery and colleagues (1999,261) argue that “conflicts should occur frequently becausewhen they are managed constructively they have many posi-tive outcomes such as increasing the motivation and energyto solve problems, increasing achievement and productiv-ity, clarifying one’s identity and values, and increasing one’sunderstanding of other perspectives.” Encountering con-flicting claims about controversial issues expands students’content knowledge because it exposes them to informationand judgments beyond those associated with their own so-cial position and personal experiences (Parker 2003). Doingso can also contribute to the development of interpersonalskills such as listening attentively and disagreeing respect-fully and of “communicative virtues” including patience,the willingness to suspend judgment, and the courage tochange one’s mind in light of evidence (Burbules and Rice1991). In a pluralistic society, these skills, knowledge, anddispositions represent civic competencies that position stu-dents to participate more fully and effectively in democraticpublic life. In addition, in an increasingly interconnected

world, learning to work collaboratively with people fromdiverse cultures can provide significant benefits in the work-place as well.

Recommendations: Adopting a “Robust Approach”

As Oregon looks to move from conceptualization to theimplementation of global literacy as a graduation require-ment for all students, several existing models of global liter-acy could serve as useful models for how to operationalizeglobal literacy in a more robust manner that capitalizes ona wide range of potential academic, civic, and workforcebenefits. For example, Wisconsin has developed an interna-tional education curriculum guide (Wisconsin Departmentof Public Instruction 2008) that defines defined global lit-eracy with the following elements:

• speak one or more languages in addition to English• train for high skill jobs in the US or abroad• find ways to travel, explore, and be creative in a culture

other than their own• evidence curiosity and compassion for people of other

cultures• solve problems by working together with others in a

diverse workforce• appreciate and protect the arts and nature in many places

on earth.

Charlotte Anderson, Susan Nicklas, and Agnes Craw-ford (1994) through the Association for Supervisionand Curriculum Development published a ‘global un-derstandings’ framework for teaching and learning atthe elementary level. This framework employs an inte-grated, interdisciplinary approach designed to “help stu-dents recognize the commonalities in all human beings,become effective caretakers of our planet, honor hu-man diversity, and work together for the benefit of all”(5). At the collegiate level, the American Council on Edu-cation (ACE) has developed a list of attributes for a globallycompetent student (American Council on Education 2008)that includes:

Knowledge.

• understand own culture within a global and comparativecontext

• demonstrate knowledge of global issues, processes,trends, and systems

• demonstrate knowledge of other cultures

Skills.

• use knowledge, diverse cultural frames of reference, andalternate perspectives to think critically and solve prob-lems

• communicate and connect with people in other languagecommunities

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tex

as A

&M

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

14:

58 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 6: Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

Searching for Global Literacy 129

• use foreign language skills and/or knowledge of othercultures to extend access to information, experiences,and understanding

Attitudes.

• appreciate the language, art, religion, philosophy, andmaterial culture of different cultures

• accept cultural differences and tolerate cultural ambigu-ity

• demonstrate an ongoing willingness to seek out interna-tional or intercultural opportunities

Beyond the United States, the Global Education Project inAustralia in 2002 published “Global Perspectives: A State-ment on Global Education for Australian Schools,” whichincluded a complete framework for defining and imple-menting global education. This framework identifies thecharacteristics of a global citizen along with key under-standings in global education, values, and attitudes em-phasized in global education, skills and processes for globaleducation, and ways in which learners can “translate theirknowledge and values into practical action and participa-tion” (Global Education Project 2002, 9).

Each of these models are notable because they offer com-prehensive frameworks that foster student learning out-comes in the knowledge, skill, and dispositional domainsand can be applied in multiple subject areas across therange of academic disciplines. Through requiring studentsto “solve problems by working together,” “communicateand connect with people in other communities,” and “trans-late their knowledge in practical action,” these models alsoevince a view of learning as knowledge-in-use in whichacademic knowledge and skills are first sought and thenapplied to address authentic goals, projects, and problemswith relevance beyond the classroom context. In so doing,particularly where such learning happens in collaborationwith students from other cultures or parts of the world,they open the possibility of developing what John Paul Gee(1992) terms ‘powerful literacy’ whereby learners make useof what is learned to operate more effectively within thecontexts in which they find themselves and also become ca-pable of recognizing the processes through which their owncultural assumptions and perspectives are formed. Belyingthe stereotype of the Ugly American, willfully ignorant anddismissive of other cultures, such a “powerful” approachto global literacy positions students to communicate andcollaborate across cultural or national borders, motivatesthem to seek to understand the experiences and perspec-tives of others “with more than a casual tourist’s interest”(Nussbaum 1997, 88), and inculcates a sense of personalefficacy and civic engagement.

The definition of global literacy adopted within Ore-gon offers opportunities to cultivate this powerful literacy,although the extent to which these opportunities are real-ized depends on how broadly or narrowly certain elementswithin the definition are construed. In particular, “applying

a global perspective” can be interpreted as an individual-ized act or one performed in real or virtual collaborationwith those holding diverse or even conflicting perspectives.Likewise, “analyzing contemporary and historical issues”can be approached as a theoretical enterprise or applied toproblems with perceived relevance to students and commu-nities, and actual solutions proffered or enacted. To ade-quately equip Oregon students to understand and functioneffectively within an increasingly interconnected world, theauthors of this article recommend that Oregon adopt a “ro-bust approach” to global literacy in which students applyknowledge and skills are to solve problems, seek out andunderstand diverse perspectives, and collaborate and workacross national and cultural borders.

Developing robust assessment instruments

Oregon’s plan for assessing the essential skills requiredfor high school graduation includes three options: test-ing, work samples, or locally developed performance as-sessments. Currently, Oregon assesses students’ contentknowledge in writing, reading, math, science, and the so-cial studies through the Oregon Assessment of Knowl-edge and Skills (OAKS) tests on which students mustmeet designated scores to be considered having demon-strated proficiency in designated essential skills. For stu-dents who do not meet the required scores and for thoseessential skills with no corresponding OAKS tests, stu-dents may demonstrate proficiency by completing worksamples—representative examples of student work alignedwith the essential skill that are scored using official statescoring guides. Alternatively, districts may opt to developlocal performance assessments comparable to a work sam-ple but not using state scoring guides. A modified diplomawill be offered to students who fail to demonstrate pro-ficiency in the essential skills through any of the optionsdescribed above.

Within their report analyzing the degree to which theessential skills are embedded within the current contentstandards, West Ed also analyzed the alignment betweenthe OAKS tests and the essential skills. According to thisreport, only 6 percent of existing OAKS test items assess theessential skill of global literacy (West Ed 2007, 26). Thus, toprovide students an adequate opportunity to demonstrateproficiency in this essential skill, either the OAKS tests willneed to be significantly revised or work samples and localperformance assessments developed through which scorersare able to ascertain and measure students’ global literacy.Further, for Oregon to adopt a robust definition of globalliteracy, assessment options must be developed that providestudents opportunities to demonstrate and scorers to assessa broad range of knowledge, skills, and dispositions.

Although many conceptual models and practical frame-works exist on which the Oregon Department of Ed-ucation can draw in defining global literacy, work onassessing specific learning objectives associated with global

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tex

as A

&M

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

14:

58 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 7: Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

130 King and Thorpe

literacy has emerged only recently. Attempting to findan assessment model for use at the Southern IllinoisUniversity–Edwardsville, Denise DeGarmo (2007) re-ported that existing instruments either assessed very narrowslices of student learning (e.g., geographic literacy) or, whenbroader measures were used, only indirectly captured stu-dent attitudes. She concluded that “a tool that can actuallymeasure global competency through student learning doesnot exist” (2007, 4). Recognizing this lack, ACE embarkedon a three-year project to develop and pilot a portfolio-based approach to assessing international learning. Thisrecently concluded collaboration between six universitiesgenerated an ePortfolio assessment process that includes acollection of student work, a detailed scoring rubric alignedwith the “nine attributes for a globally competent student”described previously, and a series of anchor portfolios tohelp potential raters distinguish between low-, medium-,and high-level portfolios (American Council on Education2010).

In addition, ACE has compiled an extensive list ofresources that can be used to assess different dimensionsof global knowledge and perspective. The InterculturalDevelopment Inventory (IDI), for example, is a statis-tically validated questionnaire that rates respondents’intercultural sensitivity along a continuum ranging froma “monocultural” to an “intercultural mindset” in stagesmoving from denial, polarization, minimization, accep-tance, to adaptation (Hammer, Bennett and Wiseman2003). Other instruments capable of assessing globalperspective include the Global Perspective Inventory(GPI), Beliefs, Events, and Values Inventory (BEVI), CrossCultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI), and the Web-based Global Competence Aptitude Assessment (GCAA).Specific instruments assessing global knowledge includethe Global Awareness Profile (GAP) and the Survey ofGeographic Literacy developed by National Geographic.Pre- and post-test instruments for measuring global knowl-edge and attitudes have also been developed by the GlobalAwareness Program (GAP) at Florida InternationalUniversity (Cruz and Bermudez 2009).

Instruments for assessing students’ ability to apply theiracademic knowledge and skills to address authentic issuesand problems derive primarily from the civic educationarena. For example, the Civic Development Inventory andPolitical Interest Scales, developed by the Center for CivicEducation to evaluate the widely popular We the Peopleand Project Citizen programs for middle and high schoolstudents, measure civic learning outcomes ranging from po-litical interest and efficacy to the propensity to participate,knowledge of public issues, and commitment to exercise therights and responsibilities of citizenship (Vontz, Metcalf,and Patrick 2000). Similarly, in 1998 the IEA Civic Edu-cation Project developed a questionnaire to assess the civicknowledge, attitudes, and engagement of students in thirtycountries. This questionnaire measured students’ knowl-edge of the principles of democracy, skills in interpret-

ing political communication, trust in public institutions,and expectations for future participation in civic activities(Hahn and Torney-Purta 1999).

Thus, while there may be no single instrument currentlycapable of assessing all dimensions of global literacy, avariety of models do exist for identifying and measuringthe knowledge, skill, and dispositional domains of globalawareness, perspective, and citizenship. Although the “self-report” approach employed by many of these instrumentsmay not be appropriate for high-stakes assessments involv-ing the essential skills, they can be used to identify specificperformance indicators that could be adapted and used toinform the development of assessments and scoring guidesin Oregon. The ACE portfolio and scoring guide, in partic-ular, provide a potential starting point for developing worksamples appropriate for use at the high school level.

Supporting Teachers, Schools, and Districts

The adoption of the essential skills marks a significant tran-sition in how Oregon schools prepare and qualify studentsfor high school graduation. Because the implementationof the new requirements will occur on the local level, thestate has developed an interactive, Web -based planningsystem called the Assessment of Essential Skills Toolkit toassist districts in designing, implementing, and sustainingan assessment system that meets the requirements of thenew Oregon diploma. The toolkit outlines and provides re-sources and examples for a ten-step planning process thatmoves districts from (1) reviewing the new requirements; (2)establishing local goals and timelines; (3) surveying existingresources and identifying resource needs; (4) planning forspecial needs populations include special education, En-glish language learners, and talented and gifted students;(5) planning for professional development of teachers, ad-ministrators and staff; (6) developing support structures,defining roles, and communication plans; (7) building alocal assessment plan; (8) developing record-keeping andprogress-tracking systems; (9) reviewing local policies andprocedures; and finally (10) reviewing and assembling plans(Oregon Department of Education 2010).

Given the current state of Oregon’s planning processrelated to global literacy, the requirement of surveying ex-isting resources is particularly timely because the results ofsuch a survey could be used to inform how global literacyis to be operationally defined. Many teachers in Oregonare already doing much good work related to teachingglobal education and many organizations support thatwork by providing instructional materials and professionaldevelopment, most notably the Oregon Council for theSocial Studies, Oregon Geographic Alliance, World AffairsCouncil of Oregon, and the Oregon International Council.In addition, a wide and growing range of instructionalplatforms and curricular materials are readily available tosupport teachers and students seeking to build knowledge,skills, and dispositions related to global literacy. Notable

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tex

as A

&M

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

14:

58 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 8: Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

Searching for Global Literacy 131

among these resources, the SPICE (Stanford Program onInternational and Cross-Cultural Education 2010) andCHOICES program (CHOICES 2010) curricula employa case study approach of particular global regions andissues to develop an in-depth global knowledge. Recentlydeveloped texts such as Gary Reichard and Ted Dickson’s(2008) America on the World Stage: A Global Approach toU.S. History provides disciplinary vehicles for embeddingthe examination of global issues and connections withinthe confines of traditional U.S. history courses. GlobalNomads Group’s videoconferencing (2010) promotes thedevelopment of global perspective by providing technolog-ical platforms that support ongoing, real-time dialoguesamong students and classes in different parts of the world.And, by engaging students in first learning about and thenproposing and taking action to address pressing globalproblems, the Challenge 20/20 (National Association ofIndependent Schools 2010) and NetAid’s Global CitizenCorps (MercyCorps 2010) programs foster an informedsense of civic engagement and global citizenship.

On a systemic level, a recent compilation by Toni FussKirkwood-Tucker (2009) describes an expansive array ofapproaches for promoting global education at the school,university, and teacher preparation level. Potential fundingsources such as the Longview Foundation support statesseeking to increase teaching about world regions and globalissues, expand investments in international education, anddevelop teachers’ professional capacity to teach about theworld (Longview Foundation 2010). The Longview Foun-dation also publishes an International Education PlanningRubric that outlines strategies employed in different statesto prepare globally competent students. By disseminatinginformation about promising curriculum, policy initiatives,and program developments, these resources provide valu-able support and guidance for teachers, schools, and dis-tricts seeking to build their capacity related to global liter-acy.

Conclusions

Oregon policymakers exhibited ambitious and forwardthinking in choosing to include global literacy among theessential skills to be required for high school graduation.One of only two states to do so, Oregon now faces key de-cision points as it moves forward in its planning process.Chief among these is how to operationalize its definitionof global literacy in terms of demonstrable indicators ofstudent learning. Doing so in narrow, instrumental termsin which the application of knowledge and skills are limitedto academic settings could enable policymakers to circum-vent potentially contentious debates that have historicallyaccompanied global education in the United States andmay prove more expedient in aligning more easily with ex-isting instructional practices and methods of assessment.Such a choice, however, reduces the likelihood that stu-

dents will develop the capacity and commitment to utilizetheir knowledge and skills to address authentic needs, is-sues, and problems outside the classroom context. Giventhe tremendous investment of resources, time, and energyexpended in the transition to the essential skills, an out-come that largely replicates current practices and studentlearning would constitute an opportunity lost for Oregon’sstudents and schools.

To more fully prepare students to meet the civic, aca-demic, and occupational opportunities and challenges ofthe twenty-first century, the authors of this article recom-mend that Oregon adopt a robust approach to teachingand assessing global literacy that includes the use of higher-order abilities to solve problems and incorporates a citizen-ship element similar to national models in civic education.In light of the recent development of assessment strate-gies in global and civic education, concerns regarding theability to validly and reliably assess such a wide range ofknowledge, skills, and dispositions need not be a deterrentto adopting such an approach. To the contrary, develop-ing instructional materials, performance assessments, andscoring guides aligned with the comprehensive frameworksfor global literacy and assessment instruments already inuse elsewhere provides an opportunity for Oregon to max-imize the prospect that student learning will be transferredto nonacademic settings and capitalize on the widest pos-sible range of intellectual, occupational, and civic benefits.

References

Achieve, Inc. 2005. “The American Diploma Network.” www.achieve.org.

American Council on Education. 2008. “International LearningOutcomes.” http://www.acenet.edu/Content/NavigationMenu/ProgramsServices/cii/res/assess/intl learn Outcomes.htm.

American Council on Education. 2010. “Assessing International Learn-ing Outcomes.” http://www.acenet.edu/Content/NavigationMenu/ProgramsServices/cii/res/assess/index.htm.

Anderson, Charlotte, Susan Nicklas, and Agnes Crawford. 1994. GlobalUnderstandings: A Framework for Teaching and Learning. Alexan-dria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Develop-ment.

Avery, Patricia, David Johnson, Roger Johnson, and James Mitchell.1999. “Teaching an Understanding of War and Peace through Struc-tured Academic Controversies.” In How Children Understand Warand Peace, ed. Amiram Raviv, Louis Oppenheimer, and DanielBar-Tal, 260–280. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Barton, Paul. 2006. High School Reform and Work: Facing Labor MarketRealities. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Bloom, Allan. 1987. The Closing of the American Mind. New York: Simonand Schuster.

Boulding, Elise. 1988. Building a Global Civic Culture: Education for anInterdependent World. New York: Teachers College Press.

Bragaw, Don. 1998. Global Literacy: Challenges, Culture and Connec-tions. New York: The American Forum for Global Education.www.globaled.org/globalLiteracy/activities/glIndex.html.

Burack, Jonathon. 2003. “The Student, the World, and the Global Edu-cation Ideology.” In Where Did Social Studies Go Wrong? ed. JamesLemming, Lucien Ellington, and Kathleen Porter-Magee, 40–67.New York: The Fordham Institute.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tex

as A

&M

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

14:

58 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 9: Searching for Global Literacy: Oregon's Essential Skills Movement and the Challenges of Transformation

132 King and Thorpe

Burbules, Nick, and Suzanne Rice. 1991. “Dialogue across Differences.”Harvard Educational Review 61: 393–416.

Calder, Margaret. 2000. “A concern for justice: Teaching using a globalperspective in the classroom.” Theory Into Practice 39(2): 81–87.

CHOICES. 2010. “Curriculum Catalog.” http://www.choices.edu/resources/individual.php.

Conley, David. 2007. Toward a More Comprehensive Conception of Col-lege Readiness. Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Cen-ter.

Cruz, Barbara, and Pedro Bermudez. 2009. “Teacher Education in theUnited States: A Retrospective on the Global Awareness Program atFlorida International University.” In Visions in Global Education:The Globalization of Curriculum and Pedagogy in Teacher Educa-tion and Schools: Perspectives from Canada, Russia, and the UnitedStates, ed. Toni Fuss Kirkwood-Tucker, 90–115. New York: PeterLang.

Cunningham, Greg. 1986. Blowing the Whistle on Global Education. Den-ver, CO: U.S. Department of Education, Region VIII Office.

DeGarmo, Denise. 2007. Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes inRegard to Global Competence at Southern Illinois University Ed-wardsville. Unpublished Assessment Scholar Proposal.

Gates, Bill. 2005. “National Education Summit on High Schools:February 26, Prepared Remarks by Bill Gates.” http://www.gatesfoundation.org/speeches-commentary/Pages/bill-gates-2005-national-education-summit.aspx.

Gee, John Paul. 1992. “What is Literacy?” In Becoming Political: Read-ings and Writings in the Politics of Literacy Education, ed. PatrickShannon, 21–28. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Global Education Project. 2002. Global Perspectives: A Statement onGlobal Education for Australian Schools. www.globaleducation.edna.edu.au/globaled/go/engineName/filemanager/pid/59/global perspectives statement.pdf?actionreq=actionFileDownload&fid=3908

Global Nomads Group. 2010. “Interactive Programs.” http://gng.org/product/videos/index.html.

Hahn, Carole, and Judith Torney-Purta. 1999. “The IEA Civic EducationProject: National and International Perspectives.” Social Education63: 425–431.

Hammer, Mitchell, Milton Bennett, and Richard Wiseman. 2003. “TheIntercultural Development Inventory: A Measure of InterculturalSensitivity.” International Journal of Intercultural Relations 27:421–443.

Hanvey, Robert. 1976. An Attainable Global Perspective. New York:Global Perspectives in Education.

Hicks, Donald. 2003. “Thirty Years of Global Education: A Reminderof Key Principles and Precedents.” Educational Review 55(3): 265–275.

Hirsch, Eric Donald. 1996. The Schools We Need: And Why We Don’tHave Them. New York: Doubleday.

Kirkwood, Toni Fuss. 2001. “Our Global Age Requires Global Educa-tion: Clarifying Definitional Ambiguities.” The Social Studies 92(1): 10–15.

Kirkwood-Tucker, Toni Fuss. 2009. Visions in Global Education: TheGlobalization of Curriculum and Pedagogy in Teacher Education and

Schools: Perspectives from Canada, Russia, and the United States.New York: Peter Lang.

Longview Foundation. 2010. State Initiatives. http://www.longviewfdn.org/120/state-initiatives.html.

MercyCorps. 2010. “Global Citizen Corps.” http://www.globalcitizencorps.org/.

Merryfield, Merry, and Kasai Masataka. 2004. “How are Teachers Re-sponding to Globalization?” Social Education 68(5): 354–359.

National Association of Independent Schools. 2010. “Challenge20/20 Homepage.” http://www.nais.org/resources/index.cfm?ItemNumber=147262.

National Center on Education and the Economy. 2007. Tough Choicesor Tough Times: The Report on the New Commission on the Skills ofthe American Workforce. Washington DC: Jossey-Bass.

Nussbaum, Martha. 1997. Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense ofReform in Liberal Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress.

Oregon Department of Education. 2008. “Oregon Diploma Project.”http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id = 2042.

Oregon Department of Education. 2010. “Assessment of Essential SkillsToolkit.” http://assessment.oregonk-12.net/.

Parker, Walter. 2003. Teaching Democracy: Unity and Diversity in PublicLife. New York: Teachers College Press.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills 2008. “The Intellectual andPolicy Foundation of the 21st Century Skills Framework.”www.21stcenturyskills.org.

Pike, Graham. 2000. “Global Education and National Identity: In Pur-suit of Meaning.” Theory Into Practice 39(2): 64–73.

Ravitch, Diane. 1978. The Revisionists Revised: A Critique of the RadicalAttack on the Schools. New York: Basic Books.

Reardon, Betty. 1988. Comprehensive Peace Education: Educating forGlobal Responsibility. New York: Teachers College Press.

Reichard, Gary, and Dickson, Ted. 2008. America on the World Stage:A Global Approach to U.S. History. Chicago: University of IllinoisPress.

Rischard, Jean-Francois. 2003. High Noon: Twenty Global Problems,Twenty Years to Solve Them. New York: Basic Books.

Schlafly, Phyllis. 1986. “What is Wrong with Global Education?” St.Louis Globe Democrat, March 6: 23.

Silverman, Julia. 2007. “Oregon Latest to Raise Graduation Require-ments.” The Boston Globe, January 21: A15.

Stanford Program on International and Cross-Cultural Education. 2010.“Featured Curriculum Units.” http://spice.stanford.edu/.

Vontz, Tom, Kim Metcalf, and John Patrick. 2000. Project Citizen andthe Civic Development of Adolescent Students in Indiana, Latvia, andLithuania. Bloomington: ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies(ED447047).

WestEd. 2007. Oregon Content Standards Evaluation Amendment Report:Part 1. Essential Skills Analyses Report. San Francisco: WestEd.

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. 2008. “Strategies forAchieving Global Literacy for Wisconsin Students.” http://dpi.state.wi.us/cal/pdf/global-litbrochure.pdf.

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. 2010. “InternationalEducation Recommendations: Global Literacy for Wisconsin.”www.dpi.state.wi.us/cal/pdf/ie-recom.pdf.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tex

as A

&M

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

14:

58 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014