C.M. Ferrari J.B . Fine

1. Through the Crossroads:Short-term Study Abroad Promoting Educational Leaders’ Global Perspectives andSelf-Authorship Capacity C.M. Ferrari J.B. Fine

2. Purpose 1) 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.

3. 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

4. Aligned Competencies & Standards

5. 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

6. 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).

7. 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.

8. 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.)

9. What is the GPI?

10. Cognitive Dimension Scales • Knowing. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. Loyola University Chicago: School of Education Summer Rome Program • The 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”

14. 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

16. Curriculum

18. Co-curriculum

20. Community

21. GPI Strongest Areas of Growth

22. Compare to Norms**Norms consisted of 42,138 undergraduate students who have completed the GPI from 2008 until 2012 (Braskamp, Braskamp, & Merrill, 2013)

23. Average Responses

24. 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.

25. Developmental Pathways Toward Self-authorship

27. Follow-up Survey Design • How 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.

28. 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

29. Results from Survey NA 22.8% Crossroads 29.7% Internal Meaning-Making 47.5% External Meaning-making 0.0%

30. 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.

31. Selected Responses • 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.

32. 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).

33. 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.

34. 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.

35. 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.

36. 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)

37. 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)

38. What does this mean for our profession?

39. 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?

40. Further Research • Explore short-term study abroad • Explore graduate students abroad • Connection between GPI and self-authorship • What effects occur from intentionally designed, high-impact practices that are grounded in theory and an assessment framework?

41. Thank you!

42. 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.