4 .1 1.... . all. y . We I hob." fit. '0. l-"Plu: ' 0 t ...; . . I. fia we). m0. .3_ .00.“ .0. «.0 .92.)..0600310. .p r n . 8.. '1: .... (c. :06...‘20 .10 ldtNH...u.OtO. 0 u . a. 83 t 90“ .0 1 0. 5.. I ......01: .3509... 0.0.. 0 ‘32.... 00 .0... 2...... .0 :06 ..0 . .. 0 v ‘OCQ 00. ‘....§10.0...t.... 0.110....) 2... L!0892:9Oo ...»...IJo- - u I . .... .1 3. .3 . egg or. ...-0...... to! ...... t..t-tu'l.Vu..... t ...... ...: 6.3. ......0011. 0". U . I "‘3. "a.” . “a. 0.00 0! ‘2 can“! I; 2' . ...A... 0.30 0|. 0‘0..0.$’0.‘00‘0... .0. .. .. . ...... 14.. . 9.0.00.3 041. .00 0|» 0‘0 O r .75’300 . ”v.20. ..0 . l! 0 0‘ ... 0 0.0 0 : It... 0 u .. 0...... 0|... ‘0 ...-039...??? . 0 0000...... 00 “C . 24...... 4-. 1 0001.0 \Qll‘ Q 0 . 0:»! 00.9.... . '1'}..o.. 1:: ‘01 2-.. : . . u ‘1‘? 0034?. ...! C .9030000...40’Q oL.‘-.‘0v~.\'lalo .... ...-3.800000 03...! 33.90. . . .. .. A 0:. 50.010.00.50 “#3?“ .5000 05.002210!!! .. 0.....0. .000...9~8.I!0u‘03:.'. 002 0.0.0. V . V V . . .. .. . : D ‘0 ‘8»: 0 d. ‘0 0 O. 9‘... 0.1.0.00 ‘9’ 0'. 00.0. .0. 00.0.9- . 00,3900 .0 0 0.0 . .. . . V . .. .. . :00. ”tun-£14 00.I..Y‘(0.|.\.0. 3!. 009:”...‘Izwicit0. 9:! . . . . I 0 .V . ...0 .00;.o§10.(..0« ... .. ‘10.-.. Y I930... . . .. V . . . f v 0 c. 6‘ 09...... 0"...90-0of! v. .03. 0 .005‘.... . . . r . . , 0 I‘- u 030...... 00.00900. ... 230.130.10.030 Ii... :9!!! . . . 0" 0... ......Jllil: I. . Q0... .00 ....r [0... l..¢0$n¢0...l90....v¢00 . v.“ c . r 08 0} ..to 0. .Jcfiu. —0.0.~l ‘ 3090.00. 'I‘O.....'0Aq 03.30.10.100: ......u‘... .00. 0. v .l....0.0.'.. . . 0.“..303'. at! . to.“ “.00....0I1 . 0.00.000 ‘1. ...}... 0:",.|.0..»"00..003u 00‘0-‘0.Y. 3 040...... . I .00 K 01“ . ‘0 lo. 5.07:! O. 0 in?" ‘1‘.“ «I11: . ‘Q 20 10 I?.l¢lr9..o 2.3 :00... x... 0.0.$!0.00.\|..0.-1 10.930.092.91030230... 03.0.93...2 3 . . 0.80 .02.. . .1 0' 8035‘..- . .0: 1 I91: I... 1.217“? . ’0 £000.!!90‘t0 .0... $0.... .120: :...t:..2 132;. '00.. . ..0‘878. o.’\..8 ...... 1.0.5.... .0L-30..¢ .V-i.’ .v xv... 033“ s .3 . .‘ . (0.033301! $88110...0.08.03.03.91...0.7.3.13}?!10.30...... . .00? .v. '9... . .. ... .3 1:1... ... 03.7.1303... Ornk. .0... .. 0 0. fiiflfi in. . #:00. A ... J . . . 1‘0733 . . ..80 00:. 7.03.9991!!! .1390...0.0. .0 .0399!!! . .. :0... 3.30.91.20.55! 0 .0.....¢!0.Q ...»!tit. .. . V .0 flat! 5&- .»0 . 3.." H\. It (I. . . . . . ...-50.0.0.0...- !%!n.....9..:...... p108...0...t0..!l!:....t! ...; u. . .. 1 .0 60.9.... .3 it ...) I....:.... .0. .. ..W 90.00“.“— elr 0.... I . . . n . ..o. .. a. T V 0:00.. .50 . . v. 1.2.0.0): ... 0.. 0.3 2.0022... 0.20.30.22.03. '10.)..30. fl .0. . ...}II ’20 . .1 ...!‘fi 1: b...t 1 3v .1\.~.7! I. .0. 0 9|! . ”...: . 4”. » RM...) a? . 0..." -1“... .0 (3‘01”"0 1.0% J. 9.003.... 2:20;...0928411701 0.29.9.0... .0..Z..v1..0.. ..296-0. . ......110805. 1...: .0“. . .... . ... V v... .1 0...... o. .5! 00.... . 1 0. 0‘. t... . t w . 00.0.0.8 0 0 L l 0... 3:0. ... ...0 1‘01... .0380...- . 3.9.0.192: 00.30 1!}. J... (.0... ...0...‘...co...:0l ...-0.9:- . .... :9: 30...... A .0 ...: .. .. .00.. .. $8 010.!5 :0. J. .$ 0. c .. . \u 13 flagflfi...‘ 0H5“... ..\.otl..t0..lo.l:‘. ...-0. 0|. 0:... 00.2.... 0.12.1.0. ‘0'...- :.4....3....1! ? t....;0.8.l.. 3.28.0! .I..’..)Q.....¢VOU. .309.0.....9 . .4 ain't «‘1 x .‘ . . N” r. . . V .. 00.0. 0. 9’ 'II... 1:.10I ....l . .. . ‘00.... 0.02.003... .90 3'10... 0p0010.’r 3’90 V. '00.. 00...... .9. .0 0 003.0000. 011.3000’0 .0. .0 . . .. 33.4.2.“ ”I . fin. . .- Q ., ‘ J . \l n . 0. .0. .0. . . '1‘!‘0.ot'.-.l>§...0000 9'. 0. ,‘S‘I-il‘. 90.00030. . . .l. 00“}; 0.. 00 .. .... Ob. .. .l. .... .. . 0 1.00. " . . . ‘00 . l 0.0 0... 0.0.00! .0 . 2 0a N. . o "‘.Vo‘l..{1a"¢“0vlao‘v.’cd' . . . 1 .0 ...-010.10... 0...! .‘o... ...-0.. .6...O.O 79000»: .930“... . V 0". 'l D0".90 0‘00‘ .74... 0"...“ . . .0 0r . he 0' I V "‘E. .I0-.0.I-(1.’...0 . o.""..’t~"‘ 0.000 091.031 ‘0 .|00-. {...} ....!.0 . €00,000... ‘1‘.0.V 7...... . T010. ...,” 00.0 .35 )I 0 ‘ . . . 00 p. .00‘.0L00.V5. 91.5 00:00. $00.01.i..-.;Q9.40 0.... . (0.030.231 0.0V . . . . . v. 0.. .‘On‘.0: 0. 0t..0.0.. V .000... 34000 0. C ‘u. ‘ i ..0 . V _ ....Plv ....L‘co‘ZCJ. .1‘0.-.0.!Q0.l¢01 33980.293‘131130.’ . .002: . I. . . ....-900:0...:0::..0 :0. 00...?! ...-’9. I“: ‘0 ¥ . , . . . Sftno'v. 03...! ... 0.0 . : ..............I0....... 0 iiivfiesv: 1...... t . o 0.1.1.. ....-.2.‘ ‘l.... .9. .l . . 0.. .. ......0000. w . . \ )Q . _ 1r? a. 03.2... 3...... . ...; . .. . . V... {litreszzt . 3.. . ...... 0.26.0.3... . vi. .0 .o: .4051: .u. . . .. . ..V 3.31203. 0. {I a x (I 00$...”r00'I-10i‘13‘...‘ . . . 0.0.0 ...". 3.15. .22005 $\?99'..0I- . :8... AI..'0 400... 0 r \’ 910.10,.“923 .0 O . A. 1“ ‘00..0n'.o' k0 . . .L.000.' ~ 00.... .‘ 0000.30.00. 3010.0»: . ...-Q. .l...\~.. 1“. . 0.. 0.! ‘ .\0 O “3.. .0 I 1'0... . . V. S30..€.1l.01..'r0!0 . .. ... .. alt}... .. £15.. -. 010150. 47*? 1 .. ‘7‘"II .0. .30.} . V $0 000.90.! .18. . £00.... 0 V 0... «0“ “90‘... 00: . . 1...!!! .... 10.... . _ . . . . I 0.....0....f..v$. .0. ...... 1 .00., v... i!~£\ . 1.333.290.00213990. . . . . . v08!..3....0. 1... Q t .. _ . 2 . 9 0- (0.90%: 5.2-0.000. V ..Q’.vl 0.91.! 4‘03. 0 . .. .. . 3...! 0.0 0-: .... v3.3 $1.03N0“. . [90.00 0. 3.0 900031....Jnri .0? .I0. V. . u‘. ..0 0.903.001. I. .0099 . u -. 0.101.002.1211‘3 . ...’O.:._ a?! ... 0 . . 0100!! ‘K‘! 0. 000 o 0 ...a?., . 9.0 33.0‘. .3. .. . 3-.‘Y0.0..~v ....000 u 4.. I. . 0.730;... . 0.00.0“..k .- ’11....0 0” ‘ 0 ...3 £0.00"... O... 0.900 t 0;! o... .0I\X.. ‘9 0.01.,3l’. l...v...»0‘u.‘. .- 0000.3. . ...? «...-0": .1... o 0.9.0.0093»; 0 ... . . 0. 90.01.2408... .0 I: 03 . 1.0350020000‘90. 0.104 ‘.00...‘0 2 . 0“- ‘~I0,‘10.;.. . 00... 116...! A! r..0&!0.!£. o 3...... .1093!!!) 0.0. {0.29.00.5u: 0 .9 . .30.I‘...‘.0OQ.0 ..I‘uono6h; . 30.0. .5 53.6.... 33.11.9203. .0 t I. ...?0,‘. 30.0%.”?! ... 0 . *1 Q .. .. .3... n . 0 0.0.10 90..” It. , .."10. . O. s 00....“ 2.. ' . 0.3. .‘lvn. . . 80.0.!900..'....93.9 . D O I 0 l A .0 0 .Lo . 0 030510010“ 3 afiu‘t Q. ’1‘. a... .0330... ... 020....- ..I 000-0 fig: Cl- 0 0 ..-. V «I o 03‘- 0‘..’ . .0 .... O... '98-...961... 0.0.0.3721 .3 1 .n ... ...: 0.0. 00.0. 0. :Otltoq V.0v 0 0.! l0 0...?! .I. . 0. ..-..00. .50.”, ‘0. .00 0. 00....‘I .0 30.0”“; ’to...10.:0.2| .7... 0‘ 0 x! ...: ... o O0~vv .00“ _ upf‘l’tn .I . ‘ ’0 O... .00 .... ‘" IA‘... 2 O I" 00': n'l ‘90»; ..9’0. ... .. V . .0.'00..‘0 I. 0 00:" . V .0 . u '20‘ .0... 0.!0 0.00.... 0.5-02.0..0.’ o ...? .93 ...:0... ‘00.. . .r HL 6 07.00. 0... .1 v . 9000......Oo0ngfloe. H... . 01.900000. .0. ....” .‘ ...... I. ant-O! 3:00. p 3"... 0...?! . 0 9.0.0030 3...!02-10- .01! .0. 90‘201. . .: eflpdir..H-0u.u:o0.uo .?...209 . _ ~ 0 . . 0- 09.0030? tr!!! 5:1...— .10'0 0 0. 0 Q. 0. 0'. 000‘... .0. . ... . I . . 1 .0 .000. .03. 2’ .0 1:00.... .... . 3.0000910 0‘ w...»ot0000!I.0...1‘ . A ~. .{'I..: 2.0.0.0300. 40.00.09.000. 3 0!‘.. .0. ...!n.. 0.0."...0; .C. an... .I .. . ... 1 ...‘TQa’ ' ..70 00.. 00’Y0v l~.. V.... .0 2.91:1... . V . v 00... . . O .. i :2 .0 ‘0... 0 I, or} 200’ ‘ to‘. n. 81‘ 351.... H05 3" quso'h. .000. . . '0‘ ‘0-1. . It..1‘o‘. 0t..... 9 0010.13.03 'I90§I0.31. .. 230.910.5102}. . ‘0) .....uuu... 9.. Rum... L. qr. n03.. gun link!“ A." .‘ . . ~'.lm 0.0.0 I I2.“ . fin. .2..m ‘00 0 ‘ ’ . . 3 O 10 a . /W’. i J.” D J. . . . y . . . . . 0 0 . fit 0 0 O‘ to . V . . . . b) *0. _ . . A Y"’.‘ . . . . . ilhnx00¢t0 . ~ 0 . .. I . n '00. 00. v 0 . I . $21.": 0"... . . . I . 5000.... .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . 0.01.32}: 3.0551100: .. . . . . _ . .".-Qo0.0-92. 0.0.3.9309“); I0..“u‘0\Ia. ‘ . . . . . ... - , .90 .0 C ‘ 0.00 . V . .. 20.0. 0.0.0.43. $30; {01.3490052 . _ . : ... .v.....10¢f..0.v?li0..l. 30¢..39 0‘ Q 00 . . ..l-.l\‘0.l$!...t§$2 9.3.. ....0‘03 “.0 O . . 03.00.00.900 .Q960.‘Hfifl". “t . n . .339”... .....05‘0 v c . “$3.... I '2 00. 100 0.‘ ‘3 000 ..1. 0 r ...... ll .0) 230.. "£001 .Jmnfio:5. 04.00.! 3&0 . . 3.4].% 0’}! ‘9;- ‘o... :0: 0 l 700‘ Dig-0| .".“..‘I£.l ...—10.. .00 36.5%: ‘0 .\ ‘00 v 0.0.1“. . 0" 1. . . .8 .80...” V. n on? Ju .30030fir-0‘v :1: o... 00 . 3 .. . 090. 000300.040‘6? a... 00.29: ‘01,!" 0.. 00.001000 5. .‘201 0 .0... 3.0.0.. , ‘1‘3‘....\ 00.30.! 0. ‘0. ' 3 3.30... 0 .o. .- 0.1.!00 .0 ...-‘1.‘0..0 .00., 0.0.0... ... . 005 ‘ 1 0 . . . 0.. .I0 . 0 0.000 Jasoo‘. 0.....- ...... -.. 'qu-ilgo a..!-- ...-.0 0.0 . . . .. . . . r’.».'-..=.I‘;‘“Ol0.0 ‘01:.“ . 0 . . . . . . 0.....8o3‘ .00 fl-Vivl . . . .. .. 0!). 1......‘10.%. 100 I... . . . . . .. . .. . ,...011..t:1‘2..:¢.0$t..8900-. . . . .. .. V . . w unto-0000.“. 0 . . . . . .000 . 03‘. ... . . . . .. . . .... .. ...-v. . .. . . . . . . .00?! V00. . o .0; ..it.‘ _ . . . V . . . . 4.... 20.1.3; 22.10.033.01 . . . , . . V. . . .. .....Q:........_:!..0t..0.,~.0 03.. k. I . Z . 2:3... 0 . . V . :1. :1. co'lanflu \0.Qo.rkomr~fit.n." ...."8 0r . . .. . . .7100 V. . V ., . «‘0... ..c . . . 0 v . .. . . . . it... . .0. 0 ... . . V . . “.....mrfifiv... W~u{“«’ ”ha . . . .. . . . . .0 I. . . . . .. _. 0 0 c 0 . . ... 3.30.. .00': ..0. . I .310210‘ . chin“. .“M.l.vv ‘\.'q9§l . . . :- ...; .. .... . . \- 1.!fi!‘0.3..0..93.0~'|! iv '30» . . ,. . ..‘0003 0.1.0.0 0.0.0.9010... 3 00 09.30%? X; 31......iv .00)! ...vfzdfdobf . r . . . . . .093. . :0. orw‘f. 0 3"I'8 . ...: _ "nun. 2a... ...v..t..0 ‘0... .‘J0 3‘ ...; ... 010:0 a... .. anwurfinuflr 0-! a... ficu‘fi.‘ 0] 0.0; t. .00) 000.000.0004 .0 - 0.1.}.‘othi. .08 . l. 0 o . g . 0.. 0.”..00-“00m1. i _‘ . r .07 «1.3. A. nglfu.00.... _ ......,.0... . . . .0 00 o O. 0' 00.”. i070: Ra‘div ‘03‘0‘0: I .10.; .195 . {-17.15 000”" 0.0000... 0 Vs...“ .Ot ......000.“O¥140Mrn0m.0 (30”. 50'- 0 $00 0 r. Y‘ t M“ :59) Nb: .0. L.‘0.10 . V ‘1‘... 01 .3... .tlt..I)soN:0.§-vtos, .. 0 .0: ......0.‘I.?9.v.0.ldv’-' . Jzou-IX‘.0...‘0_!“"“0" t. o 00-. o!..‘.... 53.....I0‘ '1. 00. 10%.: . 5.999....02... fice.‘ ...‘Dt 0. 0t 3580.; w L ‘2‘! g. 0.03033 v..0V\0 .. .vvb..0.0’V .0. \ .30.!100‘5 s '0 on... . 0.. 9'0 9 1“ ‘QI! Q .0...‘0 ‘ .- . 00v...' Ii; ......i190} . .0 .10. . ‘. .... A 0.090.. ...I . 0.2 I. .15 0,} 3.7.52. 9‘19: 90"?- I. 0...... v 1.. 0\’1;I5 00.099n .2033. i... .‘ ...-49.2.0.0 .I\?.§l 0.0... '30.. ‘.-.10.|0 $103.2 ...! ...... . 2.1. 0.3.5.. $000.0..." . ‘0... 0.9.0.! . 011...... .o!\.. ..!|1$1!.0‘Q¢QQ V . ...-ii 9:. .... ‘0. 0.0.00 9‘04.Q._t 0.0.. ‘i‘ . . ..\\c ..l ..0. .30.... .000. 9‘0 040 éfiilfi III. 0 .9200 .03 L‘ . .p.‘(:‘r§f .020. z I... 10.99 ‘10 .. P‘i‘fi 90.14‘1‘ 0.0 . . . .00.... .0 001.3% I10. ‘3‘ 5 ‘3‘“..330uilcfi Di:\v‘ ‘00... I. 9"‘9‘ Sup: i:\ttfi‘.o¢‘! 30 ‘910‘ . t 00.0.: 0. 0.....I0.‘ 90“!" 0.. ...? VJ 1.3“”...3100t'muuozl. ‘0 u$.- ~.O.-..o§o“. .... I05: 0 . . 5.. . v v > . fit...l. . 9000.. 0.4000. ‘JuFJII... 0 0 07“ no.."\;'u\‘l 0.3.. . . . ...... .. 0101.1...0. -. ...-ll. _ 0"." ....»Lv. ‘5“ IT‘.0.0:’ 0.0 (00‘: 0.0..‘0uvl ‘0' ...‘..’no’09‘20.. 0 l 0. A ...I §.‘.l 5" ..‘.v . . r...\" b... ..0: ‘0... 38.7.0.1 0'0 . .1. . A... 90. Av; . .o ..70 f ... Q .0" .00 30.0.02... .0 $00“ ... . .. . ..9 OSII'.0.90.O. . .0 000 ‘0.10C.Q0.‘0.! 0... 0.04 It .'\§.uo .....I. .‘Q... 5... I. .5‘81300. ‘0' 9.10.. 2' 0.0301. . . 0.20.0020! .. \0.0.!0.0.0.3. . v.1 qxo“ . ‘01.” 007.0: 01'. ‘0'...A.‘0‘0¢ )- . I... 0 ~.\.‘\ 0.01 .‘nO00.~.N0 . . . . 0-..; .... ‘0000.0’0 .Iroo.) . . 03 0 O 0 O 0 0 000 9.200. .05... 302) Va... is ‘00.. 1. ...-...... .. 2 .3; . ...: .390“. ... . QAOlDCQO ‘0. 0‘ 0 00.0... I... ..0000§00' . ... v0 0 0..'0."’- ... 0.000.- 0......I' %‘ 0.. ...IT . .0...‘ . . .... .. .. . 1.. .. 0.0,... 00!. ...-0 ... $0.3...nv. . 0..0 03“ 6'31} 0 I ..‘3’ .00. .0 ‘ 7 3.05. v ‘P. A... .0 0-. .0. ctc‘.o.0.0u_ . .00",I. 00"....9 “‘6‘,'0 00.43.. . . {0.3. ... 0. O...‘\-..0. ...»... .I. ...: 0. 7:90... .00‘ .. $00.1..- . .0. 0. ... v... . . ...d. 0. .0 . .. . ...-...... .- .... .0 . o ’0. .0 In. . .... .... 00-. c... ....0 . l.... .A . . . ....v. . .1 0 o...?:\l.00.u . .. . . 100. .00..07_.. .. .V . ... ... . 0. . . . 0 .. . . 0 0.. 0. .- .. . . .. :3. 90“... . _ . . .....0... . ..0 ...-0 ~ . . V . . ...... .V .00. ..00V00..0v. I . . .... ‘00. ... 0... . ...0. ...-c I .00... . .. 0.9 . . .... . .0. ... a. 0. n. . n .0 .. 0. .00... 0.0 . V. . . ..0. . . s0. .. 0.00.1.6 0....Il.\...0.1 .00.... .0... . .0 0V. . . .. . .... . 0 o .. ... 0:00.01... 00.0 10. .0 .V ‘0 0.... ’004, . . 0000. ..L. .0. '§,§ ‘0... .01.: ... v. .0 ..‘0‘0v.!00 000.0- ,. .... ...? .v..¢0. . . .. ... o : .. ..00 0.}...0. 0 .....0- ..‘.....0.. .. . 0... .... .V. no.0». .‘ 0.........‘. ...0 l .. . . .... s..~0».0 .0.0.o.‘000000... .. .... 1.. ..0 ... v......0~o......v.. u...0.. ... s... .... . 0. .... . 0 0.0.1.0000 . v . .. c 0 .. . . ......L: ... ...0 . -.0.0. .. .0. I 000...... 0.0 . .. l . .v. . . Y 0 ...O. 0...... ...-.v ..- .0 .0..... .00. .1... .0... .0 u. 0 . ... .0 .0 .... 1 .03....5030. 6'90... .. . 0...... . ....-..f.0 .0.0.0-.l010-0.~O. 0.1 3...... g. Q. . . 00.0.00000l0, ......0 0. ... . ... 1 .0 .... I ... 4.... . uv0000...0. .- .0. .06... .00 .9330». . .0. .-..0....l0. .. .0 .n .00. 0 . 0 .0 0 .v00..0.. C... ..V 0:00 0.....Q.00.v 090000.. .I.... . . .0 ...-.00.... ... I ... D. .. '0. 0 ' 0 0 0 u ...-I 0 s..u..0.0 A. '0.0_0..\.4.00 3.00.0' . 0-550... :20. .9. .. ....0 ...0 00.. n a... 0‘ [0'0 00 00 00.0.4.0. ....0. 0.0 0.0.0.. . 0 00.0.... . .. 0 .0... .... .0? 0.... .00.: .0 .0 .... .0 s . . . 0 .0 ....>.000.0v.0... - 0-0.0..000 0.0.90.0 . . . 0 . ..l..0.lu...: .0. . 0. ...0 . ...: .0 ._ .07 0.000.050; 3... 1.00. 00v..~....0.0.300.0.. \. .Do ”a Y... ..... ... ..- 0 ...: .0 . 0 o. .. ...0 ... v...0... .....b.v 0‘00.00.an|0 ..V00O'....0 00.... . | ... ...... .... ..00 ...? .005 ..no .. . .0..O.V 0.. 0.0.... ‘0 00. . 0V..o.. ... .06. .00.... .. 0... O0 .. I 0 o . .. n ....0 u .0 no: s. .l . . ..w..\‘..t-’.-..0. 0 0-00.7.0. .0 I|.P0 .O00to. ,I. ... . . .v ¢.. n 0.... .ov...-. . .v0.0\.L . ..0 0.. ... .. ... . .... .. ...00...200..00.0V00 .00 . It. ... o ..-. o t. .. . . A.... 0.0 . . o .0. t0... 9-...00»...o..0. .Oa900 . ...-lvnl. Q0 .0 Il.€.B~VO . .. . o -9. .0 .... a I n .1: ...c . . 0 . o. .. .....0.0.. .5. .0 . 0 .....o. . 0... ...Jo. ...’.04...o ... I300... ..A a .O‘ .0 .. . ...¢.no .0 0 -. ... 0.. .0... 0.009200. .00 0 .lVO.00 0.. ..0I . .9. DI’O... . o ..- 9 00.0 0.x ..0'.v.000 00..0.7.d 0 Q0. .0.._0O.0...'0..0.00'\ .0. ... 0. . .V . 0 0' ...0'00.. 0. 9.0.vv |'.n - o O o o . 0.. .0 0 .. .... .0‘QY.J..V0.-0.IO . I . 0 .v - . I ..0 c '01. V . .0 . A .. ‘0‘ . I c 0 o u : n n 0 O a. : - 0V 0 I o n 0‘ 0 0- 0 J c I . . D o . .I o . O u 5 I 00. 0 0 . a 0 . . -00. A0. 0 0 non I.. '00.?) 0. . 0.00.. . O . 0 ..I I Ova a I I.’VQO O. .0’0‘0 .0. I r|\l|'\ l‘l 0 . .no.. 9 0 I .O\I'A‘I.O.0 I'll-“I . c 0.. ‘00 U9 “I‘II|' ' .0 0 on O \ I l 'l‘ 1‘ 1 THEQE LIBRARY Michigan State University 9) (\J I | 9 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled INTERNATIONAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS: FULBRIGHT HAYS GROUP PROJECTS ABROAD, 2003-2007 presented by KRISTIN JANKA MILLAR has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. degree in Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Policy IA / 2M 3 / Major Professor’s Signature 13%;? 20/0 Date MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. To AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 5/08 ICIProj/AcoatPrelelRC/DateDue.indd INTERNATIONAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS: THE FULBRIGHT HAYS GROUP PROJECTS ABROAD, 2003-2007 By Kristin Janka Miller A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Policy 2010 ABSTRACT INTERNATIONAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS: THE FULBRIGHT HAYS GROUP PROJECTS ABROAD, 2003-2007 BY Kristin Janka Millar This study examines the content and nature of internationally oriented professional development for US. K-16 teachers. More Specifically, it focuses on understanding the range and nature of opportunities to learn in federally funded short-term Fulbright-Hays Group Projects Abroad (GPA) proposals. The GPA program is one of four programs created under the Mutual Education and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 (Fulbright-Hays Act), aimed at increasing international understanding through international study and exchanges, and complements domestically-focused Title VI (NDEA/HEA) programs. Together, these programs provide the main infrastructure for federally funded U.S. international education. The GPA program is one of the few programs that support international- related professional development for K-16 teachers. It is funded at more than four million dollars per year. Despite its importance and the changing needs of teachers and their students, this program has not changed in close to 40 years. The proposals in this study are seen as expressions of their proposer’s conceptualization of internationalization and professional development, as operationalized to meet the requirements of the GPA program. That is, the proposer’s conceptualization is inferred from empirical data from the proposals. This study is an analysis of funded GPA proposals using quantitative and qualitative methods with a stratified probability sample of one third of the target population of 172 funded GPA proposals for five years (2003-2007). A content analysis was conducted which involved developing a coding scheme and the coding of proposals. Building on these results a principal component analysis was done to search for patterns and possible structures. Component scOres were computed and proposals were dichotomized according to their scores on two components dealing with language/immersion and curricular/academic demands. This led to discussion of several more homogeneous groups of proposals which were further explored in a more qualitative way and compared with what is known about effective professional development. The GPA proposals described in this study represent different purposes and visions about what is important to learn about a country or society and how such learning should happen. They are the product of a negotiation between the visions of Congress and policymakers, ED, GPA program administrators and reviewers, project directors/authors of GPAS and their institutions, and the needs and goals of educators for whom they are written. While many of the GPAS in the sample went above and beyond the requirements of the GPA program, they fall short when compared with research on professional development and teacher learning. This study shows clearly that there is a need for the GPA program to be reviewed and rethought to make GPAs more effective in terms of professional development and better rooted in the aims of internationalization. Copyright by KRISTIN A. JANKA MILLAR 2010 TO MY FAMILY AND TO JACK AND LYNN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation was a collaborative effort and was possible because of the support of many individuals. I would like to thank my dissertation committee whose questions and suggestions made this dissertation better: Ann Austin, Janet Alleman, John Metzler and Lynn Paine. A Special thank you is due to Lynn Paine who encouraged me to apply to graduate school and has been there through all the ups and down, in school and out. Most of all, I would like to thank Jack Schwille, my dissertation adviser and director. Jack’s time, patience, encouragement and conscientious feedback made this dissertation possible. I am grateful that he pushed me to learn things I wasn’t sure I wanted to learn and didn't let me give up. This dissertation was fun to do because of him. I wish to thank the many Group Projects Abroad (GPA) authors/project directors who shared their GPA proposals and experiences with me. This dissertation research would have been very difficult without their help. Thank you also to Michelle Guilfoil, in the United States Department of Education for her help accessing GPA proposals and for her patience with my many questions. Diane Ruonavaara deserves a special thank you for introducing me to GPAS and inviting me to focus my pre-dissertation research on her GPA. There are many who have provided help and support during my doctoral studies and dissertation. To Richard Houang, thank you for helping with the sample design and effect size for this dissertation and for answering my many questions. I would also like to thank my guidance committee for helping me to vi choose courses and experiences that would stretch me intellectually and bring together my research interests: Suzanne Wilson (chair), Lynn Paine, Avner Segall, Elizabeth Hellman, Scott Whiteford and Jack Schwille. Thanks are also due to Brian Delany and the Paine-Delany family (especially Will, my cheerleader), Helen and Jay Featherstone, Sandra Crespo, Teresa Tatto, Margo Glew, Julie Lindquist, Rocio Quispe-Agnoli, John Bratzel, Laurie Medina, Lindon Robison, Jonas Zoninsein, Merry Merryfield, and fellow doctoral students: Allah Carolan-Silva, Ramona Fruja, Mark Hamilton, Won-Pyo Hong, Kamila Rosolova, Sandra Schmidt, and Hailing Wu. l have been fortunate to work with great colleagues in International Studies and Programs and the Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies during my doctoral studies. Thanks are due to: John Metzler, Emily Holley, Daurice Lewis, Inge Stieglitz, Rolf Dietrich, Claire Brendar, Jeffrey White (my statistics buddy), Stephanie Motchenbacher, Peter Briggs, and Rob Glew. I owe a special thanks to Robert Blake and Jeffrey Reidinger who gave me the support I needed to finish this dissertation. And finally, I would like to thank my family whose patience and support made my doctoral studies and this dissertation possible. I am grateful for the sacrifices they made and for enduring my absence. In particular, I would like to thank my husband, Duane Millar and sons, Jimmy, Billy and Andy; my mom and dad, Millie and Ralph Janka; my family, Karl Janka, Kevin and Kendall Janka, Dave and Cathy Millar, Bill and Maxine Millar, Howard Sweeney, Debby Muskovitch and Dan Witaala; and my (exchange) family in Costa Rica where my vii interest in international studies began: Johnny, Sonia, José Pablo, Melisa, and Ana Gabriela Jimenez. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................ xi LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................ xiii INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 Origins of this Study .............................................................................................. 1 Dissertation Research ........................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK....10 1.1 Calls for Internationalization ...................................................................... 10 1.2 Research on Teacher Professional Development and Learning, Curriculum and Internationalization ........................................................... 13 1.3 Summary ................................................................................................... 35 CHAPTER 2: THE GPA: A PROGRAM TO SHAPE TEACHERS’OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN ....................................................... 37 2.1 The Legislative Foundation for US. International Education: Title VI and Fulbright-Hays ........................................................................ 37 2.2 Group Projects Abroad: Opportunities and Constraints ............................ 43 2.3 Summary ................................................................................................... 62 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ......................................................................... 63 3.1 Research Design ....................................................................................... 63 3.2 Target Population and Sampling of Proposals for Content Analysis ......... 65 3.3 Document Collection ................................................................................. 71 3.4 Coding Scheme and Content Analysis ...................................................... 72 3.5 Additional Sources of Data ........................................................................ 84 3.6 Data Coding and Analysis ......................................................................... 87 3.7 Limitations ................................................................................................. 91 3.8 Summary ................................................................................................... 92 CHAPTER 4: CHARACTERISTICS OF GPA PROPOSALS ............................. 94 4.1 Overview ................................................................................................... 94 4.2 Purpose and Rationale .............................................................................. 94 4.3 Disciplines and Themes ............................................................................ 97 4.4 Project Directors ........................................................................................ 99 4.5 Participants ............................................................................................. 102 4.6 Opportunities to Learn (OTL) .................................................................. 102 4.7 Summary ................................................................................................. 116 10:1- CHAPTER 5: LOOKING FOR PATTERNS AND RELATIONSHIPS IN GPA OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN ......................................................................... 118 5.1 Identifying Patterns and Relationships .................................................... 118 5.2 Patterns of High and Low Component Scores ........................................ 127 5.3 Summary ................................................................................................. 143 CHAPTER 6: GPA PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS: IS IT MORE THAN TOURISM? ........................................................................ 145 6.1 Proposals that Go Beyond Tourism ........................................................ 145 6.2 Language and Immersion: A Window into Culture .................................. 146 6.3 Interacting with the Host Culture: Going Behind Closed Doors ............... 159 6.4 Curricular-Academic Demands ............................................................... 173 6.5 Seeing the Taj Mahal .............................................................................. 182 6.6 Lack of Critical Reflection ........................................................................ 185 6.7 Summary ................................................................................................. 190 CHAPTER 7: IMPROVING THE INTERNATIONALIZATION OF TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ............................................ 192 7.1 What the Study Reveals about Constraints Built into the GPA Program .................................................................................................. 192 7.2 What the Study Reveals about GPAS as Embodiments of Internationalization .................................................................................. 193 7.3 Do GPAS Qualify as Professional Development for Teachers? .............. 197 7.4 Recommendations for What It Would Take to Give GPA Proposals More Academic Credibility ...................................................... 202 7.5 Recommendations for Making GPAS More Effective Professional Development ........................................................................................... 206 7.6 Future Research ..................................................................................... 209 7.7 Summary ................................................................................................. 209 APPENDICES ................................................................................................... 211 Appendix A: Glossary ....................................................................................... 212 Appendix B: Mutual Education and Cultural Education Act (Excerpt) ............... 215 Appendix C: Codebook ..................................................................................... 219 Appendix D: Coding Form ................................................................................. 231 Appendix E: SPSS Output ................................................................................ 233 Appendix F: Fulbright-Hays Group Projects Abroad Roundtable ...................... 235 Appendix G: Interview Protocol ......................................................................... 240 REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 241 LIST OF TABLES1 Table 2.2.1. Selection Criteria for 2010 Short-term GPAS. ................................. 49 Table 2.2.2. Top Five Host Countries for (Funded) GPAS, 1972-2009 (N=499) ............................................................................................. 54 Table 3.2.1. Overview of Funded GPA Proposals for Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects in 1972-2009 (N = 1,120). ...................... 67 Table 3.2.2. Overview of Population and Sample by World Region and Year (N=172, n=55) ........................... 70 Table 3.4.1. Definitions and Examples of Purpose in Coding Scheme. ......... 73-74 Table 3.4.2. Definitions and Examples of Conceptualization of Internationalization .............................................................................................. 75 Table 3.4.3. Definitions and Examples of Disciplinary Focus in Coding Scheme. ............................................................................................ 76-77 Table 3.4.4. Definitions and Examples of Thematic Focus in Coding Scheme .................................................................................................... j ...... 78-79 Table 4.3.1 .Overrview of Distribution of GPA Proposals by Disciplinary Focus and World Region (n = 55). ...................................................................... 99 Table 4.4.1. Characteristics of Project Directors in the Sample (n = 55) ........... 100 Table 4.4.2. Expertise of Project Directors (n = 55). ......................................... 101 Table 4.6.1. Average Hours OTLs by Pedagogical Approach (n = 55). ............ 108 Table 4.6.2. Average Hours of OTLs by Locale (n = 55) ................................... 110 Table 4.6.3. Average Hours of OTLs by Subject (n = 55). ................................ 111 Table 5.1.1. Correlation Matrix (13 Variables). ................................................ 121 Table 5.1.2. Proportion of Variance in Variables Explained by Components (13 Variables). ............................................................................. 125 1 Images in this thesis/dissertation are presented in color. xi Table 5.1.3. Component Loadings in Rotated Component Matrix (13 variables). ................................................................................................... 126 Table 5.2.1. Proposals with Highest Language/Immersion Component Scores (Component 1) (n = 11). ................................................................ 132-133 Table 5.2.2. Proposals with Highest Academic-Curricular Component Scores (Component 2) (n = 11). ............................................. 137-138 Table 5.2.3. Proposals with Lowest Component Scores on Language/Immersion and Academic-Curricular Demands (Components 1 and 2) (n = 14). ................................................................. 141-142 Table 6.2.1. Characteristics of Proposals with Highest Hours of Language Study (n = 11). ................................................................................. 147 Table 6.2.2. Structure of OTLs During Programming Abroad for Proposals with Highest Hours of Language Study (n = 11) ........................ 152-153 Table 6.2.3. Characterstics of Assessment for Proposals with High Hours Devoted to Language Study (n = 11). ............................................................... 155 Table 6.3.1. Overview of Home stay, Meals and Community Engagement or Field Placement OTLs (n = 55). .................................................................... 161 Table 6.3.2. Characteristics of Proposals with Highest Hours of Home Stay (n = 11) .................................................................................... 162-163 Table 6.4.1. Characteristics of Proposals with Highest Hours of Curriculum Development (n = 11). ............................................................. 174-175 Table 6.5.1. Characteristics of Proposals with Low Language/Immersion and Low Academic-Curricular Component Scores (n = 14). ...................... 183-184 xii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.4.1. Modified IEA Curriculum Model. .................................................... 24 Figure 2.2.1. Funded Group Projects Abroad by World Region and Year (1 972-2007). ....................................................................................................... 53 Figure 3.1.1. Phases of the Study’s Research Design. ....................................... 64 Figure 4.3.1. Distribution of GPA Proposals by Disciplinary Focus (n = 55). ...... 98 Figure 4.6.1. Pre-departure Opportunities to Learn in Sample (n = 55). ........... 104 Figure 4.6.2. Percent of Proposals with OTLs by Pedagogical Approach (n=55). .............................................................................................. 107 Figure 4.6.3. Percent of Proposals with OTLS by Locale (n = 55). .................... 109 Figure 4.6.4. Overview of Subject Focus of Proposals (n = 55). ....................... 111 Figure 4.6.5. Overview of Evaluation Types Included in Sample (n = 55) ......... 114 Figure 4.6.6. Overview of Evaluation Types Included in Sample (n = 55) ......... 115 Figure 5.1.1. Graph of Component Loadings in Scree Plot (11 variables). ....... 123 Figure 6.3.1. Timing of Home Stays in Proposals with the Highest Amount of Time Devoted to Home Stays During Programming Abroad (n = 11). .......... 164 xiii CFR DDRA ED EDGAR FCC FR F-H FRA GPA HEA IEPS HUS LCTLs NDEA NRC NRCs OPE OTL RFA SA KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS Code of Federal Regulations Doctoral Dissertation Research Abroad US. Department of Education Education Department General Administrative Regulations Foreign Curriculum Consultants program Federal Register The Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act Faculty Research Abroad program Group Projects Abroad program Higher Education Act of 1965 (Public Law No. 89-329), formerly the NDEA lntemational Education Programs Service, US. Department of Education lntemational Resource InfomIation System Less Commonly Taught Languages National Defense and Education Act of 1958 National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences National resource centers funded by Title VI Office of Postsecondary Education, US. Department of Education Opportunity to learn Request for applications (proposals) Seminars Ahmad-Bilateral Projects xiv Title VI Title VI of the Higher Education Act. U.S.C. United States Code XV INTRODUCTION The FuIbright-Hays Group Projects Abroad (GPA) program is one of four programs created under the Mutual Education and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 (known as the Fulbright-Hays Act) to “support the internationalization of the nation's educational infrastructure by strengthening area and foreign language expertise among current and prospective U.S. educators” (ED 2009). Together, with Title VI programs of the Higher Education Act (originally the National Defense and Education Act), and Fulbright Programs (administered by the US. Department of State), these programs provide the main U.S. international education infrastructure. For close to 50 years, the GPA program has provided funds to support group training, research, and curriculum development for US. educators, administrators and students and is one of the few federally funded programs and rare sources of internationally-related professional development for K-16 teachers. Origins of this Study I first became interested in the GPA program in 2003 when l was asked to give a presentation at a GPA orientation for a group of K-12 teachers about to travel to Oaxaca, Mexico. Some years later in 2005, I was asked to participate this time in a GPA to Belize designed by the same director, as a curriculum consultant and participant. While planning the Belize GPA, the project director invited me to study the GPA as a participant-observer. I designed a pre- dissertation study around four questions: 1) what opportunities to Ieam (OTLS) does the GPA afford teachers both while they are overseas and when they return to their classrooms? 2) What are the effects of such programs? 3) Which opportunities to Ieam promote teacher Ieaming and what do these look like? 4) What do teachers Ieam about the world from such a program? The pre-dissertation research was an interpretive study that included nine K-12 teachers and the project director. I conducted in-depth interviews with the project director as the GPA was being planned and with teachers before programming in Belize began. Once in Belize, weekly interviews and observations were conducted with each participant and OTLS (formal, informal and incidental) were documented during the four and a half week program. Participants were interviewed again six months and one year later after returning to the US. and OTLS (pre-departure, abroad and post-trip) were mapped out and analyzed. Among the findings, teachers described having Ieamed new content about Belize (ethnic diversity in particular), personal growth (self-confidence, independence, personal connections), and one teacher said his worldview changed (from being Eurocentric). Teachers mentioned two OTLS that had the most impact on their Ieaming: a day-trip to a cave and a home stay with Mayan families in a small village. These OTLs were also the most physically and mentally challenging activities of the itinerary. When asked to describe what it meant to intemationalize their teaching using the Belize GPA as an example, “international” was described in three very different ways: 1) as a world view and personal philosophy or way of being; 2) an addition or insertion into the existing curriculum (e.g., unit on Belize instead of Guatemala); and 3) a means of disseminating information through technology (e.g., posting lessons to a website) so those outside of the US. would have access to the curriculum (with or without an international focus). This pre-dissertation study helped me understand and articulate a number of important issues for the GPA program. For example, the Belize GPA highlighted the importance of developing a common understanding (among the group) about the purpose and goals of the program. In the case of the Belize GPA, there were formal goals and unarticulated goals for the GPA that were not clear to everyone, and some participants had their own goals that were in opposition to those of the group that impacted the program abroad and aftenrvards. It was also assumed that there was a common understanding about what it meant to “intemationalize” one’s teaching and curriculum; however, this was not the case. An underlying assumption of this GPA program was that participants have the capacity to transfer or translate (by themselves) their experiences abroad into curriculum they would teach in their classrooms, as evidenced by the lack of attention to (and funding for) follow-up support. While this pre-dissertation research has made some aspects of GPAS clearer, it also raised questions to explore further. In particular, I was interested in examining how the OTLS in the Belize GPA might compare with other GPAS. My conversations with colleagues and authors of GPAS led me to believe that there could be variation across GPAS (with the same RFA). This pre-dissertation research also helped me to see how, in the case of the Belize GPA, the GPA requirements (RFA) shaped the design and the types of OTLs that were available to participants (e.g., pre-departure preparation, unplanned time abroad, interacting with people from the host culture), and this was something I wanted to examine in more depth. Dissertation Research Taking these evolving issues into account, this dissertation focuses on understanding the content and nature of professional development (i.e., GPAS) for K-16 teachers which is intended to provide international opportunities to Ieam. That is, professional development for teachers that is about and takes place within another country, culture or society. More specifically, this study focuses on understanding the range and nature of opportunities to learn in federally funded short-ten'n GPA proposals. GPAS have authors (usually the project director) with different purposes and visions about what is important to Ieam about a country or society, what it means to “intemationalize” (one of the goals of Fulbright-Hays) and how such learning should happen. Thus, GPA proposals are taken as expressions of how the proposers conceptualize internationalization and professional development, as operationalized to meet the requirements and constraints of the GPA program (discussed in chapter 2). Research Questions The overarching research question for this dissertation study is: How do the authors of GPAS plan and explain teachers’ professional development that focuses on Ieaming about the world and that is situated in an international context? More specifically: 1. What opportunities to Ieam (OTLS) are included in GPA proposals? 2. What is the nature of the professional development for which these OTLS are developed? As far as one can infer from the funded proposals and these OTLS, what are the assumptions and conceptions concerning internationalization that are embedded in these proposals? 3. Given the range of OTLS included in GPA proposals that are internationally oriented, are these compatible with what is called for in the professional development literature? Mapping Opportunities to Learn The proposals described in this study articulate different purposes and visions about what is important to Ieam about a country or society and how such Ieaming should happen. Since GPAS describe planned OTLS, the first question calls for understanding what types of opportunities to Ieam are included in GPA proposals and what is the range of these OTLS across the sample. My approach to this process is based on a sample of GPA proposals and conducting a content analysis of this sample. A coding scheme was developed with categories motivated by the research questions and focusing on four main areas: overall characteristics of the GPA, characteristics of the project director and characteristics of the participants, and opportunities to Ieam before, during and after travel abroad. Examples of important variables created by the coding scheme include: purpose of the GPA (e.g., curriculum development, institutional linkages, and language skills), pedagogical approach (e.g., lecture, site visit, and reflection), opportunities for interacting with the host culture, and grouping arrangements for OTLS (e.g., whole group, small group, and independent). Issues of What Counts as lntemationalization in GPAS The second question concerns how authors conceptualize professional development and internationalization in GPA proposals. GPAS are understood as a type of teacher professional development and the authors of these GPAS make decisions about what is important to Ieam and how to organize Ieaming. These decisions and the ways in which they are explained in the proposal are seen as evidence of authors’ conceptualization of professional development and internationalization. No a priori definition of internationalization is imposed. Instead the GPA proposals are analyzed to see what they imply as far as internationalization is inferred. The program itself has built-in constraints on what internationalization can mean and these are discussed in chapter 2. Within these constraints, the content analysis reveals the contours of internationalization in terms of how OTLS vary, what is preferenced and what is left out. GPAS as Teacher Professional Development? The third question involves comparing funded GPA proposals with what is known about research on effective professional development and teacher Ieaming. While the professional development literature indicates that content matters, the literature on intemationally-related professional development tends to ignore this. Five characteristics of effective professional development were identified from the research literature: 1) teachers as active Ieamers and participants in constructing their own professional development (i.e., the design of the GPA), as well as the degree to which OTLS offer opportunities for active engagement (e.g., home stays as opposed to lectures); 2) a focus on student Ieaming and connections to teachers’ own classrooms; 3) a focus on content and deepening subject matter knowledge; 4) attention to the contexts of Ieaming and teaching; and 5) the importance of program duration and sustained follow-up. GPA proposals are then compared and discussed in light of these five characteristics. Overview of the Target Population and Data Analysis In this study, two types of short-term GPAS are examined: Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects because of their explicit focus on K-16 teachers. These GPAS are referred to as short-term GPAS because they are less than 8 weeks in duration, as opposed to other GPAS which can be longer. The study's target population included 172 funded short-term GPA proposals over a five year period (2003-2007) for all world regions (i.e., all the funded proposals for that period of time). From this, a stratified probability sample was drawn which included one third of the target population for 5 years or 55 funded proposals. Secondary data included the GPA request for applications, government documents, and interviews with GPA administrators and project directors. The study's design included three phases of content analysis, the first of which focused on sampling and data collection. The second phase involved developing a coding scheme (discussed in chapter 4) and actually coding proposals. Building on these results, the third phase included a principal component analysis to identify patterns and structures in the proposals. From this, component scores were computed and proposals were dichotomized according to their scores on two components: language/immersion (Component 1) and curricular/academic demands (Component 2). This led to discussion of several more homogeneous groups of proposals (described in chapter 5) which are further explored in a more qualitative way and compared with what is known about effective professional development (chapters 6 and 7). Audiences for this Research Despite the GPA program's long history and position as one of the rare sources of intemationally-related professional development, this program is not well understood or studied. Furthermore, there has been little research on international teacher study abroad in general, and the research that does exist tends to focus on describing the impact of the international experience with less attention to the content of such experiences. This dissertation is an effort to fill this gap. Such a study speaks to a number of audiences and issues, in particular, issues of funding and the ways in which research on effective professional development and Ieaming could be used to reshape the GPA program. This study also raises questions about the program’s (long-term) emphasis on 8 languages and countries of US. national security interest and ways the GPA priorities might be changed to better serve the needs of teachers and their students, given the realities of an increasingly interconnected world. For GPA program administrators and reviewers, this study speaks to issues about how proposals are evaluated and the academic credibility of GPAS and relevance to teacher professional development. Of particular importance is the need for proposers to clearly articulate the GPA’s purpose and rationale for OTLS in their proposals. For GPA authors, this study Speaks to issues concerning the design of GPAS and innovative ways of organizing OTLs as well as trade-offs involved in these choices. It also raises questions about the goals and purposes of GPAS, the role of teachers and relevance to the classroom. For educators and potential GPA participants, this study is intended to help future GPA participants be better informed about lntemational opportunities and resources that are intended for K- 16 educators. CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK This chapter provides a review of the literature for the study and conceptual framework. First, it examines calls for internationalization which are found in the literature, noting that they have tended to focus on the needs of students, as opposed to teachers. Later, the chapter describes the features that . are essential for effective teachers’ professional development and Ieaming. 1.1 Calls for Internationalization We are living in an increasingly interconnected and interdependent world. Unprecedented shifts of people in the US. and across the wortd, technologies that are creating new cultural interfaces, and an increasingly global economy, all have important implications for schools. The world into which students will graduate will require different kinds of skills, knowledge and ways of thinking than were needed a generation ago. Suarez-Orozco and Quin-Hillard (2004) suggest that the greatest challenges for education in the future will be understanding the domains of ‘difference’ and ‘complexity’ and “to shape the cognitive skills, interpersonal sensibilities and cultural sophistication of children and youth whose lives will be both engaged in local contexts and responsive to larger transnational processes” (p. 5). The task of preparing students to manage these new challenges falls to teachers and schools. However, there is widespread concern that US. students may not be adequately prepared for these challenges. A recent report by the National Research Council (2007) for example, states that 10 A pervasive lack of knowledge about foreign cultures and foreign languages in this country threatens the security of the United States as well as its ability to compete in the global marketplace and produce an informed citizenry. The US. educational system places little value on speaking languages other than English and on understanding cultures other than one’s own students in the United States tend to understand less about the beliefs, cultures, and history of other nations than their foreign counterparts (p. 15). This is not new. Scholars and practitioners have argued for the need to prepare more world-minded citizenry since the 1950’s if not earlier. Dewey (nd) for example, expressed these concerns in a speech he gave in the 1940’s about progressive education where he said: "[tjhe world is moving at a tremendous rate. Going no one knows where. We must prepare our children, not for the world of the past. Not for our wortd. But for their world. The world of the future.” This was within the context of a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape as former colonies gained independence and US. interests abroad grew. In 1900 for example, there were only 40 countries in the world and within 75 years there were 150 members of the United Nations (Wiley, 2001 ). The Cold War and launch of the Soviet Sputnik satellite in 1957 raised further concern about the ability of the US. to compete with other countries. It also drew attention to the importance of knowing more about other countries and societies outside of the US. In response, the US. government created a number of programs aimed at strengthening area studies and language expertise within the US. A number of programs were created under the National Defense and Education Act (NDEA) and Fulbright-Hays Act in the late 1950s and early 196OS (discussed in more 11 detail in chapter 2). While these programs filled a needed gap in international education, they did not go far enough and it became clear that much more was needed. In 1979 for example, a report by the President’s Commission on Foreign Language and lntemational Studies warned that there was “a serious deterioration in this country’s language and research capacity, at a time when an increasingly hazardous international military, political and economic environment is making unprecedented demands on America’s resources, intellectual capacity and public sensitivity” (President’s Commission on Foreign Language and lntemational Studies, 1979 in Heyl & McCarthy, 2003, p.1). While this concern for national security and economic competitiveness may have dominated (and continues to dominate) the discourse on international education, there were also calls for the importance of understanding more about other cultures and societies in and of themselves for the purpose of mutual understanding and peace. For example, a number of scholars have pressed for the inclusion of more global and international content in US. education, (AEC 2002, 1998; Anderson L. 1998; Becker 1979; Becker & East 1972; Hanvey, 1974; Merryfield, 1997; Noddings, 2005; Reischauer, 1974; Suarez-Orozco & Qin—Hillard 2004; Torney & Morris 1972; Torney, Oppenheim, & Famen 1975; Tye & Tye 1992; Wilson, 1993) and for the preparation of teachers (Anderson C. M. & Wilmon 1975; Boston 1997; Collins, Czarra, & Smith, 1998; Collins & Zakariya,1982; Germain 1998; Hamblin 1988; Menyfield 2001, 1997; Merryfield & Wilson 2005; Schneider 2005; Wilson 1993). 12 The need for studies like this dissertation is therefore clear. The literature has tended to focus on students and recommendations for skills and competencies that are needed to be 21st Century Ieamers. Less attention however, has been paid to teachers and their professional development needs. Martin-Kniep (1997) reminds us that "[i]f teachers are to teach global skills and concepts, they themselves have to Ieam about and embody a global perspective.” This kind of Ieaming involves opportunities for Ieaming in both the cognitive and affective domains, and substantive and perceptual knowledge (Case, 1983; Wilson, 1993; Merryfield & Wilson, 2005). 1 .2 Research on Teacher Professional Development and Learning, Curriculum and Internationalization This study draws on research in four main areas including teacher professional development and Ieaming, curriculum studies, global/lntemational education, and teacher study abroad. Much has been written about how one leams and the kinds of experiences that are thought to encourage teacher Ieaming and make for an educative experience. There is also a growing consensus about the characteristics that make for effective professional development and interest in understanding the relationship between Ieaming and the context in which Ieaming takes place. This research is helpful for understanding factors that shape how curricula are conceptualized and designed. Research suggests for example that the beliefs, epistemology and disciplinary background of curriculum developers influences curricula in important ways, and for teachers’ professional development in particular. The literature also points to 13 diverse ways of conceptualizing global and international education and what kinds of knowledge and experiences might best prepare teachers to teach from a global/intemational perspective. An Educative Experience Not just any experience is educative in and of itself and this is especially true when planning international experiences for teachers. In Experience and Education, Dewey (1938) distinguishes between an educative experience and a mis—educative experience. For an experience to be educative it must be of “quality" (Dewey, 1938), which means that it should be purposeful and involve 1 interaction with the physical and social world. For an experience to be educative it should connect with and have continuity between experiences and knowledge (prior, current and future). Without this experiences “may be so disconnected from one another that, while each is agreeable or even exciting in itself, they are not linked cumulatively” (p. 26) and the likelihood is less that long-term growth will occur. For an experience to be educative, critical reflection is an essential and overlooked component. According to Beard and Wilson (2002), "[ejxperience may underpin all learning but it does not always result in Ieaming. We have to engage with the experience and reflect on what happened, how it happened, and why" (cited in Silberman, 2007, p. 3). Freire (1970/2002) and Mezirow (2000) see dialog as an important means of facilitating critical reflection. Menyfield (2003) suggests that reflection on one’s lived experiences is a “prerequisite” for cultural Ieaming and the development of perspective consciousness (p. 151 ). A number of scholars (Beard & Wilson, 2002; Dewey, 1938; Kolb, 1983; 14 Mezirow, 2000) argue that not all experiences are necessarily “educative” or lead to the kind of Ieaming and change that is desirable. Dewey (p. 27) reminds us that “[ajny experience is mis—educative that has the effect of arresting or distorting the growth of further experience. An experience may be such as to engender callousness; it may produce lack of sensitivity and of responsiveness. Then the possibilities of having richer experiences in the future are restricted.” Schwille and Buchman (1983) suggest that education based solely on experience may be limiting and could lead to negative Ieaming. Immediate experience is subjective and difficult to refute, and when left unexamined, can serve to reinforce biases and “close avenues to conceptual and social change.” Secondhand knowledge (text) is agreed to be preferable to knowledge based on firsthand experience, in part, because it is less subjective, offers the potential for more possibilities for Ieaming and change, and can be more equitably distributed than firsthand experience. Nevertheless, for Ieaming about another culture, researchers in intercultural education argue that first-hand experience or Ieaming in situ, in authentic contexts, is the most effective and efficient way to develop an in-depth understanding of another culture (Bennett, 1993; Cushner, 2004; Cushner & Brislin, 1996; Hess, 1994; Paige, 1993). Cushner (2004) considers an “influential and meaningful travel experience” (p. 40-41) to be one that involves interacting with people from other cultures and emphasizes subjective aspects of culture, including less tangible aspects of culture such as attitudes, values, beliefs and expectations. This is in contrast to more objective aspects of culture that are 15 concrete and easiest to see such as food and clothingand things most people agree upon such as food and clothing one might experience on travel tours where one is not integrated into the host culture (Cushner 2004, p. 119). The distinction between an educative and mis-educative experience is important for designing professional development in general, and teachers’ professional development in an international context in particular, such as the GPA program. The fact that an experience takes place in an lntemational context does not necessarily mean it will be educative and may instead promote a superficial understanding of others and reinforce or promote negative stereotypes. Ideally, GPA projects would include opportunities to Ieam (OTLS) that are purposeful and connected both within the shorter timeframe of the trip and across the longer time frame of teachers’ on-going professional Ieaming. If participants know they will be able to apply knowledge and experiences from the GPA in their future teaching they may have a more rewarding experience. These features and others have shaped the analytical framework for this study and have informed categories in the coding scheme (see Appendix C). I now turn to a discussion of research on teachers’ professional development and the characteristics that are thought to lead to effective professional development. Effective Professional Development Research on professional development and teacher Ieaming has contributed to a general consensus on both the weaknesses of traditional models of professional development and the characteristics that are thought to make for effective professional development. Much of this research has come from 16 research on professional development programs in science and mathematics with less work in other subject areas. Much of the literature distinguishes between “traditional” and “reform” kinds of professional development. Traditional professional development may include one-day workshops, short-term institutes and conference that often take place outside of the classroom and are led by outside experts. These more traditional kinds of professional development opportunities can serve diverse purposes ranging from mandated reforms, Ieaming specific strategies or subject matter, and personal growth. This type of professional development has been widely criticized and is seen as problematic because it tends to be one-shot, is disconnected from the classroom, lacks continuity with other professional development opportunities, involves little teacher choice, is often shallow, and lacks follow-up support (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Putnam & Borko, 2000; Borko, 2004; Elmore, 2002; Hawley & Valley, 1999; Schwille & Dembele, 2007; Wilson & Beme 1999). Teachers often end up piecing together disconnected professional development opportunities throughout their careers (Ball & Cohen, 1999, Wilson & Beme 1999). In contrast, reform types of professional development include study groups, coaching or mentoring and lesson study. This kind of professional development tends to be longer term, connects with the classroom, takes place during the school day, is more likely to be collaborative and includes opportunities for reflection and critique, and follow-up support (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birrnan & Yoon, 2001). There a growing consensus about the characteristics that make for effective professional development and numerous lists of best practices. The 17 research included in this section was chosen because they are frequently cited in the literature (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Putnam & Borko, 2000; Borko, 2004; Elmore, 2002; Garet et al., 2001; Hawley & Valley, 1999; Schwille & Dembele, 2007; Wilson & Beme 1999). There are number of places where this research overlaps and this is described below. Sparks and Loucks-Horsley (1990) outline five types of models of professional development, each of which has different purposes and assumptions and suggest seven characteristics that make for effective professional development. Hawley and Valli (1999) describe eight features that cut across much of the research. Garet et al. (2001) examined the effects of professional development characteristics on teacher Ieaming in traditional and reform type professional development programs using a national probability sample of mathematics and science teachers. They suggest six features (three core features and three structural features). Elmore (2002) describes nine characteristics hecalls the “consensus view” of professional development. Hill (2004) points out that much of the research on professional development has tended to focus on exemplary programs, which She sees as problematic because it has not considered the kinds of opportunities available to “typical” teachers. Hill’s review focused on professional development opportunities that were not exemplary programs in mathematics-Specific opportunities, non-subject-Specific opportunities and from this she outlines eight “standards and practices.” The research above overlaps in five main areas: Teachers as active Ieamers and participants; focus on students; focus on content; context; and follow-up. 18 Teachers as active learners and active participants. Professional development that involves teachers in the process of designing their own professional development acknowledges teachers as constructors of knowledge (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993). The kind of professional development that involves teachers as active participants in their own Ieaming is thought to encourage motivation and commitment to Ieaming (Borko & Putnam, 1995; Elmore, 2002; Garet et al., 2001; Hawley & Vali, 1999; Hill, 2004; Little, 1993; Sparks and Loucks- Horsley, 1990). If teachers are active participants in their own Ieaming and have opportunities to pursue their interests and participate in designing their own professional development the likelihood is greater that it will be more useful and effective. Elmore (2002) recommends that professional development include the participation of both staff and school leaders. Focus on student learning. Professional development should focus on student Ieaming (Hill 2004) and draw from the analysis of student Ieaming of specific content (Elmore 2002) and the analysis of goals and student performance (Hawley & Valli 1999). Focus on content. Professional development that focuses on content and provides opportunities to deepen subject matter knowledge in rich and authentic ways over time is thought to be particularly effective for promoting teacher Ieaming (Borko, 2004; Lieberman & Wood, 2003). It 19 is argued that teachers should have a deep understanding of the subject matter they teach (G rossman, 1990; Noddings,1999; Sosniak, 1999; Shulman, 1986; Thornton, 2001). Teachers who have this kind of knowledge are more likely to be able to approach the subject matter from different directions and see connections within and across subject areas (Gardner 1988). Context. Research on professional development increasingly emphasizes the importance of considering the context in which Ieaming takes place. This research sees Ieaming as being situated in practice and the classroom as the best context for professional development (Ball, 1996; Elmore & Burkey, 1999; Elmore, 2002; Hawley & Valli, 1999; Hill, 2004; Wilson & Beme, 1999). Hill (2004) and others, recommend that professional development include examples from classroom practice as well. Borko and Putnam-(2000) also suggest that at times it may be helpful, even necessary for teachers to engage in Ieaming that takes place outside of the classroom because “[m]any of their patterns of thought and action have become automatic - resistant to reflection or change. Engaging in Ieaming experiences away from this setting may be necessary to help teachers “break set” — to experience things in new ways” (p. 6). Duration and follow-up. Long-tenn follow-up support is seen as an important feature of effective professional development. (Hawley & 20 Valli, 1999; Schwille & Dembele, 2007; Sparks and Loucks-Horsley, 1990). Ball (1996) argues “the most effective professional development model is thought to involve follow-up activities, usually in the form of long-term support, coaching in teachers’ classrooms, or ongoing interactions with colleagues” (cited in Wilson and Beme, 1999, p.175). Among their findings, Garet et al., (2001) suggest that professional development that is “sustained and intensive” and focuses on subject matter is more likely to influence teacher Ieaming and changes in practice (p. 921-922). These features resonate with Schwab’s (1973) commonplaces of education that focus on the content or subject matter, Ieamers, teacher, and Ieaming context (milieu). These commonplaces provide a framework for conceptualizing and planning curriculum that is relevant to the realities of the classroom and lived experiences. More specifically, a “defensible” curriculum would mean that the teacher would have a deep understanding of the subject matter being taught. It would involve knowledge of the Ieamers/students in a variety of ways including prior knowledge and experiences, developmental considerations, interests and attitudes. Such a curriculum would consider the teacher, in terms of flexibility, willingness to Ieam new things, as well as one’s biases. Finally, curriculum would consider the context or environment in which Ieaming occurs, how the social environment within the classroom and larger society impact curriculum and Ieaming. These four commonplaces are relational and need to be balanced in curriculum and practice, “[n]one of these can be omitted without omitting a vital 21 factor in educational thought and practice” (p. 508-509). For this study, these characteristics of effective professional development and Schwab’s “common places” provide a guide for analyzing GPA author's decisions about what is important and how to organize professional development for Ieaming about other cultures/countries. The characteristics described above can be seen in Appendix C of the coding scheme, opportunities to Ieam abroad, pre-departure and post—trip. The Influence of Curriculum Authors Research has also focused on the ways in which curriculum authors may influence and shape the curriculum (e.g., beliefs, epistemology and disciplinary perspective). For example, Stark and Lattuca’s (1997) research on curriculum development in higher education focuses on the decision-making process involved in planning curriculum at three levels: course, program and college- level. They view curriculum planning as an ‘academic plan’ and outline a framework that includes three types of influences. These influences may be external, organizational and internal (and intentional or unintentional) and interact and shape the educational environment. An educational environment consists of eight “elements” that work together: 1) purpose, 2) content, 3) sequence (curricular arrangement), 4) Ieamers, 5) instructional processes, 6) instructional resources, 7) evaluation, and 8) adjustment (improvements). In their research, Stark and Lattuca found that “[djisciplines and associated faculty beliefs about education are ovenNhelmingly the strongest influences as instructors plan 22 courses and programs, affecting the purpose of education, the content selected, and how the content is sequenced” (p. 214). For example, they suggest several factors that could influence curriculum: scholarly training; pedagogical training/teaching experience; and religious/political beliefs (p. 152). Stark and Latucca’s framework and attention to the ways in which the beliefs and intentions of curriculum authors may influence curriculum provide a framework for understanding how GPA project directors’ beliefs, intentions and background may similarly shape GPA proposals. The role curriculum authors play in designing curriculum is also discussed by Schmidt et. al (1996) in Characterizing Pedagogical Flow. The lntemational Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) studies’ curricular model illustrates how curriculum authors’ intensions and decisions impact curriculum. This framework was used in the Third lntemational Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) which was based on a document analysis of curriculum (mathematics and science) around the wortd. This model describes three types of curriculum: the intended curriculum, implemented curriculum, and the attained curriculum (Schmidt et al., 1996, p. 30). The intended curriculum concerns decision-making — curricular intentions, aims and goals before instruction begins (see Figure 1.1). The implemented curriculum refers to the enacted curriculum (what happened) and includes instructional strategies, practices and activities resulting from attempts to implement the intended curriculum. The attained curriculum concerns what was Ieamed as a result of the implemented curriculum (e.g., knowledge, ideas, constructs). To this framework Schmidt et al. (1996) add a 23 fourth aspect, the potentially implemented curriculum which includes instructional resources and textbooks that may be utilized in the curricular plan. The potentially implemented curriculum is dependent on the intentions and goals of the curriculum author and, in the case of the GPA program could include the potential opportunities to Ieam that could be included in the GPA plan (not necessarily ones that were planned). INTENDED Intentions, Aims & Goals. POTENTIALLY IMPLEMENTED Textbooks & Other Resource Materials - .-H-H---J ‘----------H- .H--Hd IMPLEMENTED Strategies, Practices & Activities ATTAINED Knowledge, Ideas, Constructs, Schemas SOURCE: Characterizing the Pedagogical Flow, Schmidt et al. (1996), p. 30. Figure 1.4.1. Modified IEA curriculum model. GPAs are funded to have a disciplinary focus on language, social sciences and arts/humanities and this is reflected in the GPA program’s RFA. 24 Schmidt et al., (1996) and others (Putnam & Borko, 2000; Schulman, 1986; Stodolsky, 1988, Stodolsky & Grossman, 1995) argue for the importance of understanding the fundamental role that ‘subject matter-content’ plays in instructional practice within the context of a particular curriculum and related professional development. Wilson & Beme (1999) and Stodolsky (1988) suggest that different disciplines may require different ways of structuring Ieaming — and professional development. With respect to the GPA program, which has a clear focus on international education in the social sciences and humanities, this suggests that it may be necessary to structure teacher professional development differently for various disciplines and subject areas when professional development is located in international contexts. These ways of conceptualizing the influence of curriculum authors on curriculum, the intended curriculum, and the importance of considering why, is particularly relevant for this study of the GPA program as professional development in the social sciences and humanities. This study focuses on examining the intended curriculum of GPAS. That is, it concerns a curricular plan, an articulated vision for the 4-6 week program abroad. Global and lntemational Education There are diverse ways of conceptualizing global and international education and these different conceptualizations have implications for curriculum and teaching (e.g., purpose, content, and pedagogy). While recent calls for internationalization and more globally focused education have tended to 25 emphasize economic competition (see for example, NAFSA, 2006; Wallis & Steptoe, 2007) there are diverse ways of dividing the fields and conceptualizing terms. Becker (1979), for example, describes the field of international education or world studies in terms of three main camps: 1) world affairs or foreign policy studies with a focus on citizenship education and the promotion of US foreign policy interests, 2) intercultural understanding with a focus on language study and area studies/world cultures, and 3) world-centered education (he calls global education) which focuses on a “world-view” that emphasizes “education for responsible participation in an interdependent global society.” Anderson (1991) suggests five ways of thinking about the fields of global and lntemational education: 1) disciplinary focus such as worid history, world economics, 2) cultural diversity through the study of the humanities, 3) foreign languages and less commonly taught languages in particular, 4) area studies and regional emphases, and 5) world problems and issues. While the terms global and international are sometimes used interchangeably, some argue that there are important differences between these terms. The National Council for the Social Studies (nd) for example, makes the following distinction between global and lntemational education in the US: Global education focuses on the interrelated nature of conditions, issues, trends, processes, and events while lntemational education emphasizes Specific world regions, problems, and cultures. lntemational education encompasses studies of specific areas or regions of the world as well as the in—depth examination of a single culture or some aspect of that culture, such as its history, language, literature, religion, political organization, economic system, or current issues (para. 2). 26 Marshall (2007) points out that while “international recognizes the existence of nation-states and, more specifically, the boundaries between them (as well as the commonalities), there is an implication that the term ‘global’ supersedes and sometimes deliberately ignores these barriers” (p. 44). These differences are at the center of the debate about the continuing relevance of area studies (international education) in the US (Tessler, Nachtwey & Banda, 2001; Desmond & Dominguez (1996). It is argued that we are seeing unprecedented shifts of people, technology and economics in the world, making borders more porous and irrelevant and changing traditional notions of identity and place, making area studies obsolete. Hall and Tarrow (2001) argue that nevertheless, area studies provide an important, even essential means of Ieaming deeply and gaining substantive knowledge about a region or society. Hellman (2006) suggests that as a field, global education is under-theorized and as a result, global education IS sometimes “conceptually murky and contradictory’ (p. 192). Some see this murkiness as positive because it allows for diverse traditions and conceptualizations. Still, others see global education as more of an approach that can be integrated into any subject area than a field (Gualdoni 1980). In addition to these distinctions, global and lntemational education has different meanings and takes diverse forms in other countries around the world. For example, global education in the US. and UK. have different histories and philosophical underpinnings. In the US, global education grew out of the peace movements in the 1960’s and tends to be associated with social studies as a subject area. 27 Global education in the UK. has its roots in the development education movement that began in the 1940’s, and is (currently) seen as a more heterogeneous field with numerous sub-fields (Marshall 2007, p. 39). In an effort to illustrate this diversity of ways of conceptualizing global education, Menyfield (1998) compiled a list of diverse ways that scholars in the field have conceptualized global education (scholars such as Alger 1974; Alger & Hart 1986; Anderson, 1979; Anderson & Anderson 1979; Becker 1970, 1979; Case 1991, 1993; Coomb 1989; Darling 1994, 1995; Hanvey 1975; Johnson & Johnson 1987; Knlep 1986; Lamy 1987; Leetsma 1979; Merryfield 1997; Muessig & Gilllom 1981; Pike & Selby 1988, 1995; Werner 1990; Wilson 1982, 1983, 1993, 1994): 1) Understanding of humans and the world/planet as dynamic, organic and interdependent systems; 2) Understanding of global issues; 3) Understanding of diverse cultures and multiple perspectives; 4) Understanding of skills in and responsibility for making choices and decisions and taking action locally and globally; 5) Interconnectedness of humans through time; 6) Cross-cultural understanding, interactions and communication; and 7) Perceptual growth for prejudice reduction and moral education within critical contexts. The work of a number of scholars focuses on the ethical dimensions of global education (Noddings, 2005; Hellman, 2006). Noddings (1984, 2002,2005) argues the importance of incorporating an ethic of "caring for" (people and the planet) into one’s teaching. Such a focus needs to involve “recogniz[ing] the power of the local in building a global perspective” (Noddings 2005, p. 122), as 28 well as confronting and discussing difficult moral, social justice issues. In “(Dis)locating imaginative and ethical aims of global education,” Hellman (2006) argues that global education has distinctive ethical and political traditions and outlines seven ethical rationales for global education: 1) Duty ethics, 2) Natural rights theory, 3) Ethical egoism , 4) Feminist ethics/case ethics, 5) Theories of justice, 6) Liberalism and political citizenship;,7) Neoliberalism. The UK provides an example of the ways in which these different conceptualizations of global and lntemational education (which differ across the globe) can, at times, be in tension. Haywood (2007) describes how one government body, the Department for lntemational Development (DFID) promotes a global education framework that focuses on social justice and anti- poverty agenda while in contrast, a second government body, the Education Department (DfES), promotes a global education agenda that emphasizes “skills, raising standards and techno-instrumentalist goals.” While both the DFID and DfES have made a commitment to promoting (and funding) global education in the UK, they envision quite different educational purposes that result in very different visions of global education curriculum for K-12 schools and teacher professional development. As with global education, there are diverse ways of conceptualizing lntemational education. lntemational education can be a particularly ambiguous and confusing term because it is used in many different ways for different purposes. For example, international education can refer to the context of education (e.g., in an lntemational context such as lntemational schools abroad), 29 where Ieaming takes place, which may or may not include lntemational Ieaming or Ieaming about another culture. In contrast, lntemational education may refer to content or subject matter that is internationally focused (e.g., about lntemational issues, societies etc.) or comparative study of other societies or educational systems (eg. comparative and lntemational education). lntemational education may also be used to describe pedagogy or processes/strategies for internationalization (e.g., student/teacher exchanges, bringing internationals into classrooms, collaborative relationships). Cambridge and Thompson (2004) suggest that part of the confusion may be a “dilemma between ideological and pragmatic interests,” the ‘globalist’ approach and ‘intemationalist’ approach to lntemational education: lntemational education is a contested field of educational practice involving the reconciliation of economic, political and cultural/ideological dilemmas. One current identifies lntemational education with lntemational development aid and the transfer of expertise between national systems of education. Another identifies lntemational education with the development of lntemational attitudes, lntemational awareness, intemational- mindedness and international understanding. However, competing ‘globalist’ and intemationalist’ perspectives may be identified within this view. (p. 161) The ‘globalist’ approach is based on economic competition and promotes "the global diffusion of the values of free market economics” (e.g., lntemational accreditation, competition between national educational systems, schools that cater to globally mobile students) (Cambridge and Thompson 2004, p. 172-173). Cambridge and Thompson and others (Klein, 2000; Pasternak, 1998; Zaw, 1996) suggest that an outcome of the ‘globalist’ approach may be the promotion of monoculture or “global cultural convergence towards the values of the 30 ‘transnational capitalist class.’ In contrast, the ‘intemationalist’ approach grows out of lntemational relations and promotes the “peace and understanding between nations...a progressive existential and experiential educational philosophy that values the moral development of the individual. . .celebrates cultural diversity and promotes an intemationaI-minded outlook” (p. 173). Haywood (2007) argues that lntemational education may have lost its usefulness as a term because it has come to be such an ambiguous term and “education for intemational-mindedness” (Hill, 2000) might be a more productive term because it better articulates shared educational outcomes and allows for multiple perspectives. She suggests nine forms of intemational-mindedness: diplomatic, political, economic and commercial, spiritual, multicultural, human rights, pacifist, humanitarian, and environmentalist. These diverse ways of conceptualizing global and international education are reflected in the coding scheme in Appendix C and Shape opportunities to Ieam. The resulting content analysis will show to what extent 1) GPA proposals make use of these diverse perspectives and intentions in planning GPA programs and 2) the inferred visions of their developers embedded in these diverse possibilities. Research on Teacher Study Abroad The research on teacher study abroad has for the most part, focused on the experiences of teachers teaching abroad in schools (such as international schools or Peace Corps) or short-term travel-study. For the purposes of this study, I am limiting this discussion to research on short-term teacher study 31 abroad, sometimes called travel-study. The literature in this area is limited as it has tended to focus on the impact or effects of the lntemational experience for teachers. Research in this area has also tended to be methodologically weak, relying on self-report data, sometimes years after an experience has happened, from a relatively small number of participants. Wilson (1984, 1986,1993) conducted several important studies on this topic. In her study of teachers participating in short-term study abroad trips, Wilson (1984) found that the teachers reported that the experience impacted them most in the area of substantive knowledge (cognitive knowledge). Her study also found that these teachers tended to incorporate or use knowledge gained from the study abroad trip in their curriculum. In a different study, Wilson (1986) researched returning Peace Corps volunteers who later became teachers and spent longer periods of time abroad than teachers in her earlier study of Short- term study abroad returnees. Wilson found that these teachers (returning Peace Corps volunteers) seemed to accept differences more easily and were most impacted by lntemational experience in the area of perceptual understanding. She suggests that the purpose of the experience and length of time abroad may account for the differences in the impact of these lntemational experiences on teachers. Wilson (1993) builds on this earlier work in The Meaning of International Experience for Schools, to document the impact of lntemational experience on a variety of stakeholders with various kinds of experiences. This research focused on teachers with lntemational experience and returning Peace Corps Volunteers 32 who became teachers, students with study abroad experience as well as lntemational visitors, and schools with an lntemational focus. She found that lntemational experience helps people develop in two main areas: 1) gaining a global perspective and 2) developing self and relationships. The first area, developing a global perspective, involves substantive knowledge (a cognitive Ieaming), perceptual understanding (which is related to the concept of “perspective consciousness” (Hanvey, 1979) and complex thinking (Brislin, 1981 in Wilson 1993, p. 20). The second area, developing self and relationships, includes personal growth (such as increased independence and self confidence), and interpersonal connections. According to her, such internationally experienced persons, and those in “bridging” professions (such as teaching), are in ideal positions to serve as "cultural mediators” for schools and communities (Wilson, 1993; Merryfield & Wilson, 2005). Merryfield (1990) studied teachers who teach from a global perspective (with and without cross-cultural experiences). Cross-cultural experiences in the study were located in domestic and lntemational contexts. She found that teachers who had cross-cultural experiences were more likely to integrate these experiences in their teaching, make connections between the local and global levels, and encourage perspective consciousness in their classrooms. In another study, Menyfield (2000) studied 80 teachers who were considered to be exemplary global education teachers to understand what factors they attributed to their success. These teachers had had varying kinds of domestic and lntemational experiences. The experiences that were most often cited as 33 contributing to their success as teachers of global education involved some type of cross-cultural experiential interaction with people from cultures that were different from their own. In Worldly Teachers, Germain (1998) describes the transforrnative effect that lntemational experience had on teachers’ professional and personal life. She conducted interviews with six teachers upon their return from teaching abroad in China or Japan for six months or more. In addition to having more in-depth knowledge about Chinese and Japanese culture and greater cultural sensitivity after returning from abroad, five of the six teachers reported that their teaching practice had changed as a result of their lntemational experience in terms of content, pedagogy and interaction with students. In addition, teachers felt that their personal lives had been influenced or “transformed” in terms of self- confidence, leadership, empathy, interpersonal connections and worldviews. One of the few studies of a Fulbright-Hays Group Projects Abroad was by Wilson (1979) and focused on the development of a model for evaluating GPAs and was based on a questionnaire (10 questions) focusing on five dimensions: 1) changes in participant attitudes, 2) congruence between participant and program objectives, 3) interaction with the host culture, 4) aim of lntemational understanding, and 5) differences in participants’ perception of the GPA experience and the attained program objectives. This study compared the responses of participants on two short-term Curriculum-Study GPAS (now called Curriculum Development Projects) to Egypt in 1976 and 1977. Wilson suggests that this quantitative evaluation model may provide an alternative to more 34 qualitative narrative/descriptive models of evaluation which tend to dominate GPAS. A second GPA study by Young (2001) for a master’s thesis examined the impact of a short-term GPA to Cambodia, Vietnam and Thailand. After thirty days abroad, the (ten) teachers in the study showed substantial changes in their understanding of concepts (globalization, transnationalism, diaspora, and education systems in Southeast Asia) and developed increased cultural sensitivity. Young suggests that this combination of cognitive and affective experiences may have contributed to the growth teachers Showed on this program. This research has described the impact that cross-cultural and lntemational experience can have on teachers. It suggests that among other things, both cognitive and affective Ieaming are needed for deep cultural Ieaming and changing attitudes. While this research has been helpful for highlighting the many benefits of lntemational experience and ways in which teachers have been impacted by their lntemational experiences, it is also limited. This study seeks to add to this research with its focus on understanding the content of short-term lntemational study abroad and a broader representative sample of GPAs. 1.3 Summary To frame this study of teachers” professional development that is internationally oriented and that takes place in lntemational contexts, this chapter draws on literature from four areas: research on teacher professional development and Ieaming, curriculum studies, global and lntemational education, 35 and teacher study abroad. In particular, this literature suggests a number of characteristics that are thought to make for effective professional development. It also suggests that the beliefs and epistemologies (including one’s beliefs about the goals and purposes of global and/or lntemational education) of authors shape curriculum in important ways. While the literature on teacher study abroad describes the benefits that this sort of lntemational experience can offer, little is known about the content of these types of experiences. The GPA proposals provide a window on a broad panorama of such content, with the further possibility of analyzing the alignment (or lack thereof) of these proposals with the professional development literature as well as various perspectives on lntemational versus global education. 36 CHAPTER 2: THE GPA: A PROGRAM TO SHAPE TEACHERS’OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN This chapter describes the legislative history of lntemational education in the US, which has shaped much of the current state of affairs for federally funded lntemational programming. It begins with a discussion of the history of Fulbright-Hays programs. Next, it describes the goals and constraints of the program which shape what is possible in the opportunities to Ieam offered to teachers. It concludes with a discussion of the assumptions and tensions embedded in this program when viewed in light of research on professional development. 2. 1 The Legislative Foundation for U. 8. International Education: Title VI and Fulbright-Hays The current lntemational education infrastructure in the US. has remained largely the same since the mid-twentieth century and was developed for the most part, in response to key global events and concerns about the ability of the US. to compete with other countries. The twentieth century was a period of profound geopolitical and technological change. As Wiley (2001) explains: The twentieth century has been characterized by a rapidly emerging global economic system and a drive for national self-detennination, realities that continually strained the creativity of educators to comprehend these changes and to adjust not only their maps but also their pedagogical goals, teaching materials and institutions. In 1900, shortly after the Berlin Conference, the worid had only 40 nations, and many regions were under colonial rule. By 1920, as the concept of the nation-state spread and the global political framework began to emerge around the League of Nations, 60 nations had emerged. After the surge of decolonization from 1948 to 1975 the world had 150 nations. (p. 12) 37 In addition to a changing world map, the US. was involved in three major wars within the span of twenty years (1939-1959): World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. The Cold War and launch of Sputnik by the Soviet Union in 1957 caught many off-guard and marked the beginning of the “space race.” Domestically, these events highlighted the importance of knowing more about other countries and cultures, especially countries that were important to US. national security and economic interests, and the need to develop a cadre of experts in these areas. The US. Department of Education explains that “although this global geopolitical climate clearly mandated a need for lntemational experts, particularly those trained in less commonly taught languages, they were in short supply’ (US. Department of Education 2005, para. 2). It was within this context of presumed national security needs that Congress created legislation aimed at strengthening lntemational education in the US.2 Title VI of the National Defense Higher Education Act In 1958, the National Defense Higher Education Act (NDEA), known later as the Higher Education Act (HEA) was signed by Congress and funded in 1959. Scarfo ( 1998) points out that “in passing NDEA, Congress recognized that the defense and security of the nation were inseparably bound with education” p. 23. Title VI of the NDEA was created “to insure trained manpower of sufficient quality and quantity to meet the national defense needs of the United States” and “supported the education of specialists in various disciplines, among them foreign language and area studies. Title VI was entitled “Language Development” (Hines 2 See Vestal (1994) for a more detailed overview of the history of US. international education and the International Education Act (IEA) of 1966. 38 2001). This narrow focus on language was later broadened to include foreign language development and area studies. Currently, there are ten Title VI programs3 administered by ED. Fulbright-Hays Programs: Under the Radar As a counterpart to Title VI, a second piece of legislation was created in 1961, the Mutual Education and Cultural Exchange Act (known as the Fulbright- Hays Act). This legislation could be seen as part of the idealist school of foreign policy which was aimed at promoting the spread of democracy and human rights. The stated purpose of the Fulbright-Hays Act is described as providing a complementary, overseas dimension to Title VI programs (NRC 2007; Scarfo 1998; Vestal 1994; Wiley, 2001) to: Enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries by means of educational and cultural exchange; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations, and the contributions being made toward a peaceful and more fruitful life for people throughout the world; to promote lntemational cooperation for educational and cultural advancement; and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic, and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world. (22 U.S.C. 2451, 2452 Chapter 33) In contrast, the older (and better known) Fulbright program is an example of the realist school of foreign policy, which is focused on protecting us. national- security and economic interests around the globe. The programs funded by 3 American Overseas Research Centers; Business and International Education; Centers for International Business Education; Foreign; Language and Area Studies Fellowships; Institute for International Public Policy; International Research and Studies; Language Resource Centers; National Resource Centers; Technological Innovation and Cooperation for Foreign Information Access; and Undergraduate International Studies and Foreign Language. 39 Fulbright-Hays programs are distinct from the Fulbright programs administered by the State Department with their focus on providing faculty, students and educators with opportunities to research and study abroad. The ED makes the following distinction between Fulbright-Hays and Fulbright programs: While both sets of programs serve international education and national security interests, their specific goals and program emphases differ. State Department programs focus on exchange for mutual understanding by bringing overseas scholars and professionals to the United States and by sending US. citizens (often with no prior lntemational experience) abroad. In contrast, the Fulbright-Hays programs at the US. Department of Education serve a domestic agenda. Authorized under Section 102(b)(6) of the Fulbright-Hays Act, they support the internationalization of the nation's educational infrastmcture by strengthening area and foreign language expertise among current and prospective U.S. educators. (US. Department of Education 2009, para. 2) In addition to the stated purpose of the Fulbright-Hays Act (increasing mutual understanding), there were also practical reasons for creating this legislation. According to the Council for lntemational Exchange of Scholars (1974) the Fulbright-Hays Act was to: Consolidate the several pieces of legislation affecting educational exchange into one law, to correct certain specific problems in the existing program, and to provide increased flexibility and scope for development. It was, in fact, designed to make possible nearly any type of exchange activity. As Congressman Wayne Hays, one of the sponsors of the bill, states, “This law is intended to give all the possible authority needed to develop this field adequately. If you don’t find what you want, ask your lawyers to look harder. Despite the wide latitude that the law provides, it has little altered the pattern of educational exchange developed in the 19503. The constraints to the realization of its potential are legislative, budgetary, and organizational in nature. (p. 24) The current array of Fulbright-Hays programs focuses on providing opportunities for faculty, educators and students to research and study in 40 countries outside of the US. and includes: Faculty Research Abroad (FRA), Doctoral Dissertation Research Abroad (DDRA), Seminar Abroad (SA), and Group Projects Abroad (GPA). The programs created under section 102(b)(6) of the F ulbright-Hays Act are an example of this “wide latitude" as the authorizing legislation “contains no specificity as to programs, but rather speaks of support to visits and study in foreign countries by American teachers and prospective teachers” (Scarfo 1998). Despite huge changes in the world during the past fifty years when these programs were created and the need for “different kinds of skills, knowledge and ways of thinking than were needed a generation ago” (Suarez-Orozco & Quin- Hillard (2004, p. 5), Fulbright-Hays programs (Group Projects Abroad in particular) have changed very little and have largely gone unexamined (Ralph Hines, former GPA program officer and IEPS director, personal communication, November 12, 2009). This was pointed out by a report by the Committee to Review the Title VI and Fulbright-Hays lntemational Education Programs (2007) which stated: It is important to note that although the Title VI and Fulbright-Hays programs have a common administrative home in the US. Department of Education, they have distinct legislative trajectories. Unlike the Title VI programs, which have been pushed and prodded regularly by Congress, the Fulbright-Hays 102(b)(6) programs entered the governmental bloodstream in 1961 and have stayed there, nearly undisturbed, ever since. The adjustments to these programs have been more administrative than legislative. (p. 268) Unlike Title VI programs which undergo review every six years, there is no systematic review process in place for Fulbright-Hays programs. Such a process 41 “provides regular opportunities for revision and change” and “provides an opening for a tussle over resources” from various stakeholders (Committee to Review the Title VI and Fulbright-Hays lntemational Education Programs, 2007, p. 283). Additionally, the fact that in many cases, even without such review, federal allocations for Fulbright-Hays programs (administered by ED) have continued to increase over the years may serve as a disincentive for making adjustments and improvements in these programs. It should be noted that the history of the GPA program is sketchy at best and there is little publicly available documentation about the early years of the program. The earliest record of the GPA program in the Federal Register is 1974 (even though GPAs were first funded in 1964) in reference to new proposed criteria for evaluating GPAS (39 FR 11216 Mar. 26, 1974; 39 FR 43416 Dec. 13, 1974). The first notice inviting applications for new awards in the FR was in 1975. At this time, Fulbright-Hays programs were called "Fulbright-Hays Training Grants” and the only mention of types of GPA programs was in the guidelines section (40 FR 31617 July 28, 1975). At this time there were six types of projects: Summer seminars, curriculum development teams, group research or study; summer intensive language projects; academic year intensive language programs; summer seminars related to domestic ethnic heritage programs. During this period, the administrative home for GPA programs was the Department of Health, Education and Welfare until 1980 when the Department of Education was created by Congress. This administrative change also meant that certain regulations formerly under the Department of HEW were recodified and 42 transferred to the OPE in ED (45 FR 30802, May 9, 1980). The only other change of note was in 1983 when the two types of language GPAS were consolidated into one (Advanced Overseas Intensive Language Projects) and summer seminars related to domestic ethnic heritage programs were removed. Other changes over the years have included minor changes in definitions or wording, changes in selection criteria points, and changes in competitive and invitational priorities which are expected to change each year. In short, while there have been changes to the GPA program over the years, these have largely been administrative and have for the most part, not affected the content of the programs. 2.2 Group Projects Abroad: Opportunities and Constraints This study focuses on two types of projects, Curriculum Development Teams and Short-term Seminars. Unlike Advanced Overseas Intensive Language Projects (which focus on language development and target graduate students, orjuniors or seniors) and Group Research or Study (which focus on research and target faculty, graduate students, orjuniors or seniors who are prospective teachers), ShOrt-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects have perhaps the broadest constituency group. In addition to college/university faculty and students, Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects can also include K-12 teachers and administrators teaching or supervising modern foreign languages or area studies in K—1 2 schools, higher education institutions and State departments of education. Short- term Seminars are “designed to help integrate lntemational studies into an 43 institution's or school system's general curriculum.” Curriculum Development Projects are “designed to permit faculty and administrators in institutions of higher education, elementary and secondary schools, and administrators in State departments of education the opportunity to Spend generally from four to eight weeks in a foreign country acquiring resource materials for curriculum development in modern foreign language and area studies” (63 FR 46366, Aug. 31, 1998). Like the other Fulbright-Hays programs, the regulatory policies that are in place have changed very little since the program was created. These policies and practices make some OTLS possible and limit others. They shape what opportunities to Ieam are possible and desirable, and reflect a particular vision about what internationalization entails and how to organize professional development. The next section discusses these constraints. Constraints Which Shape the Goals of Short-term and Curriculum Development Projects The goal of Short-term Seminars, as described by ED is to "help integrate lntemational studies into an institution's or school system’s general curriculum” (63 FR 46366, Aug. 31, 1998). Curriculum Development projects have a similar goal with an emphasis on “acquiring resource materials for curriculum development in the modern foreign language or area studies programs” and are expected to “provide for the systematic use and dissemination” of the materials collected or developed. Many GPAS (Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects) include the requirement that participants develop 44 curriculum (e.g., lesson plans, units or modules) in return for being selected even though this is not actually stated in the GPA RFA. The closest ED comes to requiring curriculum is in the section of the criteria for reviewing proposals, Potential Impact of the Project on the Development of the Study of Modern Foreign Languages and Area Studies in American Education (worth 15 points). In this section of the application, applicants are instructed to address the following: o What would be the potential impact of the project on the development and improvement of the study of modern foreign languages and area studies in US. education? 0 Describe the possible long-term benefits to project participants, their students, colleagues, and communities resulting from successful completion of the grant. What multiplier effect will the project have specifically? 0 Indicate the process by which resulting curricula will be evaluated for accuracy and effectiveness. Although curriculum development is not actually a requirement of GPA proposals, 85% of the sample analyzed in this study listed curriculum as a product that participants would complete. GPA awards, however, cannot be used to support further curriculum development or other kinds of follow-up support once participants have returned to the US. as GPA funds must be spent in the host country. 45 This means that once the GPA group arrives in the U.S., teachers are expected to figure out how to translate their experience abroad into their classroom teaching on their own. This restriction on how funds can be spent (not in the US.) was a complaint of many project directors who participated in the Fulbright-Hays Roundtable discussion at the Title VI 50th Conference (March 19- 21, 2009). One project director stated that: “even though there is no cost share there really is an expectation that they [applicant institutions] do pay for pre and post [OTLS] and that participants are also willing to pay.” The assumption is that GPA applicants (project directors and their institutions) will partner with Title VI funded centers to cost-share pre-departure and post-travel support, even though ED states that this is not a cost-sharing program. While this does happen, it is not the rule and is difficult for universities and community colleges with less institutional and financial capacity. Constraints Delimiting the Target Population Served by GPAS Eligibility for participation in a GPA is restricted to citizens or permanent residents of the US. Applicants must also be employed full-time in a US. school system, higher education or education agency (with the exception of students) at the time of application. In addition, applicants must be either: an elementary or secondary teacher, faculty member in higher education who teaches language or area studies, an administrator responsible for supervising language or area studies, or advanced student (undergraduate junior or senior student or graduate student) planning on pursuing a career in teaching in the social sciences, humanities or foreign language. In the case of educators who teach a variety of 46 subject areas or interdisciplinary programs, ED requires that “s/he must spend the majority of his/her time working with eligible subjects” (i.e., social sciences, humanities or foreign language). The requirement that participants must be educators or prospective teachers in the fields of humanities, social sciences, foreign languages or area studies is limiting. While the authorizing legislation was discussed previously, it is worth mentioning again. The Fulbright-Hays Act (section 102(b)(6) focuses on: Promoting modern foreign language training and area studies in US. schools, colleges, and universities by supporting visits and study in foreign countries by teachers and prospective teachers in such schools, colleges, and universities for the purpose of improving their skill in languages and their knowledge of the culture of the people of those countries. There is no mention of disciplinary requirements for participants in Fulbright-Hays regulations for GPAs today or earlier. It was not until 1983 that a definition for “area studies” was included in the CFR. Area studies was defined as a program of comprehensive study of the aspects of a society or societies, including the study of their geography, history, culture, economy, politics, lntemational relations, and languages.” The GPA application includes the following explanation in the guidelines (but not found in the CFR): All GPA participants must be educators or students who fulfill the criteria above and the selection criteria set by their respective projects and are currently teaching and/or studying in the fields of humanities, social sciences, foreign languages, and/or area studies. Area studies is defined as a program of comprehensive study of the aspects of a society or societies including the study of their geography, history, culture, economy, politics, lntemational relations, or languages. If an educator or student is working in a variety of subject areas, s/he must spend the majority of his/her time working with eligible subjects (emphasis in original). 47 This disciplinary focus is a particular issue for community colleges and educators in other subject areas that tend to be less intemationalIy-focused (i.e., health, science) and was raised by several project directors during the Roundtable Discussion at the Title VI 50th Anniversary Conference. It should also be noted that this emphasis on area studies is more consistent with definitions of lntemational education than of global education (as discussed above). There are a number of unintended consequences of GPAS that impact the target population. One issue concerns the length of GPAS which usually ranges from 4—6 weeks. While short by some standards, this length lends itself to a particular population of participants who are able to leave home for a month or more in the summer (when most take place). This means that GPAs may be structured in such a way that they are most appealing to educators who are either early or later in their teaching careers and don’t have dependents (or have resources to be away). In addition, most GPAS require some type of fee that is used to off-set the cost of pre-departure orientations or the project director’s salary. The cost to participants can range from being free to as much as $1,000 or more (which is not uncommon). While this is not a cost-share grant (it was in the early days), such fees further define and limit the pool of potential participants to those who can afford to participate and may not necessarily be those who are most in need of such an experience. Constraints Which Influence How the Proposal is Evaluated Prior to the competition each year, ED publishes criteria that will be used to review proposals. These include selection criteria and up to three types of 48 priorities which can change according to needs determined by ED. Over the years these criteria have changed very little. Proposals are evaluated and ranked by three evaluators for each region. This process is described by ED: “A three- member panel of non-federal evaluators reviews each application. Each reviewer will prepare a written evaluation of the application and assign points for each selection criterion.” A final score is then calculated for each proposal and proposals are ranked. In the past, reviewers had the opportunity to discuss (and revise) these scores with each other before the final score was calculated. Beginning in 2005, all applicants were required to submit proposals online (in separate “chunks” according to the nine criteria). As online evaluation tools become more commonplace, there are fewer opportunities for reviewers to discuss, ask questions and negotiate final scores (Schneider 2006). GPA proposals are evaluated according to nine criteria on a 105 point scale (this has been a 100 point scale at times). Table 2.2.1 lists these criteria and the maximum points one can receive for each category. Table 2.2.1. Selection criteria for 2010 short-term GPAs. CRITERIA POINTS I Plan of Operation 20 Quality of Key Personnel 10 Budget 8 Cost Effectiveness 10 Evaluation Plan 20 Adequacy of Resources 5 Potential Impact 1 5 Relevance to Institutional Development 5 Need for Overseas Experience 10 Competitive Preference Priority I 5 Competitive Preference Priority II 5 Total Points 105 49 In explaining these criteria, the ones which offer the most clues about the authors’ vision of lntemational education include the following. a Potential Impact of the Project on the Development of the Study of Modern Foreign Languages and Area Studies in American Education (15 points) includes the potential impact of the project, possible long- term benefits, multiplier effect and processes by which resulting curricula will be evaluated for accuracy and effectiveness; 0 Relevance to the Institution’s Educational Goals and Its Relationship to Its Program Development in Modern Foreign Languages and Area Studies (5 points) focuses on institutional development goals, the relationship between the project and the institution’s program development in modern foreign languages and area studies; . Extent to which Direct Experience Abroad is Necessary to Achieve Project Objectives and the Effectiveness with which Relevant Host Country Resources Will Be Utilized (worth 10 points) concerns why first-hand overseas experience is necessary, the needs and benefits project will address, and the effective use of host country resources. As can be seen, the categories that carry the most weight are the Plan of Operation and the Evaluation Plan, worth twenty points each. The categories that carry the least weight are the Adequacy of Resources, Relevance to Institutional Development and Competitive Priorities. Noticeably absent from these evaluation categories are questions about pedagogy and the nature of OTLS that will be included in GPAS. Also absent is an explanation of the rationale for the itinerary and OTLS. Very few proposals explained why they chose the OTLS that they included in their proposals. Despite the emphasis on “Quality of Key Personnel,” there are no specific questions about the project director's (and other key personnel) experience working with teachers and leading/designing professional development. Project directors with area studies and research expertise in the region (not necessarily host country) seemed to be the emphasis of proposals in 50 the sample. Interestingly, just two criteria (Extent to which Direct Experience Abroad is Necessary to Achieve Project, and Potential Impact of the Project on the Development of the Study of Modern Foreign Languages and Area Studies in American Education) are worth 25% of the total amount of points possible (on a 100 point scale). Since most proposers do not know who the actual participants will be (since recruiting has not begun at the time proposals are written) and what the potential impact will be in advance, proxies for measuring impact tend to involve counting “potential” presentations and estimated audiences for presentations that have yet to take place. One proposal for example, stated that: We estimate that the project’s immediate impact will be felt by over 100 faculty and 3000 students at the secondary school and post-secondary levels. The number of students, however, will increase annually as more students enroll in courses taught by seminar participants and other faculty. Constraints on the Choice of Region and Countries The GPA program funds projects to seven world regions: Africa, East Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia and the Pacific, the Western Hemisphere (Central and South America, Mexico, and the Caribbean), East Central Europe and Eurasia, and the Near East (ED, 2009). These world regions are considered an “absolute priority" which means that ED only considers applications that meet this priority. Since the early days of the program, the absolute priority has been “Specific geographic regions” and has included seven world regions: Africa, Western Hemisphere (Latin America and the Caribbean), East Asia, South Asia, South East Asia and the Pacific, Russia and Eastern Europe (Central, Eastern Europe and Eurasia in the early days), and the Near East. As a side note, more 51 than half of the regional classifications (if one counts Eurasia) are for countries in Asia. In contrast, countries in Latin America are for example, grouped by hemisphere (i.e. Western Hemisphere) instead of, the Caribbean, Middle America, and South America. The same could be said for African countries which are grouped as one continent, "Africa.” These regional classifications matter because proposals are funded by region. As Figure 2.2.1 illustrates, the world region with the most funded GPA proposals was Asia (includes East Asia, South Asia, and South East Asia and the Pacific) for close to forty years (with the exception of 2003-2004 when this declined). Over the years there have been minor changes in the names of several regions, especially when national boundaries were re-drawn (e.g., USSR. and Korea) but by and large, the absolute priority (regional focus) has remained the same. For example, in 1990, the world regions listed as absolute priority were: Africa, the Western Hemisphere, East Asia, Southeast Asia and the Pacific, Eastern Europe and the USSR, the Near East and North Africa, or South Asia. In 1991 changes were made so that Africa was changed to Sub- Sahara Africa (and changed back a few years later), the Western Hemisphere was changed to Latin America and the Caribbean, and the USSR. was changed to Central Europe and Eurasia in 1993 and is currently East Central Europe and Eurasia. 52 O N World Region -0-Africa co 5! 9 O U) q) .95 < 05 cc ”’0 06— mm LO. ((0 .29 0.17) 2.2 SE SE 29 gs m 0 O m a 3 0 $5 To $w :1 -)-(—Near East 00 H \D H Q N 0 co LO H H H 129A 18d sjesodOJd # 53 £008 N 900a 9008 I 7003 8003 3002 I008 0003 666I 966I £66I 966I 966L V66L €66I Z66I I66I 066i 686L 886I £86L 986L 986I , veal €86I ZBGL L86L 086L 6£6L 8£6L LL6L 9L6I 9£6I VL6L SLGI ZL6I Year Figure 2.2. 1. Funded Group Projects Abroad by world region and year (1972-2007). Regions that cannot be funded are Canada and Western Europe and are noted in the FR (Australia was removed from this list in 2001). In the early days of the Fulbright-Hays program it was decided that programs to Western Europe would not be funded because the State Department sponsored programs to the region and resources were better utilized for other areas of the world (Ralph Hines, personal communication, November 12, 2009). Objections to this policy were noted in a letter from the Chair of the US. Advisory Commission on lntemational Educational and Cultural Affairs in 1965. As Table 2.2.2 suggests, the world region with the most funded GPA proposals over the past 37 years has been Asia. India for example, had 191 funded GPA proposals during this period. This was more than double that of the second highest country, China which had 85 funded proposals. Japan was third with 47 GPAS. Close behind were Ghana (46), Russia (45), Egypt (43), Mexico (40), South Africa (38) and Brazil and Poland (27 each). Constraints on the Focus of Proposals The GPA program stipulates that projects must focus on foreign language and area studies and this requirement shapes GPAs in important ways. Area studies is defined as “a program of comprehensive study of the aspects of a society or societies, including the study of their geography, history, culture, economy, politics, lntemational relations, and Ianguages” (ED 1983). While this definition is fairly vague and open in the original legislation (22 U.S.C. 2451, 2452 Chapter 33), area studies was interpreted by ED early on in the program as social science or humanities. This was because funds were very limited at the 54 time and since NSF funded projects in science and math, foreign language and the social sciences were needed niches (Hines 2009). It was not until 1983 however, that this definition was included in the CFR. This disciplinary restriction limits not only the focus of GPAS but also limits the target population (participants) to language, social science and arts/humanities thereby excluding fields such as mathematics, science and other areas that tend to be less lntemational. Again it should be said that these requirements fit a framework of international education better than a framework of global education. Table 2.2.2. Top five host countries for (funded) GPAS, 1972-2009 (N=499). HOST COUNTRY 2000-2009 China 35 Ghana 33 South Africa 28 India 23 Mexico 22 Russia 22 1 990-1 999 India 31 China 26 Russia 1 7 Japan 16 Costa Rica 13 1980-1989 India 67 China 1 8 Egypt 1 5 Poland 1 1 Kenya 10 1 972-1979 India 70 Egypt 1 3 Japan 10 Poland 1 0 United Arab Emirates 9 55 The priorities (absolute, competitive, and invitational) that are designated each year also shape the focus of GPA proposals. Proposals must meet the absolute priority (specific world regions) to be considered. In addition, there is usually at least one competitive priority which carries an additional five points. For at least eighteen years the priority has been: “Short-term seminars that develop and improve foreign language and area studies at elementary and secondary schools.” This priority encourages proposals to focus on or include K- 12 educators in their GPAS. This was seen in the study’s sample of which the majority of proposals 40% (22 proposals) targeted K-12 teachers exclusively compared to 13% of the proposals which targeted faculty in higher education (universities and colleges) exclusively. Close to 45% of the proposals in the sample targeted combinations of faculty and K—12 teachers (four of these also included graduate students) and educational organizations. In 2007 a second competitive priority was added to encourage proposals to focus on languages of critical need to US. national security, specifically: “Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Russian, as well as lndic, Iranian, & Turkic language families” and this focus has continued. Pre-departure orientation was included as part of this priority for the 2010 competition: “Projects that provide substantive training and thematic focus, both during the pre-departure and in- country project phases on any of the seventy-eight (78) languages deemed critical on the US. Department of Education’s list of Less Commonly Taught Languages (LCTLs).” This change essentially formalized unwritten guidelines that have shaped proposals over the past few years to encourage proposals to 56 build in pre-departure activities that include language training and to include more language in OTLS abroad. This is the first time that pre-departure preparation was mentioned in any of the priorities of the GPA program. An additional priority, the invitational priority is offered occasionally and while it does not carry additional points, it nonetheless shapes the focus of GPA proposals. In the last frfteen years there have been four invitational priorities that have ranged from projects focusing on Mexico (just after the North American Free Trade Treaty — NAFTA was signed), semester or academic year study for undergraduate students (which is occasionally offered as an invitational priority, as is the case for the 2010 competition), and projects aimed at increasing the participation of underrepresented minorities. In an effort to encourage more collaboration with colleges of education, the invitational priority for 2010 was: Projects that, through collaborative efforts between colleges, departments, or schools of teacher education and other colleges, departments, or school within a single institution of higher education or consortium of institutions of higher education, propose projects that provide pre-service training for K—12 teachers in foreign languages and lntemational area studies in teacher education programs. Project activities should include pre-service teachers and teacher education students (74 FR 44830). This most recent emphasis on encouraging GPA applicants (usually colleges and universities) to collaboration with colleges of education was a new priority in that this was the first time this had been mentioned. The emphasis on collaborations between Title VI funded centers and colleges of education was one of the recommendations made by the Committee to Review the Title VI and Fulbright- Hays lntemational Education Programs in their 2007 final report. 57 Constraints on Who Can Propose Not just anyone can submit a proposal for a GPA project. There are four types of applicants who are eligible to apply for grants. These include higher education institutions (i.e. community colleges and universities), state departments of education; nonprofit educational organizations; and consortia of these groups. Individuals who are not affiliated with these groups are not eligible to propose a GPA project. The grant competition is announced in the Federal Register, ED’s website and other networks (e.g., National Council for the Social Studies, grants.gov, etc.). To be successful, one has to know that these grants exist and when and where to look. Furthermore, because of the level of detail and advanced planning that are needed to put a proposal together and then carry it out GPAS require institutional capacity and expertise in the region. Institutional resources are also needed to carry out project-related activities in the US. and may be prohibitive for those who are not associated with a large institution or area studies center. In fact, one criterion in the evaluation plan is the Adequacy of Resources (worth five points) and includes resources in the host country as well as in the US. The expectation is that National Resource Centers in US. universities are available to serve as resources to those proposing GPAS and this is mentioned in the application package: National Resource Centers (NRCs) are funded by the US. Department of Education and serve the general purpose of training specialists in modern foreign languages and area or lntemational studies. Most NRC institutions have outreach coordinators whose general purpose is to disseminate information and assist other institutions and individuals with accessing needed information and resources. Institutions interested in submitting 58 proposals to the GPA program are encouraged to contact NRCs and their outreach coordinators for assistance in accessing suitable resources for proposal and program development (US. Department of Education 2009, p. 11) Constraints on What Expenses are Eligible to be Funded from the Grant GPA regulations stipulate that funds can only be spent in the host country with the exception of round-trip airfare. It is explained on the program’s website and application materials that: “the grant does not provide funds for project- related expenses within the United States” (emphasis in the original document). Allowable expenses include travel (lntemational round-trip airfare and local travel in host country), a maintenance stipend, teaching materials, renting instructional facilities, clerical and professional services in host country (e.g., honoraria). This means that pre-departure preparation and post-travel support for participants and other project-related expenses in the US. must be paid for by other sources (if available). Yet, the supplemental information included in the application package for the past few years has stated that some pre-departure orientation should be included in proposals even though this will not be covered by the grant. For example, the 2010 application states that “a minimum of 16 hours of pre- departure orientation (guided activities) should be included in the project design. However, please note that as a U.S.-based-activity, related costs will not be paid for using GPA grant funds.” The same application goes on to say: The US. Department of Education encourages cost sharing by the participants and their affiliated institutions, school districts, or organizations to cover the expenses within the U.S., and to make up the difference between the grant and the costs of the activities abroad. Please note that if an applicant is awarded a grant, the full amount of cost sharing 59 indicated in the applicant’s budget will need to be provided us. Department of Education 2009, p. 9). As already discussed, the same application package also states that “this program does not require cost sharing or matching.” Constraints Influencing the Time Needed for GPA Preparation The timing of GPA award notifications is an issue that has a profound impact on GPAS (especially in terms of recmitment and quality of OTLS). The application and award process usually takes about eight months from the RFA announcement to award notification and involves several phases. The GPA request for applications (RFA) is usually announced in early fall (September) each year (for all except Advanced Overseas Intensive Language Study Projects). Once the RFA is announced, applicants have approximately thirty days until the deadline to submit a GPA proposal. As the selection criteria illustrate (see Table 2.2.1), this is not the kind of grant that can be done at the last minute (or within 30 days) as GPA proposals are expected to make arrangements in the host country and obtain letters of support by the time the proposal is submitted. After this, proposals undergo a review process with three external reviewers and awardees are notified in late spring (often in April). Sometimes, after awards have been made there are additional negotiations that take place (e.g., if the award was less than the amount applied for or if there is a problem with one of the applicant’s qualifications once the final list has been submitted to ED for approval). This means that by the time the award has been announced project 60 directors may have only a few months to recruit and select GPA participants since the majority of GPAS take place in the summer when educators are not teaching. This timing can be a problem as Wiley (1982, p. 3) pointed out nearly 30 years ago because “finding the best participants is not always easy, especially given time constraints (sometimes summer programs are not given final approval until late spring, after some potential participants may have been forced to make other plans)” This late award notification also has implications for the potential content and quality of OTLS. For example, arrangements for group travel (roundtrip airfare to the host country and host country transportation) and other OTLS in the host country cannot be finalized until the GPA award has been announced and participants have been selected. Because most Short-term GPAS occur in the summer during the high tourist season these costs may be very high. The late notification also means that activities (e.g., site visits, room rentals) and speakers cannot be confirmed until late in the spring and people and accommodations may become unavailable during the eight months it takes to approve proposals. This tension was explained by a veteran project director of three funded GPAS who explained that Late notification makes it difficult to make reservations or commitments to GPA [in the host country], especially given that these are groups of 15 people. Given the late notification and no funds to make early reservations, l have to convince people I am working with to make reservations on my good word; I have to use my own social capital. Additionally, while the GPA award does cover in-country charges, the regulations stipulate that the maintenance stipend is capped at fifty percent of the US. 61 Department of State maximum travel allowance. This means that food, incidentals and lodging for GPA participants must be less than half of the amount established by the US. State Department (the rate used by government civilians and professionals traveling to the same locations). Another project director had to postpone her GPA to a country in the Middle East for a year because of conflict in the region. 2.3 Summary Despite its importance as one of the few federally-funded intemationally- related professional development for teachers, the GPA program has not been reviewed and has changed very little since it was first created fifty years ago. This means that proposers are responding to the same RFA and vision of internationalization and teachers’ professional development despite a very different geopolitical landscape and the impact of increasing globalization. While the GPA program does offer teachers the opportunity to have an lntemational experience, the requirements of the program also limit what can be proposed and funded. 62 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY This chapter describes the study’s methodology. It begins with a discussion of the research design. Next, a description of the instrumentation and coding procedures is presented. Following this is a description of sources of data and sampling, and an overview of data analysis. The chapter concludes with a discussion of issues of reliability and validity, and limitations of the study. 3.1 Research Design The goal of this study is to understand how project leaders conceptualize internationalization and related professional development. This study is about different ways of envisioning or thinking about how to organize cultural Ieaming in situ, in another culture and country. It focuses on identifying and mapping out the range and kinds of opportunities to learn afforded by lntemational-related professional development that takes place abroad (i.e. Short-term Group Projects Abroad). Using a mixed methods methodology, this study draws on quantitative and qualitative approaches “for the broad purposes of breadth and depth of understanding and corroboration” (Johnson, Onwuegbuzie & Tumer, 2007). This study involved a number of phases, the first of which included choosing of the target population and collecting data (see Figure 3.1). 63 -Codmg SChente ‘ Hi ~Content Analysis I. "Qualitatrv‘ ‘ e Arlalysis -Write up 8 Reporting -- " I ate PopuIatIon. 8 ' Sampling Data Collection v Figure 3.1.1. Phases of the study’s research design. The second phase concerned developing the coding scheme and conducting a content analysis of GPA proposals. From this, a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was done with the goal of reducing data so that emergent patterns and themes might be explored in a more qualitative way. This study employs two main forms of analysis, a content analysis and component analysis occurring in sequential phases. The first phase of data analysis involved a textual analysis of the full sample, 55 GPA proposals. As an approach, content analysis is appropriate for studies such as this that involve analyzing large quantities of text and where the goal is to understand an author’s underlying goals, and conceptualizations about an issue or phenomena. Content analysis offers a number of advantages. First and foremost, it makes it possible to reduce large amounts of text into small units and can be applied to a wide variety of texts (Weber, 1990). Second, this technique can be quantitative or 64 qualitative or both, and use. inductive and deductive approaches. Third, content analysis is a systematic and replicable approach that is especially useful because it offers the opportunity to back-track and revisit texts since they are permanent (Cohen, Manion 8 Morrison, 2007: 475). Additionally, content analysis makes it possible to generalize to a larger population. 3.2 Target Population and Sampling of Proposals for Content Analysis Target Population This section describes the study’s target population and explains how the sample was selected. This study focuses on understanding how project leaders/directors conceptualize internationalization and related professional development with data from funded GPA proposals. The target population was limited to funded GPA proposals that were designed for teachers in K-12 school and higher education for a five year time period (2003-2007). How the Purpose and Focus of GPA Proposals Limited the Target Population. Four types of projects are included in the GPA program (Advanced Overseas Intensive Language Projects, Group Study or Research Projects, Short-term Seminar Projects and Curriculum Development Projects) and these projects have different purposes and target audiences. For example, Advanced Overseas Intensive Language Projects focus on intensive language training and developing an individual’s language skills and a narrow target audience that includes primarily graduate and undergraduate students (juniors and seniors) in higher education who are prospective teachers and have completed at least two years of foreign language study in the target language. Similarly, the Group 65 Study or Research Projects also targets students in higher education but also includes faculty and emphasizes group (of three people) research or study. Participants must have language proficiency, disciplinary competence in their research area, and have completed a course in both intensive language training and area studies prior to participating in the GPA. In contrast, the purpose of Short-term Seminar Projects and Curriculum Development Projects is internationalization in K-12 schools and higher education. Short-term Seminars Projects have perhaps the broadest purpose which is to: Promote the integration of lntemational studies into the curriculum of social sciences and humanities throughout U.S. school systems at all levels; Increase linguistic and/or cultural competency among US. students and educators; and focus on a particular aspect of area study, such as the culture of the area or a portion of the culture of the country of study. Similarly, the aim of Curriculum Development Projects is internationalization but with an emphasis on curriculum development and the collection of curricular resources, in particular, the acquisition of "first-hand resource materials for curriculum development in modern foreign language and area studies; and provide for systematic use and dissemination in the United States of the acquired materials.” In addition to this common purpose, Short-term Seminar Projects and Curriculum Development Projects also have a common target population that includes K-12 teachers and administrators. Eligible participants for Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects include: Elementary or secondary school teachers; Faculty members at higher education institutions; Administrators at state departments of education, higher education institutions or school districts who are responsible for 66 planning, conducting, or supervising programs at school systems at all levels; and Graduate students, or juniors or seniors in higher education institutions, who are prospective teachers. Only Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects focus on K-12 teachers and schools in addition to higher education. Since this study is concerned with K-16 internationalization, the target population was based on Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects. Advanced Overseas Intensive Language Projects and Group Research or Study Projects were excluded. How Access to Copies of GPA Proposals Limited the Target Population. The GPA program has a long history, dating back to 1964 when the program was first funded by Congress. Since then (1972 was as far back as data was available), more than one thousand Short-term and Curriculum Development Projects GPA proposals have been funded to six world regions (see Table 3.2.1 ). Table 3.2.1. Overview of funded GPA proposals for Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects in 1972-2009 (N = 1,120). 1 FUNDED WORLD REGION* PROPOSALS (1 972-2009) Africa 244 East Asia 8 the Pacific 223 South and Central Asia 221 Europe and Eurasia 150 Near East 99 Western Hemisphere 183 Total 1,120 * World region categories used by ED 67 Access to these proposals is theoretically possible however, it is not easy. Originally, I had hoped to collect data from a larger population (ten years or 1997-2007). However, collecting proposals turned out to be more difficult than originally expected and this limited the population size. For example, when choosing the size of the target population, I consulted the IRIS database which has data on all 14 of the lntemational education programs administered by ED as far back as 1959 (Title VI NRC awards). However, only limited information about the GPA program is available in this database (e.g., no data is available prior to 1993 and world regions and abstracts were not included until 1997). In this database, all four types of GPA programs are mixed together under a general Group Projects Abroad so abstracts are an important way of distinguishing which proposals are Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects and which are not. Funded GPA proposals can be obtained in three ways. The first involves writing the project director and asking for a copy of his/her GPA proposal. The second option is to submit a request for GPA proposals through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), but this takes time, is expensive (one must pay for the cost of researching and scanning the documents as well as copy costs if hard copies are needed), and not effective in getting all the documents requested. The third option is to visit the OPE in Washington, DC. and take notes on proposals (the GPA Program does not permit proposals to be copied). This last option is further complicated because older GPA proposals are sent to the ED archive for storage. For example, during a visit in the 2008 summer to collect data, I Ieamed 68 that proposals from 2003 and 2004 were in the process of being transferred to the archive. Because of these challenges and the intensive nature of document analysis in the research design, the target population was limited to five years (2003-2007), a total of 172 Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects. This range of years was adequate because it represented a variety of countries, project directors and reviewers, and was feasible given time and resources. Sample Selection Given the time and resources available, sampling about one third of the population (about 55 projects) seemed reasonable and likely to be sufficiently representative of the whole population. The population of 172 projects was divided into 5 (region) x 5 (year) groups. For each group, the projects were randomly ordered and systematic sampling procedure was used to select every third to ensure that about one third of the group was selected into the sample. Systematic sampling is a commonly used method for selecting such a sample when a listing of all units in the target population is available. If a random start is used, all proposals on the list have an equal probability of being selected. When a proposal proved not to be available, as when a project director’s computer crashed, or no response was received from a project director or the document was not available at the ED, a replacement was randomly selected from the sample groups. In short, the total sample of 55 proposals was selected through probability sampling and there is no reason to believe that the replacement proposals (14) differ from the originally selected proposals in a way that would 69 bias the results. Because of stratification, all regions and years were represented in the sample. Table 3.2.2 illustrates how the sample is distributed across world regions and years in relation to the population. As designed, the sample consists of nearly one third of the total populatiOn of proposals for each world region and each year. For example, when looking at proposals to Africa, there are 44 total proposals to African countries. The sample includes 13 of these or 30% of the population. The Europe/Russia and Middle East/North Africa groupings had the fewest proposals (15 and 18 respectively) because there were few funded between 2003-2007. Table 3.2.2. Overview of population and sample by world region and year (N=172, n=55) YEAR WORLD REGION 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 Total Sample 2 1 3 3 4 13 Am“ Population 6 4 10 1o 14 44 Sample 2 4 4 5 3 18 As" Population 5 11 13 11 13 53 Europe Sample 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 Russia Population 3 2 2 3 5 15 Sample 2 2 2 4 4 14 27:2,,“ Population 7 5 6 1 1 13 42 Middle East Sample 1 1 1 - 2 5 & North Africa Population 3 3 4 2 6 18 70 3.3 Document Collection Documents were collected over the course of about six months and involved a number of steps. At the start I assumed that all funded proposals were in the public domain, and would be readily available from the ED. This turned out not to be the case. The first step involved submitting a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the ED for funded GPA proposals between 2003-2007. But this yielded only a few proposals because only 20% of the proposals requested were actually found and sent to me by the FOIA office and of these, only about 10% were actually Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects (versus Advanced Overseas Intensive Language Projects or Group Research or Study Projects). To complete the sample, I wrote to individual project directors. In an e-mail I included a description of the study and requested a copy of the proposal. The majority of the sample (close to 90%) was collected this way. There were a few proposals l was unable to collect because the project director had lost or damaged computer files or did not respond to my messages. I contacted the OPE in Washington, DC, which makes copies of such documents available to the general public and arranged for a three-day visit to code the remaining data. Because funded proposals are In the public domain it was not necessary to submit an application for Human Subjects Approval through the Institutional Review Board at Michigan State University since research involving existing, publicly available documents is exempt from review (Exempt Category 1-4). 71 3.4 Coding Scheme and Content Analysis Coding Scheme This section begins with a discussion of the coding scheme and concepts for which it was designed. The coding scheme focuses on understanding the range and nature of opportunities to Ieam afforded by Short-term Group Projects Abroad proposals. It is linked to the research questions which guide this study. To increase the reliability and validity of the study, categories and variables were described in detail in a codebook and examples were included for the main categories. The coding scheme is divided into four sections: 1) overall characteristics; 2) characteristics of the project director; 3) characteristics of the target group; and 4) opportunities to Ieam before, during and after programming abroad. These categories are briefly described here. Overall Characteristics. The first category, “overall characteristics” includes 19 variables aimed at providing a broad overview of each proposal. These variables focus on understanding both the manifest (obvious or concrete) and inferred (underlying or conceptual) content of proposals. For example, variables coded for manifest content require little interpretation such as counts (e.g., number of different locales, number of pre-departure sessions, number or participants). Whereas, variables coded for inferred categories involve interpreting meaning from text and are more subjective (e.g., disciplinary or thematic focus, purpose, and conceptualization of internationalization). Four of these variables are described below. 72 “Purpose” concerns the rationale(s) for the GPA project. That is, the formal purpose(s) as articulated in the proposal. This variable includes eight possible purposes: Developing curricula, acquiring language skills, reducing stereotypes, gaining first-hand experience, establishing or reinforcing institutional linkages, and developing global competencies. See Table 3.4.1 for more detailed definitions and examples of these different purposes. Table 3.4.1. Definitions and examples of purpose in coding scheme. CATEGORY DEFINITION EXAMPLE Curriculum Develop curriculum, ". . .develop new courses and expand Development integrate X culture into existing courses in order to bring Islamic school or institution’s studies curricula to tertiary level institutions, curriculum thus providing complimentary academic content to CERIS [the Consortium for Educational Resources on Islamic Studies] members’ recently expanded Arabic language course offerings” (#144). Language Focus on developing “...this proposed study abroad program is Skills foreign language skills designed for practicing teachers who are or competency currently teaching Chinese at K-12 schools in the United States. The overall purpose of the program is to provide American educators, both native and non-native speakers of Chinese, an opportunity to (a) strengthen their Chinese language facility, (b) expand their pedagogical knowledge of teaching the language and culture of a changing China” (China #25). Reduce Emphasizes disrupting “The southern Indian state of Tamilnadu Stereotypes or reducing has been chosen as the site for this project stereotypes, because it provides a necessary antitheseis to the dominant K-12 textbook presentations of India which tend to be largely one-dimensional and oriented to a classical view of India, with an emphasis on North India, Hindu religion, mythology, and poverty" (#152). 73 First-hand Emphasizes “There is simply no way to reproduce the Experience importance of gaining immense national Palace mural of Diego first-hand experience in Rivera which covers three sections of the the country huge staircase. Only when one observes it on site is it possible to begin to understand the impact of this monumental work for Mexican culture...One simply must be there to see it and to walk through it to understand it and to begin to teach the significance of that civilization” #127). Institutional Emphasis on This project helps Indiana increase Linkages developing or extending international content in the K-12 curriculum linkages with while providing long-term linkages to institutions in the host university faculty at Indiana State University country (#52). Global Emphasizes developing “The proposed Curriculum Development Competencies global competencies Team project in South India aims to such as cross-cultural communication skills, intercultural understanding, global awareness, perspective consciousness conjointly expand teachers' (and ultimately their students’) skills in five areas related to global citizenry; perspective consciousness, state of the planet awareness, cultural awareness, understanding of systems of interdependence, and ability to act responsively and responsibly as global citizens” (I#152). Table 3.4.1 Continued “Conceptualization of internationalization” concerns the overall theoretical or conceptual focus of the GPA proposal and includes three categories shown to be important in chapters one and two above: national security, economic competition, and global citizenship. Proposals with a national security focus emphasize geopolitical interests and national security needs (e.g., learn about other countries who are threats to the US). Proposals with a focus on economic competition emphasize global competition and an economic rationale for learning about cultures (e.g., skills for competing global market). Finally, proposals with a focus on global citizenship emphasize international understanding and 74 humanistic goals. Table 3.4.2 provides definitions and examples for these internationalization categories. Table 3.4.2. Definitions and Examples of Conceptualization of Internationalization. CATEGORY DEFINITION EXAMPLE National Focus on learning about “UM’S emphasis on China and Central Asia Security other countries/cultures reflect[s] a recognition of the need for for national security, students at all levels to develop greater geopolitics — such as knowledge and understanding of a region learning less commonly that is playing an ever greater economic, taught languages for demographic and strategic role in an strategic increasingly inter-dependent world ." Economic Focus on skills, “The promotion and development of Competition knowledge needed to Chinese language education is of critical compete in global importance to the United States in terms of economy, with other both economic advantages and national countries, impact of interest in the dynamic global global economy on local communities” (ID #25). communities. Global Focus on international “In an era of increasing global Citizenship understanding, all interconnectedness, there is a mutual need humans belong to a common community (e.g. universal human rights, moral/ethical commitment to universal equality, global stewardship for Americans and people in other parts of the world to learn about each other. Overseas experience holds greater importance than ever in today’s world, as Americans who go overseas find themselves increasingly in the spotlight, having to answer many difficult questions” (ID#1 37). "Disciplinary focus” includes recognized areas of university or school study (e.g., language, interdisciplinary, arts and humanities, other disciplines). A proposal with a focus on foreign language training for example, would be coded as “language.” Proposals with a focus on the arts, music, religion, or philosophy would be coded as “arts and humanities.” When multiple disciplines were 75 involved, the proposal was coded as “interdisciplinary” (or IDS). In cases where there was a clear secondary discipline, this was also noted (e.g., interdisciplinary political, interdisciplinary education, interdisciplinary economics). In table 3.4.3, these disciplinary categories are described. Table 3.4.3. Definitions and Examples of Disciplinary Focus in Coding Scheme. CATEGORY DEFINITION Language Overall focus on foreign language acquisition or training EXAMPLE “[T]his proposed study abroad program is designed for practicing teachers who are currently teaching Chinese at K-12 schools in the United States. The overall purpose of the program is to provide American educators, both native and non-native speakers of Chinese, an opportunity to (a) strengthen their Chinese language facility, [and] (b) expand their pedagogical knowledge of teaching the language and culture of a changing China“ (#25). IDS Political Overall interdisciplinary focus with emphasis on politics or political “Participants will achieve a broader understanding of democracy’s role and functions in a diverse global community through firsthand experience in the science world’s largest democracy, India. .. [t]he project will provide an introduction to India’s history, religions, and arts” (#137). IDS Overall interdisciplinary "T he program will focus on three basic areas; the Economic focus with emphasis on economics, defined as involving commerce, production, distribution, consumption of goods and services. economic concepts embedded in Indiana Academic Standards in the Social Studies; area studies content relating to Chinese culture, history, geography, politics; and strategies for linking Chinese and Indiana classrooms... Fifteen educators representing several regions of the state will travel under the guidance of Indiana State University’s Center for Economic Education and the Indiana Department of Education on a four-week field study in China” (#52). IDS Overall focus is Geography interdisciplinary and geography is the main focus. defined as the study of the Earth, its surface and human interaction. “The purpose of the project is the development of geography standards based curricular materials about a little studied region in many geography area studies courses in Iowa, and the country at large, at all levels of education“ (#134). 76 IDS Culture Overall focus is interdisciplinary with emphasis on culture, broadly defined as shared patterns of behavior, values, beliefs. “The seminar will take an interdisciplinary approach to childhood in comparative perspective. Participants will focus on the concept and the experience of childhood in Argentina as compared to the U.S., as well as the role of the state, religions, families, ethnic communities, and popular culture in defining childhood in Argentina” (#123). IDS Overall focus is Education interdisciplinary with emphasis on issues of schooling or educational “A major part of the Mexican field experience will be devoted to educational issues - exploring various aspects of the educational system, visiting schools in different areas and settings to get a first-hand feel systems for how schools operate, how Mexican classrooms differ from American classrooms, what the expectations are for students, parents, and teachers” (#40). IDS Overall focus is “The group will travel to Senegal for a four week Language interdisciplinary with emphasis on language acquisition or training seminar to improve the learning and teaching of languages (particularly French) and area studies (particularly western Africa) particularly in elementary and secondary schools... The lectures topics include Senegalese value systems, the slave trade, history of Islam in Senegal, literacy campaigns in national languages, language policy in schools, education of women, health and human rights, West African expressive cultures and literatures” (#161 ). Arts 8 Overall focus on the Humanities arts, music, religion, ancient cultures and/or philosophy “The objective is to provide participants with an immersion interdisciplinary living and learning experience so that they will have new knowledge and materials that will allow them to incorporate successfully themes of Mexican art and culture in their curricula. Required courses will be in five areas: Pre-Hispanic Mexican Art and Culture; Viceregal Mexican Art and Culture; Contemporary Mexican Art and Culture; Current Changes in the Economy and Politics of Mexico; Pedagogic and Curricular Strategies and Practices” (#174). Table 3.4.3 Continued “Thematic focus” concerns the overall topical focus of the proposal and may or may not focus on a specific discipline. Some proposals for example, had both a disciplinary focus (e.g., social studies/social science) and also had a 77 thematic focus (e.g., inequity or environment). There were also proposals which had a disciplinary focus but no particular thematic focus. Coding categories for thematic focus included: education, inequity, environment, and subject area focus (e.g., geography, history, and art). When proposals included themes that did not fit the coding categories they were placed in the "other” category and the theme was noted. Table 3.4.4 illustrates these disciplinary categories. Table 3.4.4. Definitions and examples of thematic focus in coding scheme. Category Definition Example Subject area Recognized areas of “In proposing a GPA to South Africa, we recognize university or school the contextual richness of the country as an study such as the environment in which to study issues of diversity theme of language, and multiculturalism. Consequently, while our history, geography thematic focus will be on history and geography, an added benefit of our program will be exposure to issues of diversity and multiculturalism in South Africa, a country which provides important and interesting comparisons to the US." (ID #64). Education Emphasizes a focus “The Group Projects Abroad seminar will involve on schooling, education, educational systems (e.g., bilingual education) participants in Ethiopian life and culture, with a Specific focus on education. Project activities take place in three different parts of Ethiopia... Two key elements underlie the seminar: (1) in-service education and (2) development of curriculum materials about Ethiopia adaptable to Illinois educational standards” (ID#159). 78 Inequity Involves issues of power and inequity based on ethnicity, gender, or language among others L‘IDhe project's overall goals are to understand the impact of China’s rapid march to modernization on the economic and political status, well-being and family roles of minority/majority women in both rural and urban settings; to Ieam how social services, NGOs and governmental policies are improving the lives of women; and to compare women in rural and urban societies in both China and the US. from a social justice/gender equity perspective. Thus, the project will involve the study of the changing status and role of women in the family, in agriculture, arts and crafts, and all sectors of the economy” (ID #43). Environment Focus on the natural environment and human impact on ecological systems (e.g., rainforest, climate change). “The basic goal of the seminar is to examine how the cultures of the indigenous people of Australia developed in response to the conditions of the physical environment, how this relationship with nature changed with colonialism, and how commercialization and tourism have affected both Aboriginal cultures and the Australian environment” (ID #21 ). None No clear theme “[T]his advanced Seminar will enhance and broaden their understanding of Russian culture as they observe, study, live in, and travel east of the Ural Mountains to Vladivostok” (ID #4). Other Additional themes Gender: “The Fulbright-Hays Group Seminar to that did not fit the China will afford participants the opportunity to learn coding categories about the current status of rural and urban, ethnic- minority and majority women in China and to better understand the areas of difference and commonality with women in the United States” (ID #43). Table 3.4.4 Continued Project directors. The second section of the coding scheme focuses on understanding background and expertise of the project director. “Project director” is defined as the leader of the GPA. In addition to leading the GPA, this person is usually the author of the GPA and listed as the primary investigator (PI) on the transmittal form. This category includes the project director’s disciplinary background, occupation, institution, gender, highest degree, previous GPA experience, and experience in host country. One hypothesis is that the project 79 director’s background shapes the OTLS included in professional development (i.e. GPA proposals). Targeted GPA participants. The third section focuses on characteristics of the targeted GPA participants. This category focuses on understanding who the project director has in mind when designing the proposal. This category includes five variables: 1) disciplinary background, 2) occupation, 3) institution, 4) cost to participate in the program, and 5) recruitment focus. Since this study examines proposals for GPA programs, it is not concemed with knowing who actually participated in the GPA. Instead, this category focuses on understanding the type of people project directors considered when designing the proposal. As stated in chapter two, because of program requirements, the target population must be either K-12 teachers, faculty at higher education institutions, upper-level students or other professionals involved in education. Still, GPAS vary in terms of who are the targeted participants. Some GPAS for example, focus on teachers from a particular discipline or subject area while others target a particular grade level (e.g., secondary or community college faculty) or affiliation (e.g., teachers from an Intermediate School District or study group such as the professional development group LATTICE (Linking All Types of Teachers to lntemational, Cross-Cultural Education) in the Lansing, Michigan area. Opportunities to learn. The fourth section, the most detailed and extensive, includes activities and experiences that offerOTLs. These may be formal or informal and intentional or unintentional. This study focuses on three types of opportunities to Ieam: Pre-departure OTLS, OTLS abroad, and post- 80 travel OTLS. Pre-departure OTLs include activities that take place in the US. before traveling to the host country such as orientations or group meetings, language study, homework and curriculum development. OTLS abroad involve activities, experiences and situations that occur during programming abroad. Each OTL consists of seven dimensions: 1) pedagogical approach; 2) subject; 3) locale; 4) instructional or resource personnel; 5) time (duration and time of day); 6) grouping arrangement; and 7) opportunities to interact with people from the host culture. Each of these seven dimensions are described briefly here. Pedagogical approach. “Pedagogical approach” concerns the instructional strategy utilized in each OTL. Different pedagogical approaches afford different kinds of opportunities for Ieaming. This dimension includes eighteen variables ranging from transmission-oriented approaches (e.g., lectures, media/film, site visits, appointments, technology training) to more experiential-oriented or participatory approaches (e.g., service-Ieaming, co-teaching, home stays). Subject. “Subject” concerns the overall subject matter focus of the activity and includes twenty-one categories: Arts (e.g., visual arts, crafts or folklore), education, history, contemporary society and culture, economics and business, politics and government, ethnicity, gender, technology, environment and agriculture, geography, project logistics, community or town, foreign language, religion, performing arts, the GPA project, curriculum, and other subjects not included in the coding scheme. Locale. “Locale” focuses on the context or location in which an activity takes place and includes: K-12 schools, higher education institutions, 81 businesses, farms, natural areas, restaurants, private homes, government offices, theaters, town or communities, NGO and civil society offices, historical and religious sites (e.g., tomb, cathedral, historical monument), museums (e.g., historical, cultural, art or other type of museum), and other locales not included in the coding scheme. Locales that were not specified were coded as “not specified.” Resource personnel. “Resource personnel” includes individuals who lead or serve as resources for a particular activity. This category includes: government officials, NGO staff, K-12 teachers and faculty from the host country, faculty from the US. assisting with the GPA program, community members (persons from the community not othenivise coded), the project director, current GPA participants (e.g., participants leading a workshop or giving a presentation), previous GPA participants, artists and other performers, host country resource personnel (e.g., translator, store owner, priest), students from the host country, and other resource personnel not included in the coding scheme. Time. “Time” is an important factor in shaping opportunities to Ieam as the same activity may look very different in two programs depending on the ways in which time is allocated. To deal with proposals that were not required to be precise about use of time each activity was coded for two aspects of time: 1) the time of day; and 2) duration. Each day (24 hours) was divided into 12 hours of “wake time” and 12 hours of “sleep time” in 4 hour periods (e.g., morning: 9 am - 1:00 pm, afternoon: 1:00 pm -5:00 pm, and evening: 5 pm - 9 pm). First, activities were coded for the time of day in which the activity took place (e.g., morning, 82 afternoon, evening). Next, activities were coded for the duration of the activity in hours. Exact times were used as much as possible when detailed itineraries were provided and estimated when the itinerary was not as detailed. Meals and sleep time were not coded unless they were described as having a specific purpose (e.g., meal or home stay with a family for the purpose of experiencing daily life in the host culture). When a meal was coded it was allocated one hour unless a time was specified. Home stay ovemights were given 12 hours (9:00 pm - 9:00 am). Grouping. The category “grouping” involves considerations about how to group participants during Ieaming opportunities. Activities were coded one of two ways: 1) whole group stays together such as a lecture or travel to a locale; or 2) whole group does not stay together. It was assumed that the whole group does not stay together for home stays and free time. Interaction with the host culture. “Interaction with the host culture” concerns the degree to which activities offer possibilities for participants to be immersed or to interact with people from the host culture. Activities were assigned one of three levels: "none, some” or “strong” interaction. Activities coded as “some” interaction offered limited opportunities for interaction and tended to be short in duration (e.g., meal with a family, meeting or discussion with community members). Those activities coded as “strong” interaction involved spending a substantial amount of time (more than a few hours) interacting with people (e.g., home stay, service Ieaming, spending a few days 83 co-teaching in a classroom). The codes ‘some’ and ‘strong’ were later combined into one code. Post-travel OTLS. Post-travel OTLS include activities that take place after returning to the US. and may include group meetings, curriculum development, and presentations as well as OTLS related to completing evaluation plans were included in this category. 3.5 Additional Sources of Data This study draws on three types of data. The first type of data includes a variety of documents (i.e. funded Fulbright-Hays GPA proposals and government documents). The second source of data is a conference roundtable discussion which included an invited panel of eight former GPA project leaders as well as audience members involved in leading GPAS. Data from the roundtable are helpful for understanding some of the issues and rationales involved in planning a GPA. A third source of data is an in-depth interview with a former GPA project leader. This interview provides insight into the underlying rationales and process involved in the planning of a GPA. Documents Documents provide the main source of data for this study and consist of several types. The first type is funded proposals for Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development GPAs to seven world regions. Proposals are written in response to an RFA administered by the ED. These documents are approximately 40 pages and address nine areas: 1) plan of operation; 2) key personnel; 3) budget; 4) evaluation plan; 5) resources abroad; 6) potential 84 impact; 7) relevance to institutional development; 8) address participants’ need for overseas experience; and 9) program priorities. GPA proposals are most often designed and written by the same person leading the GPA. In this study, proposals are seen as evidence of project directors’ visions about internationalization and how to organize cultural Ieaming. The second type of document includes the GPA request for applications (RFA) as well as other related documents. The RFA provides instructions for completing the GPA application package for the annual award competition and is approximately 90 pages. The RFA is important because it lays out the parameters for GPA projects in terms what is and what is not possible as well as the expectations required to be funded. The RFA (also referred to as “application package”) tends to include program specific instructions and forms (i.e., competition highlights, supplemental information, Federal Register Notice, Authorizing Legislation - Fulbright-Hays Act, and instructions and recommendations for completing the application). The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which is the codification of federal rules, provides another source of information and is relevant because it includes proposed and final changes to federal regulations (i.e., the GPA program and the broader Fulbright- Hays program) as well as selected public comment about changes to these regulations. These documents can be useful for identifying changes (or lack thereof) to Short-term GPAS over time. Other documents include congressional testimony and correspondence related to international education and the Fulbright-Hays Act and, while these data are limited because they do not 85 specifically address the GPA program they are nonetheless useful for describing the context of lntemational education in the US. at key times. Other Sources of Data Conference roundtable presentation. Another source of data is a conference roundtable presentation (a single three-hour session) at a national conference, the Title VI 50th Anniversary Conference in Washington, DC, March 2009. The panel was designed as a forum for GPA project directors and administrators to discuss issues and best practices for Short-term GPAS and was co-chaired by the GPA program officer and myself. Eight former GPA project directors from institutions across the US. were invited to participate in the roundtable. Each panelist was asked to contribute questions and issues to structure the three hour session. Five issues were identified: Budget and recruitment issues and challenges, preparation and planning, evaluation and assessment, implementation and follow-up, and collaboration with Colleges of Education. Approximately forty people, primarily from higher education, attended the session and participated in the discussion and were seated alongside the eight invited panelists in a large circle. I took notes of comments made during the session on a computer, which were later compiled into a document and circulated among the panelists for feedback. The final document was included in the conference proceedings on the conference website (see Appendix F for a summary of recommendations from the roundtable). Interviews. Interviews with a veteran GPA project director provide another source of data. Two interviews took place in the summer of 2005 and were part 86 of a pre-dissertation study of a GPA to Belize. Questions focused on understanding the decision-making involved and challenges of planning and organizing a GPA in two key areas: 1) the project director's goals for the GPA and the planning involved in submitting a GPA proposal; and 2) opportunities to Ieam while abroad. The first section was aimed at understanding how the project director conceptualized the GPA program including the goals and purposes of the GPA as well as her rationale for the organization of the program (e.g., pre- departure, OTLS abroad, post-travel OTLS, locales, her role, etc.). The second part focused on understanding the content of programming abroad and focused on specific OTLS in the publicized itinerary for recruitment. Human Subjects Approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Michigan State University prior to conducting the interviews (see Appendix G for the interview protocol). 3.6 Data Coding and Analysis Coding Procedures Conceptualization. The coding scheme was developed during the 2007- 2008 academic year and involved a series of steps based on recommendations by Neuendorf (2002) and Weber (1990).The first step involved developing the research question that guides this study and conceptualizing and developing the coding categories. This was an inductive process that involved reading a small set of sample data (10 proposals) and then developing categories from language and concepts used in these proposals. Four main core categories were developed: Overall characteristics, characteristics of the project director, 87 characteristics of the target population, and opportunities to Ieam (pre-departure, abroad, and post-travel). Each of these categories and variables are linked to the research question and goals of the study. Codebook development. The next step was to develop the coding scheme and codebook. The codebook is a document that describes how categories and variables are operationalized or defined so that multiple coders coding the same data would have the same results. Categories in the coding scheme were drawn from the categories and language widely used In proposals in the sample data. This way, categories and terminology in the coding scheme are drawn from project directors’ own language which lessens the issue of imposing the researchers categories, and thereby, increasing the validity of the study. Validity concerns the degree to which an instrument measures what it is intended to measure and the degree to which the study can be generalized to the larger population (Wrench et al, 2008). The codebook developed for this study consists of four components: the category and variable, the code, a definition, and an example. The coding scheme was tested on a small set of sample data and adjusted before it was piloted. Coder training and piloting. Next, the coding scheme was piloted with five coders with experience in educational research during the summer 2008. To increase the reliability and validity of the study, coders were informed about the goals for the study and definitions in the codebook. Coders were then trained in the rules and procedures for coding and then independently coded sample data. Coding involved reading the proposal through twice and writing responses 88 directly on the coding form. The first three sections of the coding scheme (overall characteristics, project directors and target population) were fairly straightfonrvard and followed this process. The fourth section of the coding scheme (opportunities to Ieam abroad) however, was more complex and involved some additional steps. This part of the coding scheme required coding each OTL in the itinerary for seven dimensions: 1) pedagogical approach, 2) subject of the activity, 3) context or locale, 4) resource personnel, 5) time (hours and time of day), 6) grouping arrangement, and 7) interaction with the host culture. Piloting and revising. After the first coding session, the coding scheme was revised based on feedback from coders and piloted again (with different proposals each time) until there was high inter-coder agreement. These sessions were aimed at testing and refining the coding scheme with the goal of achieving intercoder reliability. The coding scheme was revised at least three times and the final coding scheme was then used to code the full set of data. Because of time and resources, it was not possible to have multiple coders continue to code after the pilot. Since I was the only coder, l coded each proposal at least twice to be sure that my coding was consistent. Rifle, Lacy, 8 Fico (2005) suggest that in cases such as this where there is one coder a way of increasing reliability is to code the same data at two different points in the coding process and then compare the results to assess reliability. This was done for the majority of the sample (all but the proposals that were coded in Washington, DC); proposals were coded twice as a reliability measure. Codes were recorded directly on the coding form, as were page numbers and excerpts for text I thought I might want 89 to return to later. Ideally, with more resources and time, multiple coders would have also been involved in coding these data. Throughout this process, my adviser and dissertation director, John Schwille reviewed the process as I refined the approach. Tabulation. The last step involved entering data into databases using Microsoft Excel and SPSS and developing several types of matrices. These matrices were aimed at providing a broad overview of the overall characteristics of proposals in the sample as well as an in-depth view of the content of each proposal’s itinerary during programming abroad. This system made it possible to refer back to specific days and OTLS in GPA proposals later on. Data Analysis Initially, graphs and tables were created to understand how variables were related and to plan final analysis. Then a correlation matrix was created using SPSS with variables from the content analysis. The purpose of the correlation matrix was to show which variables clustered or “hung” together. This helped identify which of the coded variables would be most useful to include in a component analysis. The results suggested that 25 variables (one of these, total immersion, was later removed because it overlapped with other variables) were most important. A Principal Component Analysis was then conducted using first 25, then a reduced set of 13 variables. This type of analysis can be helpful for identifying underlying patterns within the data. It is also a way of reducing data or the “orderly simplification of a larger number of intercorrelated measures to a few representative components or constructs (Ho, 2006).” A Principal Component 90 Analysis (PCA) with orthogonal (uncorrelated) rotation was chosen as the method of extraction since the main goal was data reduction. The results of the analysis were then used to identify specific proposals which were examined qualitatively. Excerpts from these proposals were pulled out to illustrate and expand on findings from the component analysis. These results are included in Appendix E and discussed in chapter 5. 3.7 Limitations There are limitations to this study, one has to do with issues related to coding, and a second which concerns the study’s focus. First among the coding issues is whether to use human coders or computer coding. Human coding has a number of limitations, the most important of which include: 1) the possibility for error (e.g., coding, tabulation etc), time and resources needed as coding can be time consuming and tiring, 3) human coding requires extensive training Of coders and re-testing of the instrumentation, and 4) finding enough competent coders may be challenging as was the case for this study. This study used human coders and alck of time and resources were definite challenges and limitations for the study. While five coders were involved in validating the coding scheme, only one coder (the researcher) coded the full data set. This was less than ideal. A second, related issue involves the length and complexity of the coding scheme. This study’s concern with understanding both the range and nature of Short-term GPAS - their breadth and depth (i.e. OTLS abroad) necessitated a coding scheme that was more lengthy and complicated than might be desired. Riffe, Lacy and Fico (1998) suggest for example, that length and conceptual 91 complexity may reduce the reliability of the coding scheme. Categories that are conceptually complex require some degree of interpretation by the coder, making it more difficult to achieve intercoder reliability. While most of the categories in the first three sections of the coding scheme (overall characteristics, project directors and target population) deal with manifest content (e.g., number of participants, stated purposes, gender), there are some categories that are conceptually complex and focus on inferring the latent content of projects (e.g., conceptualization of internationalization). Additionally, the complexity of coding OTLs abroad in the fourth section of the coding scheme (i.e. coding each OTL each day for seven dimensions) was challenging and tiring for coders. A second limitation concerns this study’s focus on the intended curriculum. While studying the intended curriculum can make some things possible to understand that might otherwise be difficult, it can also be limiting. For example, focusing on the intended curriculum can help us better understand the formal goals and purposes, the underlying rationale for a professional development OTL or program such as GPAS. However, such a focus does limit the claims that the study can make. This study cannot, for example, examine or make claims about what occurs during the professional development program (the enacted or implemented curriculum). Nor can it make claims about the attained curriculum and what is Ieamed (Schmidt et. al, 1996). 3.8 Summary In this chapter the methodology of the study was presented. The primary goal of the study is to understand how project leaders conceptualize 92 internationalization and related professional development in situ. A mixed methods design was chosen because it offers the possibility for showing broad numerical trends as well as more detailed and in-depth information by combining quantitative and qualitative approaches. These approaches included a content analysis (quantitative and qualitative) and component analysis, the results of which are discussed in chapters 4 and 5. 93 CHAPTER 4: CHARACTERISTICS OF GPA PROPOSALS In this chapter, the characteristics of Short-term GPA proposals are presented. This chapter begins with an overview of the main characteristics and features of Short term GPA proposals. Next, the opportunities to Ieam (OTLS) afforded by proposals (before, during and after traveling abroad) are discussed. Following this is a description of the sample’s plans for evaluation and dissemination. 4.1 Overview This chapter describes the range and nature of opportunities to learn (OTLS) that are included in funded GPA projects, in particular, Short-term Seminars and Curriculum Development Projects (Short-term GPAS). This study is based on a target population of 172 funded GPA projects over a five year time period (2003-2007) for five world regions. From this, a stratified random sample of 55 GPA proposals (one third the population) was drawn and a content analysis was conducted. Building on the results of the content analysis, this chapter describes the main findings and characteristics of Short-term GPAS. 4.2 Purpose and Rationale The proposals described here can be seen as part of a discourse about internationalization. They represent different purposes and visions about what is important to Ieam about a country/culture and the world, and how such Ieaming should happen. The proposals in this study were all funded by the ED and are the product of a negotiation between the visions of the US. Congress which 94 funds the GPA proposal, the visions of ED which administers the proposal, the visions of the project directors/authors of GPAs and their institutions, and the needs and visions of educators for whom they are written. The proposals in the sample included a range of purposes and rationales, from curriculum development, developing language skills and global competencies, to breaking down stereotypes. Most proposals included multiple purposes. Curricular development or change was mentioned most frequently in GPAs as a rationale for the proposal. More than 85% of the GPAs cited curricular development or curricular change as a one of the main purposes of the proposal. GPAs designed for higher education faculty tended to emphasize the development of new courses and majors as the examples below illustrate. Because of the interdisciplinary nature of the seminar, faculty who teach sociology, political science, history, world geography, art, language studies, communication, education, and philosophy will be able to relate this seminar to their course...A second, long-term benefit is curriculum reform through the possible addition of individual courses, alteration of general education requirements, and construction of new languages and area studies majors. It can be expected that several faculty may propose new courses in the area of China or East Asia. Furthermore, general education requirements may be altered. [The GPA'S purpose is to]...develop new courses and expand existing courses in order to bring Islamic studies curricula to tertiary level institutions, thus providing complementary academic content to CERIS members’ recently expanded Arabic language course offerings. Many GPAs designed for K-12 teachers emphasized developing cross-cultural attitudes and skills (global competencies) and the integration of lntemational 95 perspectives into existing curricula usually through the development of one or a few lessons or units. The purpose of the proposed seminar is to provide lntemational substance to basic curriculum for teachers at all levels in Kansas schools and to promote the internationalization of Junior Colleges in the area. A large group of GPAS cited institutional linkages as one of the main purposes of the proposal. Close to half of the sample (42%) saw the GPA as a way to develop or expand relationships and/or programs between the host country and home institution/organization: “This project helps Indiana increase lntemational content in the K-12 curriculum while providing long-term linkages to university faculty at Indiana State University.” Several GPAs were designed as preparatory trips for new student study abroad or faculty/student exchange programs. Language was mentioned as a purpose in a little less than a third of the GPAs. Such proposals tended to focus on practicing foreign language teachers and the goal of improving existing language skills, as opposed to developing new ones. Of these, several GPAs targeted participants with a mix of beginning and advanced language skills and offered different language tracks. This emphasis on language is illustrated in two GPAs below. The purpose of this grant application is to provide better-trained elementary, middle, and secondary Spanish and area studies teachers. As a result of the grant, teachers will improve their language proficiency, develop pedagogical knowledge, and engage with an lntemational socio- cultural environment with which they are not familiar. The measurable benchmarks include: 1) improve fluency in Spanish by a minimum of one level, 2) improve written Spanish by a minimum of one level, 3) improve listening comprehension in Spanish by a minimum of one level, 4) gain knowledge of the history and culture of Paraguay, 5) observe methodologies of teachers in Paraguay, and 6) create lesson plans/curricula to use in K-12 Spanish and area studies classes. ...this proposed study abroad program is designed for practicing teachers who are currently teaching Chinese at K-12 schools in the United States. The overall purpose of the program is to provide American educators, both native and non-native speakers of Chinese, an opportunity to (a) strengthen their Chinese language facility, (b) expand their pedagogical 96 knowledge of teaching the language and culture of a changing China, (0) develop linkages with educators in China, and (d) acquire instructional resources including artifacts, books, and educational multimedia materials. A number of GPAs were seen by project directors as a tool for reducing stereotypes and misconceptions about the developing world or minority groups. This was the case for almost 20% of the GPAs. Project directors cited examples of misconceptions promoted by popular films and textbooks. 4.3 Showing students how to teach South Africa, in particular, and Africa, in general, will underscore the importance of broadening their curricula to reflect the perspective of people who inhabit the less developed countries of the world including those in Africa. It is hoped that this approach would add a truly multicultural perspective to the curriculum that transcends the present preoccupation with what social studies experts have termed the three “F’s” approach to teaching diversity, namely, foods, festivals, and famous people. The southern Indian state of Tamilnadu has been chosen as the site for this project because it provides a necessary antitheseis to the dominant K- 12 textbook presentations of India which tend to be largely one- dimensional and oriented to a classical view of India, with an emphasis on North India, Hindu religion, mythology, and poverty. Disciplines and Themes GPA proposals tend to focus on three main disciplinary areas: interdisciplinary, arts and humanities, and language. Most GPAs in the sample were interdisciplinary and focused on society and culture (see Figure 4.3.1). About 15% of the sample focused on the arts/humanities and 7% focused on language. When looking across world regions, interdisciplinary GPAs in the sample were fairly evenly distributed. 97 4% 4% 11% 49% DISCIPLINARY FOCUS | I! I Language/Arts8Humanities E lnterdisciplinary-Ianguage | ‘ I Interdisciplinary-culture E lnterdisciplinary-economic : fl lnterdisciplinarv-oolitical I Interdisciplinary-education f ' Interdisciplinary-geography Figure 4.3. 1. Distribution of GPA proposals by disciplinary focus (n = 55). Proposals focusing on the arts and humanities, and language were not as evenly distributed over world regions, and concentrated for the most part on Asia, Latin America and the Middle East (see Table 4.3.1). The majority of GPAs were thematic, in that there was a central theme or topic around which activities were organized. GPAs focused on a wide range of themes including education, inequity, environment, ethnicity, gender, globalization, childhood, religion, 98 performing arts, social institutions, democracy. The top theme was ethnicity and a little more than a third of the sample focused on this topic. Table 4.3.1.0verrview of distribution of GPA proposals by disciplinary focus and world region (n = 55). WORLD REGION DISCIPLINARY FOCUS Middle East 8 N Africa 06 .9 an (I) 3 0: America Interdisciplinary (IDS) 13 14 5 9 2 43 78% Language, Arts - - O 8 Humanities 4 5 3 12 22 /o Total 1 3 18 5 14 5 55 100 4.4 Project Directors The project directors/authors play an important role in shaping the kinds of opportunities to Ieam that are afforded in GPAs. While proposals respond to parameters set by the RFA for what is fundable, project directors/authors make choices about which opportunities to learn will or will not be included in the proposal. These choices reflect project director/author‘s beliefs and visions about learning. When looking at the characteristics of project directors/authors in the sample, they tended to be faculty members at colleges or universities with PhDs from a wide range of disciplines including: social sciences, foreign language, 99 arts and humanities, business and economics, education, communication, criminal justice, music and health) (see Table 4.4.1 ). Table 4.4.1. Characteristics of project directors in the sample (n = 55). OCCUPATION DEGREE GENDER COUNTRY GPA EXPERT EXPERTISE Disciplinary Focus > 2 3 U (U LI. 2' C D Arts/Human. &Foreign Lang. 15 4 15 4 10 9 13 6 6 13 19 Social Science 25 2 22 5 13 9 18 3 15 12 27 8 Education Pl°fess'°”a' 6 1 6 1 4 3 6 1 3 4 7 fields Not specified (2) 2 - - 2 2 - - 2 2 - 2 Total 48 7 43 12 34 21 37 18 26 29 55 °/o Total 87 13 78 22 62 38 67 33 47 53 The majority of project directors had backgrounds in the social sciences and foreign language, which is to be expected given the proposal’s focus on the social sciences, arts/humanities and foreign languages. In terms of gender, there were close to twice as many male project directors as female project directors in the sample. Most male project directors had backgrounds in the social sciences while most females had backgrounds in foreign language. 100 When looking at prior experience leading GPAs, the sample was fairly evenly split between novice and veteran GPA leaders (see Table 4.4.2). Table 4.4.2: Expertise of project directors (n = 55). HOST COUNTRY GPA EXPERTISE EXPERTISE c: .9 U) m o: 32 h 0 3 More than Lessthan Specmed Specmed Not Not Africa 5 - 5 - - 3 Asia 9 1 3 2 2 10 Russia 8 E. Europe - 3 - 2 4 - 1 Latin America - 8 - 6 3 3 8 North Africa 8 Middle East 1 2 - 2 2 - A little more than half of project directors had no prior experience leading GPAs. Of the project directors who did have experience, the majority of had led two or more GPAs in the past. Interestingly, close to one third of project directors in the sample appeared to have had no prior experience in the host country - that is, it was not mentioned in their GPA proposal. The remaining project directors were native of the country (16%), or had spent a year or more (49%) in the host country. 101 4.5 Participants Most GPAs in the sample were designed for K-12 teachers (40% of total) or higher education faculty (38% of total) in the social sciences, arts and humanities. A few were designed for a combination of K-12 teachers, higher education faculty, graduate students, and pre-service teachers. Recruitment efforts most often focused at the state-level. The majority of GPAs required participants to pay part of the cost of the GPA. About 5% of the GPAs required $2,000 or more, 35% of proposals required between $500-$1,000; 21% of proposals required $500 or less, and 38% of GPAs were free to participants. There was wide agreement among project directors who participated in the GPA Roundtable panel at the Title VI 50th Anniversary conference that requiring participants to pay part of the costs encourages more serious Ieamers, and completion of curriculum projects after returning (see Appendix F for these recommendations). 4.6 Opportunities to Learn (OTL) Opportunities to Ieam include experiences and situations that are part of the GPA program and may be intended or incidental potential Ieaming opportunities. Those described here concern OTLs that occur pre-departure, during programming abroad, and after returning to the US. Pre-departure OTLs Pre-departure activities include activities and opportunities designed to prepare participants for traveling and Ieaming abroad. Pre-departure activities 102 are not a required component of the short-term GPA proposal and tend to be minimal. This is in part because the Fulbright-Hays GPA grant stipulates that all GPA funds must be spent in the host country so funds can not, for example, support project-related expenses that take place in the US. (e.g., pre-trip visits and planning, pre-departure orientation and post-trip activities or follow-up support). While recommended by ED, pre-departure activities are optional and project directors must find resources and time to fund such activities. All but one of the GPAs in the sample included at least one formal pre- departure preparation session for participants, most often described as an “orientation.” Of these, 17% included five or more orientation sessions. Close to one third included three to four orientation sessions and half included one to two orientation sessions. The one GPA that did not include pre-departure orientation used a Iistserv as a forum for sharing information among participants before departure. In addition to orientations, a few GPAS (3 %) were designed around semester-long courses offered for graduate credit and included extensive pre- departure preparation and post-trip follow-up after returning to the US. As Figure 4.6.1 illustrates, pre-departure preparation tended to take six main forms: lectures and discussions, curriculum development work, language training and study, independent work (e.g., independent readings and film viewings), online communication/networking with people in the host country, and technology training. Lectures, curriculum development and language study accounted for the top three pre—departure activities in the sample. 103 # GPA Proposals ,6" Activity Figure 4.6. 1. Pre-departure opportunities to learn in sample (n = 55). Despite being “optional,” most if not all GPA proposals acknowledged the importance of preparatory activities for participants well before traveling abroad. For example, one project director remarked that “the domestic components of the proposed seminar are considered essential pieces to give the participants the crucial knowledge base, cross-cultural orientation, and structured format necessary to maximize the educational benefits of the international experience.” Lectures and Discussions. Lectures and discussions are a key part of all of orientation sessions. They tend to focus on broad topics such as history, language, society and culture, politics and government, economics, and cultural 104 sensitivity, most often by university or college area studies experts from or working in the host country. Some proposals included opportunities for participants to interact with persons from the host country (lntemational graduate students, faculty, visiting scholars, and community members). A few GPAs also included presentations by GPA alumni/retumees from previous GPAs. Curriculum Development. Curriculum development was included in all GPA projects in the sample. Each GPA required participants to develop some type of curriculum project (e.g., website, lessons, modules or units) from the GPA experience. There were differences however, in when this curriculum development began. Half of the projects were structured in such a way that curriculum planning began before traveling abroad and most often took place during orientation. For the remaining projects, curriculum development began sometime during programming abroad or after returning to the US. Language Study. Language study was included in 42% of the pre- departure activities In the sample. Language study was most often included in orientation sessions and ranged from a few lessons in very basic “survival” vocabulary and expressions to longer, intensive language study with tapes and coursework. One project director of three funded GPAs said language study (at any level) was an important component of her GPA projects. Other Activities. Other pre-departure activities included independent work (homework), technology training, and online networking. Close to a quarter (21%) of the projects included some type of independent activity in their proposals. Independent work was defined as activities and assignments that participants 105 were responsible for completing on their own, outside of the orientation session(s), before departure. These most often included readings, videos/DVDs and/or curriculum development. A small percentage of GPAs (7%) included technology training as part of orientation sessions. Technology training focused primarily on website development, PowerPoint, image editing and using a digital camera to assist with curriculum development. Online communication forums were used by 3% of the GPAs in the sample. These forums were aimed at connecting participants in advance with teachers and other individuals they would meet when abroad. OTLs Abroad The average GPA proposal includes close to 380 hours of programming during the four to six week session (excluding meals and sleeping time) devoted to a wide range of opportunities to Ieam. This averages out to about 75 hours a week of programming when one counts weekends or only 10 hours a day. While there are many similarities across GPA proposals, there are important differences which afford a variety of opportunities to Ieam. This section examines these similarities and differences with particular attention to pedagogical approach, subject or focus of OTLs, and contexts for Ieaming. As Figure 4.6.2 and Table 4.6.1 illustrate, a fairly wide range of activities and approaches were used in designing opportunities to Ieam abroad. More than half of the GPAs included a combination of free time, site visits, travel, lectures, meetings, curriculum development, and debriefing sessions. Of these, the biggest chunk of time was devoted to free time or unplanned activities. 106 Free Time. There was much variation in the amount of free time hours that were included in GPA proposals in the sample. These ranged from 55-296 hours of free time or 17-55% of total time abroad. In designing their proposals, a number of project directors explained that they intentionally built in free time and tried to avoid a “jam-packed itinerary.” According to a number of GPA projects directors who participated in the GPA Roundtable panel this free time is necessary to allow participants time to explore and talk with other participants, to decompress and process the day's experiences. (see Appendix H). Figure 4.6. 2. Percent of proposals with OTLS by pedagogical approach (n=55). 100 100 100 ,- ----»—-—-—~r-- ____,,.__-___,,,___,-,-,_,_,-__-_____-__--_______L_ 90 -1 I 80 I 76 . I “m‘IIIIM 8 60 I 3 IIIII“ E 50' 45‘44‘44 < IIIII gM’IIIIIIIIIS’fi-e’s gw IIIIIIIIIII27 20 20 IIIIIIIIIIIIII"9 10 l: O L. .... __ - w _. - Swerve -.o\e'~s~\6-®P.q $9 $0 “(6 00“)" {$0 00 ®®$§o \é'b 0400 éQ)6 0&0 33’ ab‘ («’00 (5&0 $08“ 9“ «‘2’ 6% \’ s8 6‘9 o‘9 4” 4° 3“} «9” 0‘“ 42% T 0‘“ 6‘ 85‘ Q’ <5 9" ‘2‘ 8° \o°§ ‘2‘ 6“ 6‘ g Y9 6" 9° <9") 0° 0 e) . «\f‘ s 6‘ \C) ‘8’ #0 «0 s“ 06° t“ Pedagogical Approach 107 Table 4.6.1. Average hours OTLs by pedagogical approach (n = 55). PEDAGOGICAL TOTAL AVE. PEDAGOGICAL TOTAL AVE. APPROACH HOURS APPROACH HOURS Site visit 82.6 Attend cultural event 3.1 Free time 151.8 Language study 11.3 Travel time 25.3 Home stay 31.5 Lecture 26.5 Meal 2.0 Seminar/workshop 15.6 Media 0.7 Curriculum dev. 10.5 Field experience 5.2 Debrief/group mtg. 7.6 Technology training 1.1 Evaluation 3.3 Homework 0.1 Appt. with officials. 4.3 Site Visits. Like free time, all GPAS included some amount of site visits. Site visits most often involved traveling to historical or religious sites (see Figure 4.6.3 and Table 4.6.2). Other common destinations included visits to towns or cities, non-govemmental organizations (NGOs), and schools. These visits ranged from being highly structured (e.g., guided tour) to relatiVely unstructured opportunities where participants were expected to explore a site on their own. In the majority of proposals, site visits were coordinated with lectures (presentations) and other activities. There was usually a theme for the day around which activities were coordinated. If the morning was spent in a presentation on the educational system of a country then the afternoon most often included a site visit to a school. A few GPAs were designed in such a way that there were weekly themes (e.g., education or history) around which daily activities were coordinated for the week. In the sample, site visits accounted for between 10-48% of time abroad. Travel time. Travel within country accounted for a much smaller percent of total program time. While all but six GPAs involved some amount of traveling, 108 the average proposal spent only 7% of the program traveling. But some GPAS were designed in such a way that the group was traveling and moving throughout the time abroad. In one GPA for example, 27% of the proposal was devoted to travel to different locales. Other GPAS were designed around a home base where the group spent the bulk of time with trips to nearby locales in the afternoon or weekends. 100-98 901 I 84 80* III 71 "’ llll _ 60 8 60 5858 O .. I | I | | I e 50 a | | | l I l | | g 40~ (D °‘° Illlllll °l||llll| ll °l|||ll|l II 0 \-\.c +\ O\90\ \\\..o\ \(3’ ‘00 <5" godbqu‘ $00600 \0 089. 00% 0‘Q QGOQO‘QQQ’D‘QOQOQQK? C}\©\é‘ 0‘00 o- x .60 3" 9° \o‘(\ e‘ “\o .{0 K") {<0 (9 6‘9“ 6‘" T $0? ‘2‘?) ° Context Figure 4.6. 3. Percent of proposals with OTLS by locale (n = 55). 109 Table 4.6.2. Average hours of OTLs by locale (n = 55). CONTEXT TOTAL AVE. CONTEXT TOTAL AVE. (LOCALE) HOURS (LOCALE) HOURS Higher ed. inst 52.5 Business 2.7 City tour 15.0 . Private Home 46.3 Historical Site 21.3 Cultural Center 2.7 Museum 8.9 Farm 1 .4 Park 7.7 Theatre 2.2 K-12 school 9.7 Hotel 1.6 NGO 7.0 Health Facility 0.3 Gov't office 4.3 Industrial site 5.0 Market 2.7 Restaurant 0.4 Lectures and presentations. All GPAs included activities which focused on the presentation of content (e.g., lectures, presentations, seminars, workshops) about the country. These tended to focus on a wide range of interdisciplinary topics including history, government and politics, society and culture, and took place most often in higher education institutions (e.g., colleges, universities or institutes). Close to 90% of the GPAs included lectures or formal presentations most often led by university faculty. More than 75% of the GPAs included seminars or workshops which involved more active Ieaming Opportunities than in lectures. Subject. OTLs tended to focus on a variety of subjects or topics (see Figure 4.6.4 and Table 4.6.3). These included: city or country overviews (89%), society/culture and education (87%), the arts (85%) which includes performing arts as well as fine arts, history (81%), politics and government (76%), religion (71%), and the environment (69%). ClOse to 70% of the proposals included activities that focused on evaluating the GPA project and curriculum development. Language was the focus of less than half of the GPA proposals. 110 82 71 % 7o « 69 69 67 m am IIIIII ° IIIIIIIIII E < 50« a IIIIIIIII c2 40 A 33 t IIIIIIIIII swwme 30 I 24 20 m‘IIIIIIIIII IIIIII mIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII99771 o , . . .~“\° 63\°&,5@°«9®é'68.&&‘\'0 ,6‘ Q§Q§$ é)gigoggégz§egg$§d¢1§§d§é§é§nf§é$é§u§ggg§§ig 0‘. $04? 6‘" Q‘ 8°qu $9“ 6‘“ O <2 00°" \9 f 66‘“ 9 4° @100 <2° 9° 0 0 0 go « Subject Figure 4.6.4. Overview of subject focus of proposals (n = 55). Table 4.6.3. Average hours of OTLs by subject (n = 55). SUBJECT TOTALAVE. SUBJECT TOTALAVE. HOURS HOURS City Overview 11.2 Literature 2.2 Society & Culture 41.1 Health 1.6 Education 16.4 Gender 2.4 Arts 9.7 Ethnicity 2.9 History 18.1 Geography 2.6 Politics & Gov’t 9.5 Logistics 0.8 Religion 8.4 Development 1 .4 Environment 9.7 Technology 1.4 GPA Project 10.2 Media 0.4 Curriculum 11.5 Poverty 0.3 Language 12.8 Tourism 0.4 111 Grouping arrangement. OTLs abroad more often than not, included the whole group (i.e., lectures, site visits and travel) as opposed to OTLs in which participants were on their own or in other groupings. A few GPAs designed activities that involved pairs or small group but this was the exception. When there were activities for which participants did not stay together in a group and were independent, these activities tended to be more immersion-focused activities and included home stays, meals with families, and community engagement activities (i.e., co-teaching and job shadowing). This was Opposed to activities in which the group was together and isolated from the host culture such as in lectures and group travel (not including public transportation). Post-travel OTLs As with pre-departure activities, post-trip activities are not a required element of the proposal and are not funded by the GPA award. Because of this, post-trip activities tend to be minimal. Some GPAs however, find other resources for post-trip activities and creative ways of providing follow-up support. GPAs tend to include at least one post-trip group meeting which participants are expected to attend. Most GPAs included one or two meetings (67% of the sample) and small number (12%) included three to five meetings. These meetings most often focused on debriefing, evaluation and sometimes presentations of curricular projects by participants. In a few GPAs, post-trip meetings were designed as curriculum development workshops where participants worked with curriculum specialists or faculty. Most GPAs (76%) were 112 designed in such a way participants would complete their curriculum projects in the U.S., after the GPA. In terms of follow-up support for teachers after returning to the US, few GPAs described specific ways of supporting participants after the trip and most did not offer anything beyond a group debriefing session. However, two GPAs stood out because they were designed to provide extensive follow-up support to teachers. Evaluation. The evaluation plan is one of nine components reviewers consider during the review process and because of this all GPA projects in the sample include some form of evaluation. Evaluation plans ranged from the very detailed to a few questions. Figure 4.6.5 shows the range of types of evaluation included in the sample. Over half of the proposals (52%) administered surveys or questionnaires during or after the GPA and these were often Open-ended. Written reports/reflections or course papers, and group meetings were included in close to half of the sample. Roughly 20% of the sample said curriculum or other curricular products would be the primary form of evaluation. A small number of GPAs assessed changes in language proficiency. 113 100 - 80* 60~ 40* % GPA Proposals 20* Evaluation Type Figure 4.6. 5. Overview Of evaluation types included in sample (n = 55). Dissemination. The majority of GPAs in the sample described a final product that would be developed out of the GPA for dissemination to the public (see Figure 4.6.6). Some GPAs decided in advance what the product would be and others left the final product to the discretion of participants. Close to all of the GPAs (93%) indicated that participants would develop some type of curricular product (e.g., lesson, online module, or unit) to be disseminated to local teachers or the general public. In more than half of the 114 GPAs participants were expected to give at least one presentation related to the GPA at a conference or workshop, school or community. About a quarter of the GPAs planned to develop either a group website or individual website from the GPA. A small number of GPAs had participants create other types of final products, including a final report, journal, ethnography, artifact trunk and video. 100 l_93 " 1‘ I— l l l % GPA Proposals Final Product Figure 4.6. 6. Overview of evaluation types included in sample (n = 55). 115 4.7 Summary In this study, GPA proposals represent different purposes and visions about what is important to Ieam about a culture or society and how Ieaming should happen. Proposals in the sample describe a number of purposes that ranged from curriculum development, developing language skills and global competencies to breaking down stereotypes and developing institutional relationships. When looking at the focus of GPA proposals in the sample, not surprisingly, proposals tended to focus on three disciplinary areas: language, arts and humanities, and social science. Interestingly, most proposals had an interdisciplinary focus that emphasized aspects of culture. Project directors are hypothesized as having an important influence on how professional development (i.e. GPAs) are organized and stmctured. Their visions about how people Ieam and what is important to Ieam about a culture or society shapes the kinds of opportunities to Ieam that are made available to participants. In this study, project directors tended to be faculty in higher education in the social sciences and foreign language, with PhDs and evenly split by gender. Close to two thirds of the project directors had prior experience in the host country (at least one year), and less than half (47%) had prior experience leading GPAs. In terms of participants, most GPAs in the sample targeted K-12 teachers or higher education faculty from within a specific state (versus nationally) and fewer proposals included a combination of these groups. The majority of 116 proposals required participants to pay part of the cost of the GPA program (between $500-1,000 was most common). OTLs occurred before, during and after travel to the host country. The majority of GPAs included at least one pre-departure session and this tended to include a combination of lectures and discussions (98 % of the sample or 54 proposals included these OTLs), curriculum development (51% or 28 proposals), independent work (42% or 23 proposals), language skills (20% or 16 proposals), technology training (13% or 7 proposals), online networking (5% or 3 proposals). In terms of OTLs during programming abroad, all proposals included some amount of time devoted to site visits and free time. In addition, most proposals (more than 50%) included travel time, lectures, curriculum development, group debriefing, and evaluation. Less than half of the sample included appointments or meetings, attending cultural events as an audience member, language study, home stays and meals with people from the host culture, and community engagement opportunities. Far fewer (about 10% of the proposals) included technology training and independent work (homework) while abroad. Post-travel OTLs tended to be minimal for proposals in the sample. Of those that did include post-travel OTLs, these tended to include a post-travel meeting to evaluate the project or report on curriculum projects. Very few included long-term follow-up support for teachers or other networks for staying connected and supporting each other after the GPA ended. 117 CHAPTER 5: LOOKING FOR PATTERNS AND RELATIONSHIPS IN GPA OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN This chapter focuses on identifying patterns and relationships in GPA proposals. This chapter begins with a description of the process used to identify underlying structures and relationships in OTLs. Two major patterns were identified focusing on language/immersion and curricular/academic demands. 5.1 Identifying Patterns and Relationships To look for patterns in GPAs I selected variables that seemed most important for characterizing OTLs. These variables were chosen because they represent key characteristics and concepts. By examining correlations, it was possible to see that many of these variables did seem to form patterns that were further analyzed using a principal component analysis (PCA). This section describes the processes involved in preparing for and conducting the component analysis. Results are presented and organized around two organizing components or patterns which are further discussed in more qualitative detail in the next chapter. Data Preparation: Correlation Matrix The content analysis resulted in over one hundred quantitative variables — too many variables to be useful — so these were narrowed down to 24 variables that represented important concepts in the coding scheme and research question. These variables included: variables representing overall characteristics of GPA proposals such as the world regions in which the GPA will 118 take place (Asia, Africa and Latin America); disciplinary focus (language and arts/humanities); number of different locales/ovemights in different places, average number of locales, and total time abroad; offered for graduate course credit or not; itinerary detail; characteristics of the project director (e.g. host country expertise); pre-departure OTLs (e.g. independent work outside orientations), OTLs abroad (e.g. language study, home stays, community engagement, meals with a purpose, lectures, site visits, travel time, free time, debriefing, participant evaluation, and curriculum development), and evaluation (e.g. evaluation of language skills, evaluation of curriculum project). To make sense of these, a correlation matrix was computed with these 24 variables. The purpose of this was to see which variables were most highly correlated and whether they were consistent with what might be expected in terms of patterns. The correlation matrix produced 46 statistically significant Pearson Product Moment correlations. Of these correlations, 24 were statistically significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) with 22 more significant at 0.01. For example, home stays and total time abroad have a value of 0.817 which means that there is a strong relationship between the length of time abroad and the amount of time devoted to home stays (see Appendix G). Another correlation to be noted is between the number of locales (operationalized as the average number of ovemights in different places while abroad) and language study, which is -0.455, a negative correlation. This indicates that there is a negative relationship between the number of different locales and the amount of time devoted to language study while abroad. That is, 119 the more hours devoted to language study, the fewer locales proposals tend to have. As this table illustrates, relatively strong correlations were between total time abroad and overall immersion (0.757), total time abroad and home stay (0.758), language study and evaluation of language skills (0.762), average locales and language study (0442), average locales and home stays (-0.332). This process was repeated with fewer variables in part, because some variables overlapped in an artifactual way (i.e. total time in immersion OTLs and time in home stays) and also because it is recommended that the number of variables used in a component analysis be about one fifth the sample size (Gorsuch 1983; Hatcher 1994, and Ho 2006; Nunnally, 1978). A second correlation matrix was then calculated with 13 variables: itinerary detail, language study, language evaluation, home stay, site visit, travel time, locale (ovemights in different places), course credit, pre-departure independent work, lecture, free time, curriculum development curriculum, and curriculum evaluation. The results of this correlation matrix produced 18 statistically significant correlations and eight of these were significant at 0.01 level and 10 were significant at the 0.05 level (see Table 5.1.1). Of these, the highest correlations were between language study and the evaluation of language skills (0.775) and home stay and language study (0.590). Eleven moderate correlations were produced, including: curriculum development and course credit (0.325), language evaluation and itinerary detail (0.309), home stays and language evaluation (0.383), locales and site visits (0.368), and locales and travel time (0.419). There were a number of negative correlations between: language evaluation and site 120 '|BA3 man has euro” w Aea awn NAN- emu 80.1 etntoe mom 'dep-eJ mNm. IIIPOJQ esmo .. coo-l oomr 0;. no». Eh: v cmmr mer _. on»: _. no». emu (one: IISIA 93! w '|BI\3 eBenbue') .28 5 9m _o>c. mod on. .m 2.3.0.36 9.0.8.950 now. mac: can: can: can. NNN. mun. mam. llpms efienBue ..c>m 6an >00 0:50 OE... 09.“. 2309.. £25 9.72“. «.020 3500 3.30.. OE... .622... go; 8.0 >50. cEc... ._a>m cacao—3.. >230 092.65.. :82. E825. cow—22.30 “3190 Mmum x5e: 5.5.2.60 .8389, a: 5.522 5:29:00 .5.» 2.3 121 visits (-0.376), and language evaluation and number of locales (-0.374); language study and site visits (-0.356), language study and travel time (-0.386), and language study and number of locales (0455); travel time and home stay (-0.324); lecture and site visits (-0.266); and curriculum development and free time (-0.277). Half (9) of these correlations involved language and suggests that proposals with language study tend to include the evaluation of language skills in their evaluation plans, have home stays, spend less time on site visits and traveling. This suggests that there may be a relationship between the amount of time devoted to site visits, traveling and the number of different locales (ovemights in different places). Principal Component Analysis The next step involved an exploratory analysis using principal components analysis (PCA). Exploratory component analysis is a data reduction method for “discovering how many components could be used to explain the relationships among a given set of Observed measures”, and which variables are not important (Renko & Marcoulides, 2008). Since the purpose of the component analysis was exploratory and did not involve confirming a theory about specific components (confirmatory component analysis), PCA was the method of choice. PCA is a type of factor analysis the aim of which is to “reduce dimensionality of a data set consisting of a large number of interrelated variables, while retaining as much as possible of the variation present in the data set (Jolliffe, 2002). 122 The component analysis was conducted with the 13 variables used in the final correlation matrix. Orthogonal (Varimax) rotation was chosen as the method of extraction since the main goal was data reduction and there was no apriori theory to predict the pattern of correlations which would emerge. A scree test was included in the SPSS output and indicated that up to four components could be meaningful (see Figure 5.1.1). In the scree plot, those components included in the slope of the plot before it begins to level off (eigenvalues above 1) are considered to be relevant. Eigen values represent the amount of variance that can be explained by one or more component. The Kaiser rule (Kaiser, 1960) recommends that components with less than one eigenvalue be dropped. Scree Plot 4— 3— Eigenvalue "i 1.. I I I l I I I I I I I I 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Corrponent Nunber ..L— N 0) .5 Figure 5.1.1. Graph of component loadings in scree plot (13 variables). 123 As can be seen in Table 5.1.2, five of the 13 possible components had eigenvalues above one as reflected in the slope. However, examination of component analyses with more rotated components and/or more variables suggested that two rotated components alone would make the most sense in representing the 13 variables. Therefore, a two component rotated solution was retained for presentation and discussion in this chapter. As Table 5.1.2 illustrates, a little more than 24% of the variance in the variables can be explained by Component 1 (language/immersion-related), close to 14% can be explained by Component 2 (curricular/academic-related). Together, these four components explain 38% of the total variance. In table 5.1.3, all the loadings above 0.3 for each component are shown (loadings being the estimated correlation between a variable and an underlying component). According to this table, eight variables load on Component 1 and these range from being moderate (i.e., above 0.3) to much higher loadings: course credit (0.332), itinerary detail (0.404), language study (0.891 ), language evaluation (0.820), home stays (0.683), locales (-0.644), travel (-0.500), and site visit (- 0.475). Six variables had nigh loadings above 0.30 on Component 2: course credit (0.461 ), itinerary detail (0.501 ), pre-departure independent work (0.410), lecture (0.438), free time (-0.430), and curriculum development (0.799). 124 0.02050. Eccanoo .8655 “0050.2 5.82%.”. 125 000.00.. 000... ..v... 0? 5 ..0.00 .N F.N 05N. NF 005.00 00.0 00¢. _. .. 00N.00 000.0 000. 0.. 0.00.00 00 ...v 20. 0 05 v.00 000.0 000. 0 50 ...00 050.0 #05. 5 ..0N..V5 N.. ...5 0N0. 0 0?...50 0.0.0 50.... 0 #0000 5VN.0 NON... V 500.0v 5.0. ..w 05v... 0 000.00 050.0 .. vo0... 900.00 050.0 .. ~V00... 0.0.00 050.0 F v00... N 00 ...VN 00—...VN N320 00 ....N 00 F.VN N320 00F€N 00...VN N320 .. 00cmtm> 00cmtm> o\o 00cmtm> 0.. 026358 .o .x. .93 .x. 026555 .6 0.. :23 9:935 .o as .93 09.30.. 00.03.00 00:600.. 00.0500 0 0 :. m>c 00m. .055 20:00:50 .0 0:50 5.50”. .0 0:50 53020.0 0050.90 00c0t0> .80... ..mc.na.._u> 0... 35:00:30 .3 0050.98 0030...? :. 00:0...a> .0 c0523...“ .N. ...m 030... Table 5.1.3. Component loadings in rotated component matrix (13 variables). Rotated Component Matrix' Component 1 2 Course Credit Offered .332 .461 Itinerary Detail .404 .501 Pre-departure Independent Work .410 Evaluation of Language Skills .820 Evaluation of Curriculum Language Study .891 Home Stay .683 Lecture .438 Site Visit -.475 Travel Time —.500 Free Time -.430 Curriculum Development .799 Different Locales -.644 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 3 iterations. Meaning and Relevance of these Components These component loadings suggest several patterns and possible underlying structures of the data. The first is a focus on language and immersion. The variables with the highest loadings on Component 1 appear to relate to language: itinerary detail, more time in language study and the evaluation of language skills. The variables that had high loadings on Component 2 related to curricular and academic matters (except for free time). Proposals with high Component 2 scores tended to offer course credit for participating in the GPA had pre-departure independent work and detailed itineraries. They also tended to include more time for lectures and curriculum development. As a way of comparing proposals, a component score was computed for the variables in each of the components. This meant that for each component the values of each variable were weighted by their component loading and summed 126 in an overall component score. Proposals were then ranked first by their component score on Component 1 and on Component 2 from highest to lowest. Then for further examination the listings were dichotomized based on the median score for Component 1 and Component 2. 5.2 Patterns of High and Low Component Scores To highlight contrasting patterns, proposals were organized into three lists as follows using the dichotomized component scores on the two components: 1) the 11 proposals with the highest component scores on language/immersion (Component 1), 2) the 11 proposals with the highest component scores on curricular/academic demands (Component 2), and 2) the proposals that were below the median on both component scores. Each of these lists is discussed in turn below. The columns in Table 5.2.1 show the hours and z scores for each proposal for each of the variables measured in hours associated with the language/immersion component (Component 1): hours devoted to itinerary detail, language study, home stay, site visits, and travel. Three of the variables measured in hours are most heavily weighted in Component 2 (curricular/academic demands): hours of curriculum development, lecture and free time. Each value for each of these variables can be examined in light of the mean (:7), standard deviation (sd), standard error (se)4 and confidence interval 4 Please note that these estimated standard errors were computed specifically for a sample of 55 proposals in five strata drawn from a finite population of 172 proposals. The usual standard errors as computed by frequently used statistical packages (e.g.,S) would not be appropriate and would likely to overestimate the standard errorm indebted to Richard Houan for guidance and assistance with these estimates. 127 (CI)5 for the whole sample. In addition, the table includes six variables not measured in hours: language evaluation, itinerary detail, number of different locales, curriculum evaluation, academic credit, and pre-departure independent work. All but one were dichotomous and are therefore represented in the table by a check mark (1). Proposals with High Language/immersion (Component 1) Disciplines and regions. The first group consists of 11 proposals with high scores on Component 1(the top 20% Of the proposals in the sample): language/immersion. The proposals in this group were for all world regions except the Middle East/North Africa and more than half (or 5) of the proposals in this group were for countries in Latin America. A little more than half of the proposals in this group had a disciplinary focus on the arts/humanities/language and of these, three were for Asian countries and three for Latin American countries. Language/immersion (Component 1). The proposals in this group stand out because all included some amount of language study. This was not the case for the other groups. Examination of z scores (which are comparable from one variable to another in terms of how much each proposal deviates from the mean) shows the prominence of language in these proposals (see Table 5.2.1). For example, according to the z scores, the Paraguay proposal is 4.3 standard deviations above the sample mean in hours of language study. Five other 5 These confidence intervals are based on two times the standard error. Any value of a variable within the confidence interval should be considered no different from the mean. 128 proposals in this group also have high hours devoted to language study (all are at least one standard deviation above the sample mean). Put another way, six of these proposals in this group were well above the confidence interval (20-30 hours) for time devoted to language study, ranging from 39—98 hours. These same six proposals were the only proposals in this group that also included the evaluation of language study in their evaluation plans. This is notable because few proposals in the overall sample included any evaluation of language skills. The proposals in this group also stand out because of the high amount of time devoted to home stay while abroad when compared with other proposals in the sample. A little more than half (or 6) of the proposals in this group were well above the confidence interval (12-51 hours) for home stay time and ranged from 120-324 hours. However, four of the 11 proposals in this group had no home stay but did include language study (three of the four were above the confidence interval). Thus, while home stay may constitute an informal supplement to more formal language study for some proposals in this group (Paraguay, Chile, Argentina, Mexico #40, Mexico #60 — all above Cl on both variables), other language proposals had formal language study, but little or no home stay (Mexico #93, China, Japan #168). And still another belongs to this immersion group because of high home stay but no formal language study (Russia). The one proposal (Senegal) that was low (none) on both home stay and language study (6 hours) had the lowest factor scores in this group and may be an anomaly. This same proposal was one of four proposals in this group (Mexico, 129 China, Russia, Senegal) that were also in the highest 20% of the sample for curricular/academic demands (Component 2). When one looks at time devoted to site visits and traveling, the proposals in this group tend to have less time devoted to these OTLs than other proposals in the sample. For example, the majority of proposals in this group were below. the confidence interval for site visits (7) and travel time (9) which is quite low compared with other proposals in the sample. The proposals in this group also tended to have fewer ovemights in different locales during programming abroad than other proposals in the sample, an average of 2 ovemights compared with an overall sample mean of 6 ovemights. Curricular/academic demands (Component 2). The proposals that were high on language limmersion scores were mixed on most curricular/academic variables. A little more than half of the proposals in this group (6) offered the GPA for course credit but few offered pre-departure independent work in advance of the GPA (only three did so). When one looks at time devoted to lectures, four proposals were above the confidence interval (21-32 hours), two proposals were within the confidence interval and five were below. Similarty, when examines free time, the majority of proposals in this group were average to above average. That is, 7 proposals were within the confidence interval and 4 proposals were above. A mixed pattern can also be seen with the variable for curriculum development as three proposals were high for curriculum development (above the confidence interval), four were average (within the 130 confidence interval) and four were below. These proposals also tended not to include the evaluation of curriculum in their evaluation plans (only three did so). Summary. The proposals in this group were for countries in all but one world region (Middle East/North Africa). More than half of the proposals focused on the arts/humanities and language and offered course credit for participating in the GPA. The itineraries for these proposals tended to be semi-detailed (66%) or detailed (26%). The proposals that were high for Component 1 tend to have more time devoted to language study and home stays than other proposals in the sample but spend less time on site visits and traveling. That is, more time devoted to language study and/or home stays is associated with less traveling and fewer locales. 131 .032... 8:00....8 u .0 95 5:0 9850 n 00 52.038 28:90 u 8 0.38 0.9.; .o :80. u E .062 $va NSN 0:-.. 8-8 3-: SN. 09-0... 5 m... ..N ..N ..N S. N. ..N 3 3.. 02 ...: 2: 3m 2.. SN 0.. - . ....... - . - ....me ..... 3N. .- . - .09. - - . - - , -3“ - -oHNm - -05 . - m: ....... c... .8... - x - 3- 00. ...N .3 m... SN N .500 x no- 02 .....- 3.... .....- o... 3 0% NZ 2.5 .8... x - x N..- 0.8. no 3... .... 0N. N .08 x 0... o... N... 0.8. .....- o... ..N 0:, of 8.0.... as... - - - .... 3.2 ...... 0.8 no of . .58 x m..- o... o..- 3.. 2.- 0... ON 3... N0. :82 .82... - x - a... 0.8. E- o... o... 0.2 N .500 x 2. SN 0N- 0.2 N... S... 3 0.9. SN :80 . .80.. x x x on OSN .....- 0.2 N..- o... N .08 x m..- o... E. 0.0. ...... 0.8... ..N 0.3 :0 2.8 - .... 0.5 no- 0.... 2.- cm . .08 m..- o... N..- 0.9. 0m 3% 3. 0.8 $0 .8... x x . \ €30.00 L... H“ M .3 _l ..I H. 1: B .l 3 Nu 3 O I V V w 3 3 3 N N al.... N m 3 l V 3 9 A 9 N M I. n .l W n | n I. M W H 3 V B V B 3 S Nu 9 I. 9 IA 3 IA 3 3 N Emcanoo 0 20:00:60 ...... u 5 ... 50:00:30. 00.000 20:09:00 :o.0..0EE..000:0:0_ «00:0... 5.? 0.00000... .F.~.m 0.00... 132 ...-5.0.5 8:02.:8 u .0 0:0 5:0 2020.0 u 00 50:030.. 0.00:0... u 00 0.0600 0.9.; .o :02. u E ”0.02 'MM 'dCINl 'd3CI'3ézld ; 00...?v m... 0.3 002. \ - 0.0 0.0: 0.0 - - m... ow: No- 2- 0.09 ...—- F o 0.03 m o- x. - v _. 0.00 5 o 3W|.L 338:! N 20:09:00 N0-..N 380103] ...N 0.0. SN, osm ohm 0.0 3..-... OEN 5,: ...-N. 02% 0N ..N o... N. ..N ...: a... 3... 3.. ....N no. $N I ...N: ......- i at. 2 ...; m .200 .....- 3 3- 0.8 .....- o... 2.. o... ...o 3N m .59.... o..- o... 3 3: .... 0N2 a... .....N 3- o... m ......0 ...? ...: .....- 0.8 N. ...ON. .... SN 3. ...N N - N..- ...N m... 0.5 ...N o...NN ...... 3N .....- 0N .. .08 N...- o...N ...N ......N o... ...: S3‘IVOOT AHVH3NII| 39V09NV'I N... 0.00 llSIA 3llS F .:m:o0E00 L— 39V09NV1 00.0 00.0 :0 05.0 5.0 .0 00 cm X :8... .mmm:0w ...-N... 20:09.... .8... 8.me as... 8002 .3... 0.0030 ABINHOO .cruc. ... 20:00:80. 02000 2200200 :0.0._0E:...000:0:0. “00:0... :25 0.000020 4002.200. ...~.m 0.00... 133 Proposals with High Curricular/academic Demands (Component 2) Disciplines and regions. The 11 proposals in this group stand out because they have the highest (top 20% of the sample) scores for curricular/academic demands (Component 2). The six variables that are most heavily weighted in this component are: course credit, pre-departure independent work, time devoted to lectures, free time, curriculum development and the evaluation of curriculum in evaluation plans. Representing all world regions, these proposals focus on Africa (3), Asia (5), Latin America (1 ), Russia/E. Europe (1 ), and the Middle East/North Africa (1 ). All but one (China) have an interdisciplinary focus (see Table 5.2.2). Curricular/academic demands (Component 2). Appropriately, the majority (7) of proposals in this group were above the confidence interval For these proposals the number of hours devoted to curriculum development ranged from 15 to 98. Two proposals were within the confidence interval (with 14 and 12 hours), two below, and one which did not include any curriculum development or lectures and which therefore may be an anomaly. Interestingly, while the proposals in this group were relatively high for curriculum development time, only three proposals included the evaluation of curriculum in their evaluation plans. But in another indication of the more academic nature of these proposals, all but three of the proposals in this group had course credit available to participants. Likewise eight proposals included pre-departure work for participants to do before the GPA began. However, proposals with the highest scores on Component 2 are not generally high, but mixed for lecture time (four high, four average, and three low) while average (8 proposals) to high ( 13 proposals) for 134 the amount of free time. In short, curriculum development emerged as the dominant variable in this component. Language/immersion (Component 1). While the proposals in this group stand out because they have the highest component scores for curricular/academic demands (Component 2), they tend to be low or mixed on characteristics related to language/immersion (Component 1). For example, the majority of proposals in this group were low (below the confidence interval) for time devoted to language study. Only two proposals included the evaluation of language skills in their evaluation plans. The number of proposals with home stays was also quite low as 10 proposals were below the confidence interval (12- 51 hours) and one was above. This means that proposals that had the highest curricular/academic scores had relatively little or limited time devoted to language study and home stays. In the case of site visits and traveling during programming abroad, this group was also mixed. Four were high in site visits, two average and four low. This was also the case for travel time as four proposals were above the confidence interval (20-30 hours), two were within the confidence interval and five were below. The proposals in this group also planned to spend more ovemights in different locales than the group that was highest on Component 1 (mean of six versus two). Summary. In summary, proposals with the highest scores for curricular/academic demands (Component 2) tend to be interdisciplinary and represent all world regions although most proposals were from Asian countries. 135 High Component 2 proposals generally planned to offer academic credit for participating in the GPA and had participants do independent work in preparation for the GPA. They included more formal lectures, free time and curriculum development time than proposals that were highest on Component 1. Proposals with high Component 2 scores tended to be low on characteristics related to language/immersion (language study, language evaluation, home stays) and mixed (high, average and low) for site visits and travel time. These proposals also tended to travel to more locales compared with proposals that had the highest scores on Component 1. 136 00.80 mm-.m 0.0..-0 00.0w 00-00 3&0 0.0.0.0 .0 0... ..N 0.N ..N 0.0 N. ..N 00 ...... 0.0. ..0. 0.0. 0.0 0.... ..0N .0 0.N0. , 0.0N. - 0.0. |ll010N| 0.N0 0.0 0,... - ... 0.N-.00 \. x - .0- 0...N. 0.0- 0.0N 0.0 0.0N N. ....00 - 0.0 0.0 0.0- 0.N. ...0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 0... 00000 .00... x \- - ...- 0.00. 0.0 0.N0 N... 0.... 0 .000 - N0- 0.N 0.0 0.0 ...0- 0.0 00- 0.0 .... 000.0... ..0N... - \- - 0.- 0.00 0.N 0.... 0.0 0.0N 0 .500 x 0.0- 0.0. 0.0- 0.00 ...0- 0.0 .... 0.00 .... 0.....0 .00... x \- - 0.N- 0.00 0.. 0.00 0.. 0.0.. 0 ....00 - .0- 0.N. 0.0 0.0 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 0N.N 0.....0 ..0... \- x \. ....- 0..0 ....- 00 .0- 0.0 0 ....00 - 0.0 0.0 ...0 0.00 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 .0.N 0...... \- x x .0- 0.N. 0.0 0.N0 ...0 0.00 0 .000 - 0.0 0.0N 0.0- 0.N. 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.N 00.0 .w% r '1' Md 4.. all fil U _.| ..I 3 d3 3 O O N N N n O 3 I. V E 9 9 N M3 H. “no m v m m m Vnd m ...: 3 WM 9 9 .A 3 3 N .c0canoo _. 020000.600 ...-F u 5 3 000000800. 00.000 0:0..an00 0.500003002300950 «00:2: 5.3 £00000..."— .~.~.0 030-.- 137 00.-m0 «0. ..N 00.0 00.0w 5-00 00-5 0.0.-0.0 .0 0... ..N 0.N ..N 0.0 N. ..N 00 ...... 0.0. ..0. 0.0. 0.0 0.... ..0N .0 0.N0. 0.0N 0.0. 0.0N 0.N0 0.0 0... 0 .......... - - -- l----.N-0.-... \. - - 0.0 0.00. ....- 00 0.. 0.N 0 ....00 - 0.0- 0.0. 0..- 0.N.. ..0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 00.0 0.0... ...0... \- - 0.0 0.0.. 0.0 0.N 0.. 0.0 0 ....00 - 0..- 0.. ...- 0.00 ..0- 00 0.0- 0.0 .00 .000000 .0.... x \- - 0.0 00.. N0 0.0 0.0 0.0. N. ....00 - ... 0.0.. N.N 0.00. 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 .00 00...... .0 ....0... - - - ....- 000 .0 0.0.. 0.0- 0.0 0 ....00 - 0.0- 0.0N N0 0.00 0.N 0.0.N 0.0 0.. N00 0.0000 - . - . . . . . . - . . . . - . . . . ..00... \- x N. 000. 00 000 .0 0N. N .900 \- 00 00 .0 000. 00 00 0N 0.0 .0. 80.0.... § in: AGnlS 39VHSNV'I AHanOO Md .3 .I . OH H 3 0 d3 3 3 3 G ...: .l. V M3 u. m .... Md M 3 S AHV83Nl-Ll 39V09NV'1 N 000000.000 0 20:00:50 AN 000000.000. 000000 000000.000 0.000000352030030 .0000... 5.3 £00000...“ .3.-55500. N.N-”Wynn.” 138 Proposals with Low Language/Immersion and Low Curricular/Academic Demands Disciplines and regions. Of the sample, fourteen proposals had low component scores on both language/immersion (Component 1) and curricular/academic demands (Component 2) (see Table 5.2.3). Proposals in this group represent all but one world region (the Middle East/North Africa) with the largest percentage of proposals from Africa (Rwanda, Botswana-S. Africa- Swaziland, Guinea-Sierra Leone, Ghana and Ghana-Mali) and Asia (China- Kazakhstan, Bangladesh, China (2), Vietnam, and Australia). The proposals in this group also tended to have an interdisciplinary focus as only one proposal (China) focused on the arts/humanities/Ianguage. Language/immersion (Component 1). In contrast to the other proposals discussed here, of these proposals did not have semi-detailed itineraries or were coded without detail which means that overall they did not describe the content of OTLs abroad in much or any detail (e.g., hours, locales, resource people etc.). The 14 proposals reported almost no language study. In fact, only one (Russia) of the 14 proposals included any language study and this was just two hours. Likewise, language evaluation was not included in any of these proposals. This was also the case for time devoted to home stays; just three proposals included any home stays. Curricular/academic demands (Component 2). The proposals in this group tended to have more time devoted to free time than other groups (three proposals below, five at and six above the confidence interval). Most striking are the nine proposals that have no time arranged for curriculum development and 139 only one of these proposals was above the CI for curriculum development and only one of these was above the CI for curriculum development and two were within the CI. The majority of these proposals did not emphasize evaluation (language or curriculum development) in their evaluation plans and nine of these proposals had no curriculum evaluation either. Summary. The proposals that had the lowest component scores for both language/immersion (Component 1) and curricular/academic demands (Component 2) were interdisciplinary in their focus and represented but one world region (Middle East/North Africa). The majority of proposals were for countries in Africa and Asia. Language study and home stays were not a focus of the proposals in this group (only one included language study and three included home stays). These proposals tended to include more time for site visits and traveling to more locales (ovemights in different locales) than the other groups discussed here. 140 (I) (D M G .d M .M 0.00. 0.00m 0.00. 0.00. 0.000 0.00m 0.0: 3W”. 338:! 0.0 ..N 0.N «.0 N...- 0.0 N 0:0:00E00 «0-5. ..N 0.0. 0.0m 0.0N 0.00 0.0. 0.0... 0.00 0.0 0.0N 3801331 N0- 0.0 ...0 0.0. 0.0- 0.0- 0.0.-0 00-0N .0-... .0-N. 0.0.-0.0 .0 0.N ..N 0.0 N. ..N 00 ..0. 0.0. 0.0 0.... ..0N .0 0.0. 0.0N 0.N0 0.0 0... l ...- 60mm 0.. . - 0.0 0.0N .... 0.0N. 0.0- 0.N. 0.0- 0.0 00.0- 05.0 .00....0030 0.0. N. .500 ..0 0.N 0.0- 0.0 ..0- 00 0.0- 0.0 00.0- 00.5.0000 .00... 0.N. 0 .500 .... 0.N0 0.0 0.00. N0 0.0.. 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 80.0... .0.... 0... 0 - 0.0 0.0.. 0..- 0.N0 ..0- 00 0.0- 0.N 0.0. 0.0000 .0.... 0.0 0 .500 0.0- 0.0N ..0- 0.0. ..0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 00.0- 0000.... .00.... 0.0 0 .500 .0 0.00 N0 0.00 ..0- 00 0.0- 0.0 N00- 000000500 0.0 0 .500 0.0 0.0N ..0 0.00 ..0- 00 0.0- 0.0 .N0- .N0.... . 00.00-00.00 S31V301 4* AHVH3NI-ll . 0:0:00800 h SVHSNV‘I AHLNHOO . 0... u : N 0:0 _- 00:0:00Eoo 0_E00000.E:_:0_-::0 0:0 2500000.:0200050 :0 00.000 0:0:00800 .0030. 5.? 0.0000000 .00-«.0 0.00... 1 4 4| .00 ..N0 N0-.m 0.3-0 00.0w .0405 .0-N. 0.0.0.0 _o 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..N 0.0 S ..N 00 30 0.00 0.0. 0.0. 0.00 0.: 0.0.0. 00 I- Ilaxl-i,10.IN010|\\tI0.|00|i\ 0.0. 0.00 0.00 0.00,|im..FII|-ll ,0 01000 - - - 0.0- 0.000 2. 0.0 0.0- 0.0 N. - - 0.0- 0.00 0.0 0.00. 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 00.0- 000002 @000 - - x 0.0 0.000 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 0 - - 0.0 0.00 0.. 0.00. 0.9 0.0 0.0- 0.0 00..- 00000 0000 - - x 0.0 0.0: 0.0- 0.00 0.0 0.0. 0 - - 0.0- 0.0. 0.0 0.00 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 00.0- 0500 0000 x - - 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.00 0.0- 0.0 3 . - 0.0 0.00 0.0- 0.00 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 00.0- 00200000 00000 x - x 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.00 0.0- 0.0 0 - - 0.0- 0.0 0.. 0.0: 0.0- 0.0 0.? 0.0 00.0- 00000 0000 - x 0.0 0.00. 0..- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 : _500 - 0.0- 0.00 0.0 0.0: 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 :0- 5050s 0000 - - 0.0 0.00. 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 e _500 - 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.0- 0.0 0.0- 0.0 00.0- 40000 .0055 SBTVOO'I 4* m 0.. G 0 d I. n M N. M 3 'IlVlBG A HVHENIU SVHSNVT AHanOO N Emcoasoo . 20:00:50 . v. u : N 0:0 . 020:? E00 0_E00000\E:_:0_t:0 0:0 0_E00000\E:_:0_.::0 £00 :0 00.000E00 00030. :3? 0.0000000. 40005200. 0.N.m 0.00... 142 5.3 Summary The proposals with the highest component scores for language/immersion (Component 1) stand out because of the high amount of time devoted to language study and/or home stays. They also stand out because of the emphasis placed on language evaluation (6 of the group) and low amount of time devoted to site visits and travel. This group was well below the sample mean and other groups discussed for number of locales (ovemights in different places) with a group mean of 2.45 compared with the overall sample mean of and means for the other groups of 6 and 7.6) suggesting that the focus on language study and home stay means less traveling is possible or desirable. These proposals also tended to have more detailed itineraries than other groups discussed (4 detailed and 6 semi-detailed). Proposals that had the highest scores for curriculum/academic demands (Component 2) tended to place less emphasis on language study and home stays but devoted more time to lectures, free time and curriculum development than other groups discussed. More proposals in this group offered graduate credit for participating in the GPA and included pre- departure independent work before departing for the host country. Proposals with the lowest scores for language/immersion (Component 1) and curricular/academic demands (Component 2) stand out for their time devoted to site visits, traveling, number of different locales and free time. They also stand out because of the absence or relatively low time devoted to language study, home stays, lectures and curriculum development. Additionally, when compared with the other groups discussed, proposals in this group had the least detailed 143 itineraries, tended (not to emphasize evaluation (language study or curriculum) and tended not to offer graduate credit for participating in the GPA. These three groups suggest several patterns. First, when a lot of time is devoted to immersion-related OTLs such as language study and/or home stays there may be trade-offs, much traveling may not be possible or desirable. Proposals with a high amount of language study and/or home stays offer possibilities for Ieaming about one or a few places more in-depth than may be possible if one is traveling frequently and spending the night in many different locales throughout the country. Second, these proposals suggest that proposals with an emphasis on curricular/academics tend to include more advanced preparation (i.e., graduate credit and pre-departure independent work) and time devoted to formal lectures (transmission), curriculum development and free time (the importance of free time will be discussed in the last chapter). The third group, proposals with low component scores for language/immersion and curricular/academic demands tend to spend more time in site visits and traveling, with more ovemights in different locales and less time in language/immersion and evaluation-focused OTLs and seem to cover more ground than proposals in other groups. In short, the proposals in the third group are the ones that in general most resemble tourist itineraries. 144 CHAPTER 6: GPA PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS: IS IT MORE THAN TOURISM? This chapter describes the ways in which GPA proposals offer opportunities to Ieam that go beyond what one might experience as a tourist. It presents three ways that GPAs attempt to address this goal. Drawing on examples from proposals, this chapter raises questions about nature of Short-term GPAs. In a project such as the one proposed here, teachers might easily return to their classrooms with little beyond tourist tales and their own excitement to offer their students. (GPA ID #123) 6.1 Proposals that Go Beyond Tourism One of the challenges in designing Short-term and Curriculum Development GPA Projects is how to design a program that has substance and offers opportunities for Ieaming about another culture or society that are not superficial or cursory and build capacity to deal with difference — within a relatively short period of time (4-6 weeks). This is not easy to do. The proposals described in this chapter illustrate distinctive ways that GPA project directors/leaders have approached this challenge. The discussion is organized around three types of proposals discussed in chapter 5: proposals with a language/immersion focus (Component 1); proposals with a curricular/academic focus (Component 2); and proposals that do not have these foci (proposals with low scores on both Components 1 and 2). 145 6.2 Language and Immersion: A Window into Culture For close to 40% of the proposals in the overall sample, language study was used as a means of understanding a culture in more depth than might be othewvise possible. In 16 of these proposals, hours devoted to language study were substantially higher than the mean which was 11.9 hours (see Table 5.2.2 in chapter 5). l have used hours of language study instead of the Component 1 score to select these proposals because it provides a more coherent basis for discussion. Table 6.2.1 shows the 11 proposals with the highest amount of hours devoted to language study (the highest 20% of the sample). Eight of these proposals were also among the top 20% of proposals with the highest component scores for language/immersion scores (Component 1) and two were also among the relatively high Component 2 scores. All but one of these 11 proposals included language as the primary purpose/focus. These proposals also devoted a considerable amount of time to the evaluation of language skills in their evaluation plans. Highlights from these proposals as well as other proposals that include language study and immersion are described here because they offer interesting ways of incorporating language into short-term study abroad. Note that close to half (5) of the proposals in this group were for countries in Latin America 146 Table 6.2.1. Characteristics of proposals with highest hours of language study (n = 11). GPA PD Discp. PD Country Target Country Hours Purpose Bkgd. Expertise Population Locales Paraguay (#55) 98 0 Language Foreign More than 1 Faculty & K-12 teachers, 1 0 Curriculum language year grad. students in social science & foreign language Chile (#133) 54 a Language Foreign None Faculty (discipline not 3 . Reduce language specified) stereotypes 0 Inst. linkages Japan (#168) 51 0 Language Foreign Native K-12 teachers in foreign 1 0 Curriculum language language 0 Inst. linkages Mexico (#93) 51 0 Language Foreign More than 1 Faculty & K-12 teachers, 2 0 Curriculum language year pre-service teachers in social science & foreign language Jordan-Syria 50 0 Language Social Science None Faculty 8. K-12 teachers 5 (#106) . Curriculum (discipline not specified) Japan (#103) 40 0 Language Foreign Native K-12 teachers in foreign 2 0 Curriculum language language 0 Inst. linkages China (#25) 39 0 Language Foreign Less than 1 K-12 teachers in foreign 3 . inst. linkages language year language Ethiopia (#159) 30 0 Language Health None K-12 teachers (discipline 3 0 Curriculum "0t specified) 0 Inst. linkages Argentina (#123) 29 o Language Social Science None Faculty & K-12 teachers 3 . Inst. linkages (discipline not specified) Russia (#131) 29 o Language Social Science More than 1 K-12 teachers (discipline 5 0 Curriculum year not specified) Mexico (#60) 27 0 Curriculum Arts & None K-12 teachers (discipline 3 0 First-hand exp Humanities not specified) 0 Global awareness 147 Target Population Language-focused proposals tended to focus on similar target populations - foreign language teachers. For example, three proposals for Asian countries (China and two for Japan) targeted K-12 teachers of Chinese and Japanese from across the country (see Table 6.2.1). The proposal to China was unique because it was designed to accommodate two language tracks, one for native speakers of Chinese and another for non-native speakers. Other proposals tended to place participants in small groups according to language abilities, and this was the case for the proposals to Japan. Of the five proposals to Latin American countries, one proposal (Chile) was designed exclusively for faculty from two universities and diverse disciplines. The proposals to Paraguay and Mexico targeted pre-service Spanish teachers and K-12 teachers. In addition, the Paraguay proposal included advanced undergraduate students in Spanish education and the Mexico proposal included university and community college faculty in Spanish and the social sciences. Goals and Rationales Most of the proposals that included language study described language as a way of better understanding a culture or society. The proposal to China is an example of this. Among its goals, the proposal to China was designed to “totally immerse participants in language and daily activities in both urban (Beijing) and rural (Yunnan) settings”...and “improve participants’ linguistic and socio-linguistic skills through courses and direct observations/interactions with native Chinese people.” 148 In the proposal to Mexico (#93), language and culture were connected, that is, to understand a culture or society, one needs to Ieam the language. In this proposal, participants spent a substantial amount of time living with host families and attending daily language classes. After the first three weeks (which included home stays and language study), participants moved to a second locale for the last (or fourth) week with a family in “a small rural community where no English is spoken.” This experience was designed to provide more opportunities to see daily life, experience contrasting parts of the country and use developing language skills. In the proposal the project director explains that this proposal aimed to: Enhance participants’ Spanish language skills and understanding of the connections between language and culture in a Spanish speaking environment. Mexico has a marvelously varied and rich society from the modern lifestyle of Mexico City to the societies and lifestyles of its indigenous and rural peoples. It thus makes an excellent choice for participants’ immersion experience and window onto the issues pertinent to and faced by Latin America. and Opportunities to practice Spanish and experience Mexican culture will abound...As participants live in Mexico, study Spanish and live Mexican culture, they will be able to better understand the culture that surrounds the language and the need to teach not only language but to connect it to Latin American Studies as well. While a bit cliché, in this proposal, language study was seen as integral to understanding a culture or society. Additionally, language (Spanish in particular), was seen as a means of better understanding the students in the participant’s home state in the US. which included a large Hispanic population. 149 For another proposal to Mexico (#60) that also targeted Spanish and Hispanic educators, language was seen as a means of connecting people on a personal level. This proposal included daily language classes but for a shorter period of time (ten days) than the more language-focused proposals. This proposal focused on social change and cultural diversity and was designed around two contrasting locales — the capital city and a culturally diverse indigenous community. The project director explains the importance of language: This experience includes an opportunity to Ieam Spanish in a setting where they can practice their skills on a daily basis with native Spanish speakers. Teachers will also develop an awareness of the lived reality of Mexico — its diverse and dynamic cultures, the contrast between the urban and rural milieus, and the historic past and its influence on the present. Mexico will no longer be a geographic location, known through an atlas, but a place of colleagues, friends and families with whom they have shared their lives, thoughts, and hopes for the future. Stereotypes of Mexico, especially those relating to indigenouspeople and women, will be challenged as teachers experience a much more complex and dynamic society than that typically represented in popular media or in current educational material. The focus on language seemed to shape the ways in which GPA itineraries were structured. That is, proposals that included daily language classes (for weeks at a time) tended to have a home-base or home locale from which shorter excursions were organized. That is, because daily language classes were offered at language institutes, these proposals called for less travel and had fewer ovemights in different locale than other proposals in the sample. The language-focused proposals had similar daily schedules while abroad (e.g., lectures or language classes in the morning, site visits or other OTLs in the afternoon and weekends free). 150 Among the advantages to having a home base are opportunities to get to know one locale in a deeper way than one could when passing through. A home base allows more opportunities to use language skills in authentic contexts if there is little group travel involved. A home base also provides opportunities to see daily routines and to establish relationships in ways that could be difficult when traveling throughout the country. Language-focused proposals differed in the kinds of lodging they provided and opportunities to Ieam afforded by these choices. These proposals tended to use either housing provided by the university or language foundation (dormitories) or home stays. These arrangements differed from region to region. While the Japan proposals did not directly indicate with whom (if anyone) participants would room, it could be assumed (by the budget) that they would be together (U.S. participants sharing the same room) with fewer opportunities to use their foreign language skills. One of the proposals to Japan, however, did include a two-night home stay with families on a weekend. In contrast, three proposals to Latin America (Paraguay, Mexico (#93), and Chile) all included home stays with local families for the majority of the time abroad. For these three language-focused proposals, home stays were seen as a way of continuing language Ieaming beyond the classroom. Living with a family in a home offers one the opportunity to practice speaking and listening skills in situ while participating in daily activities from the “inside.” As one project director explained, home stays “maximize the opportunity for intimate contact with the language and culture” and are “more pedagogically sound than housing 151 participants in hotels, where they would be isolated from the day-to-day routine of a typical Chilean household.” Table 6.2.2. Structure of OTLs during programming abroad for proposals with highest hours of language study (n = 11). Country Duration Locale Lodging OTLs Abroad PM Weekend Paraguay Home stay Language Lecture & site visits free time, (#55) classes (3 hrs X 2 days); optional trips (4 hrs X 5 days curric. dev. (3.5 hrs X per wk) 1 day); school visits, observations; interviews & ethnography Chile Home stay Language classes Site visits, meet with Free (#133) (4 wks), last (3 hrs X 5 days colleagues & e-pal week on per wk) faculty, “strategic” own free time Japan Host Language classes School visits, curric. free time, (#168) institution, (4.5 hrs X 5 days dev. 1 X day curric. dev. 4 days on per wk) language study (3 or excursions own weeks), free time 4 days on own Mexico Home stay Language classes visit schools, site full-day (#93) (3 wks), (4 hrs X 4 days visits, cultural excursions 8. hotels (1 wk) per wk) classes, classroom site visits (Fri- observations Sun) Jordan-Syria Hotels Lectures, site Discussions, Discussions, (#106) visits lectures, site visits lectures, site visits Japan Host insitution language classes school visits, curric. free time, (#103) (3 wks), 2 day (4.5 hrs X 5 days dev 1 X day curric. dev, home stay, 4 per wk) language study (3 or excursions days on own weeks), free time 4 days on own China (#25) Host Language classes group debriefing X 2 free time, institution (4 hrs. x 5 days) days, site visits X 2 optional trips days, curric. dev., attend conference 152 Ethiopia 5 3 Host language classes 5 AM cont'd, daily Site visits, (#159) institutions days (6 hrs per day group discussion travel X week 1), site visits, lectures, classroom collaboration & observ. (week 2), site visits & travel (week 3) Argentina 5 3 Home stay Varies: lectures, site Language classes Home stay (1 (#123) (1 weekend), visits , field trips (4 days), evening weekend), hotels cultural activities “field trips” Russia 4.5 5 otels & Language lessons, Site visit or lecture, Site visit, (#131) dormitories site visit or lecture curriculum, travel, lecture, language review curriculum Mexico 4 3 Hotels, Language classes “tours, trips, “tours, trips, (#60) home stay (3 hrs. X 12 days for seminars & seminars & days days 44 6) speakers” speakers" 3-16 Table 6.2.2 Continued Language and Evaluation Plans The proposals that included a focus on language also stood out because they tended to have the most detailed and well articulated evaluation plans of the sample. These proposals focused on assessing four main areas: 1) language proficiency; 2) cultural knowledge; 3) attitudes and behaviors; 4) curriculum and academic work; and 5) effectiveness of GPA program in meeting its goals. As Table 6.2.3 illustrates, these eleven proposals included a variety of ways of assessing these areas using formative and summative assessments. 153 Formative assessments. Formative assessments were included in seven of the 11 proposals and were tools for gauging program needs and making adjustments as needed, during the program. These consisted of three main types: joumaling (group and/or individual); observations and reports by the project team and instructors; and discussions during group meetings and debriefing sessions. This was illustrated in an excerpt from the proposal to China (#25) which described how feedback from participants in debriefing sessions would be used: The feedback from the participants will provide an on-going formative assessment to the overall success of the summer program. The program administrators will take the participants’ feedback into consideration in making timely adjustments in the program’s offerings. The administrators will also articulate with the faculty of hosting universities about the participants’ concerns and academic needs. In this proposal as well as the proposals to Japan (#168) and Paraguay (#55), the proposals were designed to accommodate changes, to be flexible enough to adjust to the needs of participants when necessary. This was not the case for the proposals to Mexico (#60) and Chile (#133) — or at least this was not articulated. Summative assessments. Summative assessments were used as a means of evaluating the overall program at the end. These summative assessments included: pre and post-program assessments of language proficiency, cultural knowledge, attitudes, behaviors and Ieaming styles, group discussions, reflective reports and essays, assignments, questionnaires and surveys, written reports, curriculum, joumaling, and classroom observations. 154 Table 6.2.3. Characteristics of assessment for proposals with high hours devoted to language study (n = 11). I'- Z LU E U) (D LLI (D (I) <1 LL 0 (D L_J }_ ‘L’ DC I.” j— 0 < o: < I U Summative Formative mermetul uolienlene jewatxa uolte/uesqo woorssejg llBllplAlpUl) leulnor wnlnolllng alleuuoltseno sluetuufilssv uolssnoslp dnorg (urea; ioalord g sluedleliled) Aesse ‘uodel uanuM ems Bulwee'l (lead/aid) isei leummluv (lSOd/Bld) ise; 65p8|MOU)| lernijng (lSOd,’8Jd) Aoueioljmd afienfiuel uanllM =9 Iero uolssnoslp dnorg (roigliliSLll ’lueal loatord) suodal '3 suolie/uasqo (lelipmlplll JO dnorS‘l jeumor Paraguay (#55) Chile (#133) Japan(#168) Mexico (#93) Jordan & Syria (#106) Japan(#103) China (#25) Ethiopia (#159) Argentina (#123) Russia (#131) Mexico (#60) Evaluating language proficiency (summative). All proposals included some type of pre and post assessment of language proficiency. These proposals were the only proposals in the sample in which language proficiency was included in the evaluation plan. Language proficiency was measured by comparing pre/post written tests and oral interviews, and self-assessment in questionnaire form at the end of the program. Some did this via online surveys and others did this with paper/pencil tests and face-to-face interviews. The Paraguay proposal included the most pre/post assessments of all language- focused proposals. Included was a Ieaming style survey, Language Strategy Use Inventory and Index, as well as pre/post tests for oral, written and listening proficiency. Language proficiency pre/post tests were most often administered by a language institute in the host country at the beginning and end of programming abroad. The proposal to China included the most detail about what participants were expected to Ieam. Because this proposal had two language tracks (one for native speakers and one for non-native speakers), it included two different language assessments: one focusing on dictation, phonology, morphology, definitions and syntax; and a second which was more general for non-native speakers. Evaluating cultural knowledge (summative). Three proposals (China, Mexico (#93) and Paraguay) included assessments to measure changes in cultural knowledge before and after programming abroad. The proposals to China and Mexico briefly mentioned that changes in knowledge about the culture(s) would be assessed through a questionnaire or survey. The Paraguay 156 proposal was more specific in that it described several pre/post tests that would be administered to participants to assess cultural knowledge: the Culture- Leaming Strategies Inventory and Index; a Paraguayan culture test; and the Bogardus Social Distance Scale. These however, were not described other than by mention of their names. Evaluating changes in attitude and behavior (summative). Two proposals (Mexico (#93) and Paraguay) included measures for assessing changes in attitude in their evaluation plans. Both proposals included pre/post attitudinal tests aimed at measuring changes in attitude about people from the host country. The Mexico proposal included a number of additional ways of assessing such. changes. First, participants were expected to maintain a journal in which they were to document “significant experiences and lessons.” After returning to the US, the journals would be evaluated. Second, several post-trip workshops were scheduled to take place after returning to the US. These workshops would involve small group discussions which the project director would monitor for evidence of changes in attitude as well as behavior. This was the only proposal that planned to assess changes in behavior. Third, classroom observations were planned for the fall and spring following the GPA. Each participant was to be observed teaching by the project director or one of two faculty from the institution’s teacher preparation program “to determine how their interactions with Hispanic students/and or Spanish language students reflect their new understanding of other cultures.” The Mexico proposal was the only language- focused proposal that included classroom observations in its evaluation plan. 157 Evaluating curriculum and academics (summative). The majority (9) of these 11 proposals included the evaluation of curriculum in their evaluation plans and all of these proposals involved a committee in the review process. In fact, the Mexico proposal included a fairly elaborate review process for GPA curriculum. First, curriculum was reviewed by a sub-committee of GPA participants. It was then reviewed by the whole GPA group before sending on to the state department of education for review. If acceptable, the state department of education would award credit to participants and curriculum modules would be posted to their website. Once curriculum was complete, the project team was to conduct two post-trip classroom observations for each participant during the year following the GPA to look for the implementation of curricula, changes in behavior and new understandings from the GPA. For pre-service teachers, their curriculum modules were to be evaluated and included as part of their portfolio for teacher certification. Curriculum developed by participants for the two Japan proposals was to be reviewed by faculty members from the sponsoring institution. The Paraguay proposal was the only proposal that included academic assignments, (other than curriculum) such as ethnographies and interviews in its evaluation plan. Evaluating the overall GPA project (summative). These proposals used a variety of ways of evaluating the GPA program overall. Most common was a report and/or reflective essay done by participants. These questionnaires and reports tended to be self-reports focusing on participants’ impressions of the overall program— their preparation, Ieaming and features of the GPA that worked 158 or did not work and should be changed. The majority of these proposals included an external evaluator in their evaluation plans. Most often, this was a person or group of people charged with reviewing material from the GPA who then were to write a report on the GPA. The proposals to Japan included the most extensive external evaluation of the six proposals. In these two proposals, an external evaluator was to visit the language institute while participants were abroad. The evaluator was to conduct interviews with each participant and the language instructors and then write a final report about the GPA. Since the primary purpose of these proposals was language Ieaming, it is no surprise that all described language proficiency as an indicator of the project’s success in the proposal narrative. There is increasing pressure on project directors to include methods of evaluation in proposals that are “quantifiable.” Over the years, evaluation has become increasingly important and is now the highest category in the technical review criteria, worth twenty points (out of 100); the same amount of points as the plan of operation. 6.3 Interacting with the Host Culture: Going Behind Closed Doors Chapter 5 has shown that some proposals high on Component 1 emphasize language, some immersion and some both. The proposals described in this section stand out because they are designed to include OTLs that offer participants possibilities for interacting with people from the host culture. This was not the case for most proposals in the sample. The OTLs described here 159 take three main forms: home stays, meals, and community engagement or field placements. Home Stays Home stays are opportunities for participants to live with a family from the host country, to experience daily life and see part of the culture one might not see as a tourist. Home stays afford unique opportunities for Ieaming about a culture that simply aren’t available othenlvise. They offer a means of glimpsing daily life, practices and traditions, and provide opportunities for informal conversations on a personal level that are not possible with a large group. One project director explained that she included home stays in her GPA because home stays “facilitate cultural immersion, help develop language skills and provide a context for academic learning.” This section describes some of the ways in which home stays were used in proposals. When looking across the sample, close to 35% of all the proposals (or 19) included some amount of home stays, ranging from 1 day to 29 ovemights (and 1% to 58% of total time abroad) (see Table 6.3.1 ). These proposals were to all five world regions: Africa, Asia, Russia/E. Europe, Latin America and the Middle East/North Africa. Some proposals included a day or overnight with a host family, living primarily in hotels, while other proposals were designed so that participants spent the majority of time abroad living with a host family. 160 Table 6.3.1. Overview of home stay, meals and community engagement or field placement OTLs (n = 55). Proposals with Immersion OTLs Africa Asia Russia& Latin Middle East Total Grand E. Europe America & North Total Africa N Y N Y N HomeStay 4 9 5 13 1 4 8 6 1 4 19 36 55 Meal 2 11 6 12 1 4 4 10 3 2 16 39 55 Community Engagement &Field 4 9 4 14 O 5 0 14 0 5 8 47 55 Placement Table 6.3.2 shows the characteristics of the 11 proposals (top (20% of the sample) with the highest amount of hours of home stay. Eleven proposals had between 48 to 324 hours or more of time abroad devoted to home stays. The proposals with the highest amount of time devoted to home stays in the sample were to Paraguay, Chile and Mexico (324, 300 and 228 hours respectively). There were differences in the ways in which home stays were timed. That is, some proposals were designed so that participants met and began living with host families soon after arriving in the host country. For other proposals home stays were scattered throughout the time abroad. And still others positioned home stays in strategic places in the program. 161 Table 6.3.2. Characteristics of proposals with highest hours of home stay (n = 1 1). PD Discip PD Country Target Country Hours Purpose Bkgd Expertise Population Locales Paraguay (#55) 324 0 Curriculum Foreign More than 1 Faculty 8 K-12 1 0 Language language year teachers 8 grad. students in social science 8 foreign language Chile (#133) 300 0 Reduce Foreign None Faculty (discipline 3 stereotypes language not specified) 0 Inst. linkages Mexico (#40) 228 o Language Foreign None Faculty 8 K-12 2 language teachers in education 8 social science Russia (#04) 216 o Curriculum Foreign None K-12 teachers 4 language (discipline not specified) Argentina (#123) 132 o Language Social None Faculty 8 K-12 3 0 Inst. linkages science teachers (discipline not specified) Mexico (#60) 120 o Curriculum Arlslhumanit None K-12 teachers 3 0 First-hand exp, ies (discipline not 0 Global specified) awareness Belize- 108 0 Curriculum Resource Less than 1 K-12 teachers in 9 Guatemala (#63) o Global development year arls/ humanities, awareness social science, language arts 8 environmental studies Ghana (#166) 80 0 Curriculum Music Native K-12 teachers in 5 , Reduce social science stereotypes 0 first-hand exp. Thailand-Laos 60 o Curriculum Education Native Faculty 8 K-12 12 0 Inst. linkages foreign language 162 Japan (#103) 48 0 Curriculum Foreign Native K-12 teachers in 2 0 Language language foreign language 0 Inst. linkages Mexico (#05) 48 0 Language Social More than 1 Faculty 8 K-12 6 o Inst. linkages science year teachers in arts/humanities, business, economics, education, social science 8 foreign language Table 6.3.2 Continued Figure 6.3.1 illustrates the different ways that home stays were used in programs. The proposals in this table were chosen because they have the highest percent of home stays (top 20%) during programming abroad of the sample and are identified by their country and ID number. These data points were calculated by dividing the number of days abroad for each proposal into thirds, representing the beginning, middle and end of programming abroad. Using the results of earlier coding, the number of days devoted to home stays was calculated for each segment and plotted. For example, the proposal to Ghana (#166) did not include any home stays in its itinerary during the beginning and middle of programming abroad. However, the last third of the proposal included close to 30% of time devoted to home stays. In contrast, the proposal to Paraguay (#55) began from the start with home stays which continued for the duration of time abroad. These different approaches to utilizing home stays as a pedagogical approach are highlighted in the following examples. 163 .000. 8002+ .00.... 000071 .0000. .__00.-0000l .0000. 00000l .0000. 00000021.: .000...0000N__00lol .0000 800211 .3... 0003.11 .030 8082+ .0050 0__00+ .0000 .0000000lol D. .0080; .A .. .l. 5 0.000005 .0 50:00.00 0 5. 00.0.0 0E0: .0 05E... ...00 050.". .0023 0500500020. .000 0.20.: 00.0.0000 y, \ .. ,x \