Leading for Global CompetencyFernan

Leading for Global Competency
Fernando M. Reimers
Now more than ever, education should prepare students for global civility and peace. So what in the world are we waiting for?
Good teachers and principals, in the United States and elsewhere, know that good education begins with clarity of purpose. The purpose of schooling is to prepare students for life in the real world in their communities and societies, both in the present—while students are in school—and in the future—after they leave school behind.
Good educators know that the real world is ever more interconnected and interdependent. We all share in facing such planetary challenges as climate change, health epidemics, global poverty, global economic recessions and trade imbalances, assaults on human rights, terrorism, political instability, and international conflicts. We also share opportunities for global collaboration in such areas as scientific and artistic creation, trade, and international cooperation. These challenges and opportunities define the contours of our lives, even in their most local dimensions. Yet in spite of growing awareness of the importance of developing global skills, few students around the world have the opportunity today to become globally competent.
I define global competency as the knowledge and skills people need to understand today's flat world and to integrate across disciplines so that they can comprehend global events and create possibilities to address them. Global competencies are also the attitudinal and ethical dispositions that make it possible to interact peacefully, respectfully, and productively with fellow human beings from diverse geographies (Reimers, 2009).
Making the Case
In the United States, a number of groups have produced compelling studies and policy statements explaining the importance of developing global skills. Most recently, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills—an advocacy coalition of educators and business, community, and government leaders—has identified global awareness as one of the six core skills that all students need to acquire (along with information and communication skills; thinking and problem-solving skills; interpersonal and self-direction skills; financial, economic, and business literacy; and entrepreneurial and civic literacy). The partnership defines global awareness as the ability to understand global issues; learn from and work with people from diverse cultures; and understand the cultures of other nations, including the use of non-English languages.
In 2007, the partnership administered a survey to a group of voters, asking them to rank the importance of 14 skills and indicate the extent to which schools were doing an adequate job of developing those skills. Two-thirds of the voters ranked global awareness as an important skill, but only 1 in 10 thought schools were doing an adequate job of teaching that skill.
Several prominent organizations—such as the National Research Council (2007), the Committee for Economic Development (2006), and the Asia Society (2008)—have also made the case for global education. Concurrently, some teachers and education entrepreneurs have developed a wide range of practices that foster global competency, such as improved foreign language curriculums, programs that promote intercultural competency, and internationally themed schools and curriculums. Unfortunately, these practices remain the exception rather than the rule.
So Why Don't Schools Promote Global Competency?
If we know that global education is important and we understand the kinds of curricular and instructional practices that support it, why are most schools not developing global competencies? The challenge is not simply figuring out which specific activities contribute to fostering aspects of global competency, but also finding out how to integrate those activities into the regular work of schools and how to align them with existing curriculum, assessment, and opportunities for teacher professional development. Two obstacles typically stand in the way.
Lack of Resources
Not only do schools and communities have competing priorities, but school systems overburdened by demands also often have insufficient capacity and resources. In the 2007 survey conducted by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, although 66 percent of respondents considered global awareness a priority, far more respondents considered other skills more crucial, such as computer skills (87 percent); reading comprehension (85 percent)' and critical thinking and problem solving (80 percent). When resources are insufficient, these skills often take priority over developing global competency.
An Obsolete Mind-Set
Schools also have greater consensus on how to operationalize traditional competencies, such as literacy, numeracy, and scientific literacy. As a result, these are more likely to be reflected in standards and curriculum frameworks, assessment systems measuring the effectiveness of schools, and professional development initiatives.
But what accounts for this pervasive focus on traditional competencies? Part of the reason is that schools have been at these competencies longer—and schools are generally best at doing what they have already been doing for a long time. Also, these competencies are easier to tackle, particularly from a mind-set that reflects the logic of industrial production in which optimal productivity is achieved by high specialization and intensity in the use of resources.
This logic leads to the compartmentalization of the curriculum and the creation of subject specialists who are highly focused on developing a narrow set of competencies. This model is inherently at odds with interdisciplinary collaboration and leads to a zero-sum way of thinking about the use of education resources: If I do more global education, I must do less literacy or science instruction because resources—whether teaching positions, resources for professional development, or resources for instructional materials—can only be allocated to serve one of multiple competing goals.
This way of thinking makes developing traditional competencies like literacy—particularly initial literacy or numeracy—a more tractable problem than developing competencies that sit across disciplinary boundaries. It may also lead to the fallacy that educators have to choose between developing academic excellence and developing character.
The Reality in School
A survey I recently administered to a group of 150 school principals confirms the limited opportunities in schools for promoting global learning (see fig. 1).1

Figure 1. Survey on Principals' Perceptions of Global Competency Offerings in Their Schools

Question To a great Extent To some extent Not much Not at all
To what extent are there opportunities for students to develop global competency in your school? 12% 33% 46% 10%
Are there opportunities to develop global competency infused throughout the curriculum in your school? 12% 41% 38% 9%
Are there opportunities to learn foreign languages available in your school? 33% 25% 9% 33%
Are there opportunities for students to participate in project based learning around global topics? 11% 35% 33% 21%
Are there opportunities for students to travel abroad available to the students in your school? 15% 8% 19% 57%
Are there opportunities for teachers to travel abroad available to the teachers in your school? 7% 19% 22% 52%
Are there opportunities for teacher professional development to help teachers in your school develop skills and knowledge to develop global competency? 6% 21% 40% 32%
Are there partnerships between your school and universities or non-profits to develop global competencies? 6% 13% 16% 65%
Question Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
In your school teachers agree on the definition of global competency… 3% 29% 50% 18%
In your school the development of global competency is a priority for teachers… 7% 17% 43% 32%
In your school there are sufficient opportunities for students to develop global competency… 10% 25% 43% 22%
In your school there is good alignment between the way in which we assess student learning and the purpose of developing of global competency… 11% 23% 40% 26%
Source: Survey administered by the author to 150 participants in the seminar "The Art of Leadership" at the Harvard Graduate School of Education on July 7, 2009.

Fewer than one-half of respondents reported that their schools offer opportunities to develop global competencies, with similar percentages reporting opportunities to infuse global competencies throughout the curriculum or participate in project-based learning. Although a somewhat higher percentage reported that their schools provide opportunities for foreign language learning to students and teachers, only one in four principals reported opportunities for students or teachers to travel abroad. Support in this area is also limited: Only one in four principals reported adequate opportunities for teacher professional development in global competency, and only one in five reported partnerships with universities or other organizations to support the development of global skills in their schools.
The survey shows that constraints to developing global competency in the respondents' schools include a lack of agreement on the definition of global competency among teachers (68 percent reported insufficient agreement); the fact that this purpose is not a priority for teachers (75 percent); and insufficient opportunities for students to develop global competency (65 percent).
Since Wars Begin in the Minds of Men
To break free from the mental trap that sees the development of global competency as competing with other educational purposes, we need to think anew about the relationships among the different goals of education, understanding that schools were created to achieve ambitious civic purposes and that reconnecting with those purposes can make education more relevant, engaging the imagination