How International Is You School?

Stephen Taylor (@IBiologyStephen) Education in an International Context
© Stephen Taylor (@IBiologyStephen)
How international is your school?
Proposing a web chart tool to visualize the degree to which a school
promotes eight qualities (radials) of international education.
Stephen Taylor
MA International Education
University of Bath
This assignment was submitted for assessment in the module „Education in an
International Context‟ at the University of Bath, as part of an MA in International
Education. It is uploaded here with tutor permission and is shared as part of my
professional blog/portfolio at ibiologystephen.wordpress.com.

2
Contents
1 Introduction & aims
2 Defining an “international education”
2.1.1Students
2.1.2Values & Ideology
2.1.3Policy & Governance
2.1.4Culture
2.1.5Curriculum
2.1.6Global Citizenship Education
2.1.7Action
2.1.8Faculty & Leadership
2.1.8.1 Evaluation rubric for faculty & leadership radial
2.2 Spinning the Web: Designing the Chart
2.2.1Existing visualisations & analogies
2.2.2Construction of a web chart
2.2.3Demonstrating the Web
2.2.3.1 British International School vs British International School
2.2.3.2 Evolution of a small international school
2.3 Conclusion and Evaluation
2.4 References
2.5 Appendices
2.5.1Appendix I: Evolution of the web analogy and visualisation
2.5.2Appendix II: Construction of the web in Microsoft Excel
2.5.3Appendix III: Glossary of key terms used in this paper

3
Introduction & Aims
The webs of orb-weaving spiders
(Araneae sp.) are complex and diverse,
analagous to the characters of the growing
population of schools in the ecosystem of
international education. The shape of each
web is the „fingerprint‟ of its species
(Zschokke & Fritz, 1995), but they are all
founded on radials, stretching from the
centre and maintaining the integrity of the
web, that are reinforced as they are
revisited in the web-spinning process.Although all schools are unique, the
strength of the international dimension of a school can be derived from
connections and tensions between its many inter-related radials: the stronger
the web, the more internationalthe school.
This paper proposes a web chart to communicate the degree to which a
school promotes internationalism, attempting to quantify the quality of eight
inter-related radials. It is an attempt to generate an operable tool to marry
research and practice in schoolsand, if developed with care and rigour, to be of
use in the fields of comparative and international education and school
evaluation.
The scope of this proposal goes beyond a single masters-level assignment,
and this paper gives but a brief overview and justification of the concept.I will
draw on a range of literature germane to the topic to show how and why the web
chart has been developed, including identification of the radials and some
discussion of how descriptors may be developed. I will build on established
definitions and visualisations related to the field before expanding on some
radials to illustrate how they may interact. Finally I will evaluate the model and
suggest areas for further research into a tool that will allow stakeholders to
answer the question, “How international is your school?”
Figure 1: diagram of the orb-web of
Araneus diadematus, adapted from
Nieuwenhuys, 2010

4
Defining an “International Education”
Every school is an international school.
As a result of contemporary globalization(Robinson, 2003) we are
preparing students for life in global markets: as leaders or workers, innovators
or implementers, as children who may seek to study or work abroad or as those
who are already overseas due to their parents‟ own work. As educational
technology and internet-enabled pedagogies are „flattening the classroom‟
(Lindsay & Davis, 2012), exposing students to a greater world view, and as
educational policies and decisions are formed with a local eye on the global
economy, leading to an internationalization of education(Robinson, 2003, p.243),
it becomes ever more difficult to separate the international from education.
International education could be seenbroadly as “education for an
international understanding” (UNESCO, 1968, in Hayden & Thompson, 1995),
or more practically as “primarily as an instrument for the preparation of young
people to cope with a life in an increasingly interdependent world” (Hayden &
Thompson, 1995). Marshall (2007, p38) notes:“…teachers and global
educationalists are currently drowning in a sea of seemingly similar terms.
Global citizenship education, international education, education with a global or
international dimension, development education, world studies, education for an
international understanding – the list goes on.” Some elements of international
education are therefore evident in any school setting, though the degree to which
this is promoted in a school is highly diverse and worthy of description and
quantitative evaluation.
At one end of the spectrum lieideology-driven international schools such
as the International School of Geneva (opened in 1924, perhaps the first true
international school (Hill, 2001)), with a mission statement, student and faculty
body and action-oriented curriculum that equip students towards thinking from
multiple perspectives in order to consider issues of global, humanitarian and
developmental importance. Opposite lie national schools with minimal diversity
orinclusion of global issues in the curriculum, yet which need to shape graduates
and workers for the global economy; systems that see education as more a

5
commodity of globalization than an ideology of internationalism (Cambridge &
Thompson, 2004).
There is a relatively small but growing
body of research in international education,
with strength in its central role
ofpractitioners engaged in research(Dolby &
Rahman, 2008). As this body of knowledge
expands, I see an opportunity to better
engage other practitioners in the „big ideas‟
of international education, and to that end
propose that a visual, operable measurement
and comparative tool be developed to connect
research to practice.
The International School Association‟s
(ISA, 2001) self-study tool can be used to
measure four aspects of internationalism in
a school: cultural composition and
community, governance and administration,
philosophy, and curriculum(Hill, 2007), and is based on a system of self-study
that can take various approaches (Cambridge & Carthew, 2007). The product is
a useful description of the degree of internationalism promoted in a school,
though may not be immediately accessible to all stakeholders. This is
compounded by the difficulty of giving a clear and meaningful definition of
international education,so I propose a visual representation in the form of a web-
chart (Fig. 2) that allows an illustration of the extent to which a school promotes
each of the qualities of the international dimension. In keeping with Nikel and
Lowe (2010) I use the term qualitiessynonymously with characteristics, each of
which is a named radial on the web.In a normative sense, each can then be
evaluated for a degree of quality, the extent to which it is evidenced in the
school‟s documentation and practices. An important caveat: there is no
guarantee that a more international school facilitates a higher quality of student
learning than a less international school; the overall evaluation of the standard
of a school is not the purpose of this tool.
Figure 2: The proposed structure of the web, with
eight radials representing inter-related qualities of
the international dimension of schools. The degree
of quality of each is represented by the scale 1-5,
radiating outward from the centre of the web.

6
How can we measure “International‟?
“Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can
be counted counts.”
Albert Einstein (Harris, 1995)
Although some quantitative data for evaluation may be drawn directly
from empirical sources (enrolment, examination scores, budgets etc.)we must
avoid McNamara‟s fallacy(Basler, 2009) and ensure that data collected are of
genuine value and that robust methods of evaluation are developed for qualities
that are not as easily measured. This will require further work in three or more
stages, beyond the scope of this assignment: a rigorous literature review of each
of the proposed radials, identifying and describing elements of each radial
deemed important enough to measure; the development ofkey performance
indicators for each of the radials‟ potential metric tools or sources of evidence for
achievement of varying levels of success; and, the development of reliable and
operable descriptors for each degree of quality for each radial. For many of these
radials, a self-study process,such as the ISA‟s self-study tool, might inform data
collection, balancing the voices of stakeholders with empirical data and allowing
schools to „speak for themselves‟(MacBeath, 1999 in Cambridge & Carthew,
2007).
Students
Belle-Isle (1986), states that a school “cannot claim the status of an
international institution simply because 70 or 80% of is clientele represent a
variety nationalities, races and cultures.” (in Hayden and Thompson, 1995), yet
interaction with a diversity of students has a large impact on students‟
perceptions of the extent to which their education was international (Hayden &
Thompson, 1995). In a metric for this radial, we should consider how students‟
experiences, cultures and values are brought into the curriculum and how they
are used to shape instruction. Beyond whole-school demographics we can look at
diversity within classes and year-groups, the structure of social and extra-

7
curricular groups, and the extent to which these groups are encouraged in the
school.
The nature of the students should also be measured, building on Sampson
and Smith‟s (1957) (or subsequently Hett‟s (1993), in (Zhai & Scheer, 2004))
scales to measure global-mindedness. These inventory-based scales generate
quantitative and comparative data pertaining to student values. As a result,
they can be tracked over time, and further studies in the school context can
attempt to attribute causal relationships where appropriate.
Furthermore we might consider questions such as:
Is there a tendency for homogeneous groups to form as a result of scheduling
constraints (they „travel‟ together as they are in the same language class), or
do cliques form based on nationality?
To what extent is the student population rooted locally or are they more
transient global nomads with “an extensive knowledge of the world and a
broad perspective on issues […] several languages and much broader career
opportunities…?” (Hayden & Thompson, 1995).
How are transitions supported for immigrant, emigrant and extant students
and how are the learning needs of all students met?
Values & Ideology
“The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring,
knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better
and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and
respect.”
Statement (IB, 2012a) (emphasis mine)
TheInternational Baccalaureate Organisation‟s (IBO) Mission Statement
leaves no doubt about the ideologic nature of their aims, echoed in the missions
statements of many international schools around the world. A concise overview
of how this might be measured is articulated in the ISA‟s self-assessment tool for
matrix I: school pholosophy and values (ISA , 2001, pp.9-10). The values and
ideology of a school should be apparent in their published mission statement or

8
equivalent and so analysis of these documents and policies may be used as a
comparative tool. Mission statements including terms such as international-
minded, peace and compassion could be identified as representing a higher
degree in this radial than those focusing on individual excellence, achievment,
single-faith doctrine or national citizenship. Beyond this there would need to be
evidence of these values and ideology in practice, some of which connects with
the radials of curriculum and action, others from faculty and leadership, in
evidence of professional development, hiring practices and culture. To what
extent is the mission of the school evidenced in practice in administration,
curriculum, development and teaching? Is the mission measured in student
action and if so, how?
Policy & Governance
The governing body of a school is generally responsible for formulation of
policies, mission and core values in the school, including input in strategic
planning and budgeting. These inputs are a line of evidence of the values and
ideology in action: policies on hiring faculty, adopting curriculum frameworks
and allocating budgets to the various operations of the school can facilitate (or
severely limit) the degree to which the school promotes international education.
Again, the ISA‟s self-study matrices are informative in this stage, with sections
devoted to governance, administration, admission, public relations and facilities
(ISA , 2001, pp.20-23). To generate evidence for this radial, one might consider
the connections between the mission and the decision-making processes
evidenced in minutes and annual reports; the balance of the budgets dedicated
to curriculum, instruction, outreach and service; policies on hiring of faculty, in
particular policies that may limit the nationalities or family situations of
applicants; policies on admission of students in terms of nationality, academic
ability, faith or special educational needs.

9
Culture
An emergent property of schools, culture can be defined as “features
which produce the school‟s ethos” (Marsh, 2009, p.9)arising from interactions
between all the stakeholders, policies and curriculum. It is informed by local,
national and international context, as well as market forces or the „purpose‟
of the school. Peterson (1987, p.36, quoted in Hayden & Thompson, 1995),
suggests: “one would expect a special influence of the host country,” especially
if a significant number of faculty and students are admitted locally. This
might lead to a bias towards local cultural norms, curricular aims and
attitudes towards other cultures. Attempting to quantify culture might run
into limitations of reliability if dependent on perception data alone, yet the
culture of the school can play a strong role in enhancing (or limiting) success
in the promotion of international education and a carefully-designed self-
study may help in articulation of cultural influences.
Small but key changes in faculty, leadership, political or economic
stability can have significant impacts on the culture of a school and the
teaching and learning that take place; this is a radial that may be more
abstract and more challenging to measure than the others, yet is worthy of
further investigation and discussion.
Curriculum
“… The school curriculum (in the wider sense) is essentially a selection
from the culture of a society.“
(Lawton, 1975)(emphasis added)
This quote resonates strongly in the discussion about what makes an
international school: from whose culture are we drawing when we write the
curriculum and to what extent does the curriculum that emerges truly represent
an international education? By adopting IB curriculum frameworks are we
buying in to the culture of the IB, in essence globalizing the notion of
internationalism in schools? (Cambridge & Thompson, 2004) Is this
“…embedded in a Western humanist tradition of thinking?” (Walker, 2010).

10
So to avoid international education becoming little more than a „globally branded
product‟ (Cambridge, 2002 ), with schools the franchisees in the
„McDonaldization of society‟ (Ritzer, 1983), we must ensure that the curriculum
delivered by the school draws not only on recognized international standard but
on the unique cultural qualities of the school, its demographics and setting. By
doing this are we moving into less concrete knowledge outcomes and how might
this impact the reliability of assessment and therefore the marketability of our
students? This radial may interact with the faculty and leadership and students
radials as recognized curriculum frameworks may act as a draw towards a
school, impacting recruitment and retention.
Global Citizenship Education
There are clear connections between this radial and many others, most
obviously values and ideology and curriculum, though is set aside for the
purpose of clearly differentiating international schools from schools in an
international context. It includes the planned and experienced curriculum(Kelly,
2004, p.5)with regard to evidence of ideals such as “a culture of peace and
sustainable development” (UNESCO, 2011) and creating “a better and more
peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect” (IB, 2012a).
According to OXFAM (1997, quoted in Davies, 2006), global citizenship
education has three components: knowledge and understanding of the
background to global problems; skills such as cooperation and conflict resolution;
and values and attitudes. Where global education (or world-mindedness) can be
delivered in an abstract fashion, my intention here is that global citizenship
education is action-oriented, evidenced through curriculum, teachers‟ practices,
student work and even „global citizen research‟ (Davies, 2006). This would
interact with the Students radial through attempted measurement of the degree
of global citizenship exhibited by students, perhaps building on the Global
Citizenship Scale (Morais & Ogden, 2011), itself grounded in three interacting
concepts of social responsibility, global competence and global civic engagement.

11
Action
Where the written curriculum is an articulation of the concepts, content,
pedagogies and assessment that takes place in the school, action could be
defined as the changes that these interventions have caused: changes in
mindset, ability, attitude or behavior. Just as the discipline of international
education can be seen as „more explicitly applied and action-oriented‟ than that
of comparative education (Crossley, 1999), a more international education tends
to combine the purely academic with action-led learning: the evidence that
learning has taken place and had a desired impact on the student. Consider the
A-Level system of England and Wales in comparison with the IB Diploma
Programme (IBDP): where there is no requirement for service in A-Levels, the
Creativity, Action and Service core component of the IBDP is a passing
condition. Similarly, IBDP students are expected to complete a Theory of
Knowledge course, culminating in an essay and presentation that explore the
nature of knowledge and learning from multiple disciplinary and cultural
perspectives. A school might have an active Global Issues Network or
International Award group, or might simply draw from current affairs as a
regular part of teaching and learning. In all of these examples, there is
significant visible evidence of student action: from service (and the reflections on
it) to the response of students in assessment tasks, we are able to identify
evidence of the quantity and degree of quality of this radial.
Faculty & Leadership
This radial includes teachers, principals and academic support staff
responsible for the implementation of curriculum and assessment and with
direct connection to students, teaching and learning. It does not include the
board of governors or local/ national accrediting bodies. The Head of School has
diverse roles, including those in governance, but any pastoral or visible
leadership elements of their role would be considered here. There will likely be a
clear connection here between diversity of faculty and hiring policies or market
forces, and as with the point made by Belle-Isle (above, 1986), we should beware
of equating only diversity in the faculty with an international education.

12
Similarly, we should recognize the limitations of the „international circuit‟ in
promoting a truly international education.
Table 1 shows an example rubric for evaluating the degree of quality of
the radials of the web, using faculty and leadership as an example. It is made up
of component elements, each described on a 1-5 scale of degree of quality and
draws on some ideas from the ISA‟s Matrix 3 (ISA , 2001). When evaluating a
radial, the evidence provided by a school against each element would be
considered against the descriptors and a level given. A best-fit criterion-related
method would then be used to determine the overall degree of quality for the
radial. Evidence for this radial could be drawn from curriculum documentation,
teacher observation and evaluation evidence, student feedback and work
exemplars, records of professional development, policy documents or evidence on
hiring procedures.
The first element of diversity is the most obvious sign of an international
school. However, as contemporary globalization(Canterford, 2003) drives the rise
of international schools, and these schools seek to sell the „product‟ of an IB
education (or equivalent), the labour market for teachers has been segmented;
there is much greater demand for English-speaking teachers and leaders, than
for those from other nationalities (in some countries, visas are dependent on
nationality) (Canterford, 2003). In hiring there is a preference for experience in
the programme of instruction, which paradoxically might reduce the degree to
which a school promotes internationalism: hiring exclusively from “the circuit”
could create an echo-chamber of ideas, or a single mobile faculty lounge of
suitcase-toting teachers. For these reasons, we need to look beyond diversity in
devising our metrics for the faculty radial.
I have included further elements of recruitment, curriculum, pedagogies
and professional development in this radial to show not only how the hiring and
development of teachers can influence the international dimension of a school,
but also how their classroom practices (Davies, 2006) and role as “change-agents
in the school,” (Kelly, 2004, p.116), have a significant contribution. As a faculty
develops professionally with regard to curriculum mapping and international
education, we would expect to see growth in these elements and therefore on
pedagogies, leading to an overall improvement in the radial – even if the school

13
is for some reason limited in its hiring of a diverse faculty. These connections
extend beyond the elements of the radial and out across the whole web. Tensions
and modifications in some strands of the web can felt across the whole school,
including the faculty and leadership radial (Fig. 3): the role of policy and
governance in hiring and faculty diversity, the ownership and implementation of
the curriculum by the faculty, the resultant student action as a result of the
pedagogies of their teachers as examples.
Figure 3: Examples of tensions and interactions between the Faculty & Leadership radial and
other elements of the web. This is illustrative, not exhaustive.

Table 1: Evaluating the Faculty Radial
Degree of quality
evidenced by school
Elements of the Faculty Radial
Diversity Recruitment Curriculum Pedagogies Professional Development
5
Very high
Very highly diverse&
experienced in international
education. Multiple cultural
perspectives and first
languages valued & have
impact on student action.
Recruitment of experienced
international educators from
diverse sources and
backgrounds, without
limitations on nationality.
Faculty collaboratively writes
curriculum, drawing from
experience and including
multiple international
perspectives & global issues.
Inquiry-based, led by student
inquiry and investigation of
global issues. Reflective and
meet needs of all learners.
Result in significant student
action based on learning.
Active PD highly
differentiated, international
education issues included,
evidence-based, ongoing.High
impact on classroom action.
4
High
Many (20+) nationalities
represented on faculty, with
minimal bias towards a few
nationalities. Highly
experienced overall.
Recruitment of experienced
international educators from
diverse sources; minimal
limitations on nationality.
Faculty have input in
curriculum development,
planning and assessment,
including some global issues or
perspectives.
Generally inquiry-driven,
including global issues and
reflection on practices. Student
action arises from learning.
Active PD builds on faculty
needs. Includes discussion of
international education.
Generally improves classroom
practices & student action.
3
Moderate
Some diversity in faculty (10+
nations), though biased
towards western passports.
Faculty generally experienced
in international schools.
Active recruitment from
overseas (e.g. job fairs), based
on best fit for school and
experience where possible. May
be limitations based on
passport nationalities.
Faculty updates curriculum,
with minimal ownership. Some
inclusion of international
perspectives may be required.
Some evidence of inquiry-
driven practices and best-
practices in assessment. Some
differentiation and/or
discussion of international
perspectives.
PD includes some aspects of
international education, such
as programme workshops or
„sit and get‟ one-off sessions.
Moderate impact on classroom
action.
2
Low
Skewed to one or two
nationalities, may have
limited overall experience
internationally.
Recruitment based on market
forces (e.g. western teachers or
affordable English speakers),
experience of new hires may be
limited to local contexts.
Faculty has some flexibility in
delivery of prescribed syllabus
content.
Generally content-driven
pedagogy, some differentiation
or flexibility. Minimal action
arises from learning.
PD has low impact on student
learning with regard to
internationalism or best
practices. Generally passive.
1
Minimal
(Near)-homogenous, local or
nominal* faculty.
Faculty recruited only locally
(or nominally).
Faculty delivers prescribed
curricula, lessons &
assessments.
Dominated by didactic,
teacher-centred (or exam-
focused) pedagogies.
PD minimal or biased towards
administrative or narrow-
focused tasks.
*Nominal: nationality of school name, for example a British school overseas might hire only British faculty and leadership.

Spinning the Web
The web chart communicates two dimensions: the identification of
qualities (radials) and the degree to which each quality is evidenced. The rubrics
and descriptors for each radial form the third dimension, which themselves may
be supported by a further level of support materials, exemplars or measurement
tools. The construction of this model has been inspired in part by each of three
different representations: Stobart‟s (1989) concentric circles of international
education, the IBO‟s programme models and Nikel and Lowe‟s (2010) fabric of
quality in international education.
Stobart‟s (1989) proposed concept of internationalis represented
alternately in Hayden and Thompson (1995) and Hill (2006) as a model of
concentric circles, with each level linked to “the level of intensity of
„international living‟” (Hayden & Thompson, 1995) (Fig. 4). These alternate
representations are easily interpreted, though essentially one-dimensional: a
linear scale of progression captured in a circular image. For the purpose of the
web, a higher degree of quality as the radial moves outward is more easily
interpreted and adds to the analogy in that a greater overall area represents a
„more international‟ experience.
Figure 4: Stobart‟s (1989) concept of international as presented in Hayden and Thompson (1995,
left, intensity increasing from outside to centre) and Hill (2006, right, with intensity increasing
from inside to outside).

2
The International Baccalaureate‟s programme models can be interpreted
as a visualisation of thetotal curriculum(Kelly, 2004, p.5)with the learner at the
centre, surrounded by core programme elements, the learner profile (a set of
value statements) and academic components. Similarly, the web aims to capture
all that is international in education at a glance, with the aim of clarifying the
concept of international education for the reader. Although the web chart shares
visual similarities to the IB models in that they are both clear representations of
many elements of international education, the IB models are not evaluative and
the web should not be interpreted as being biased towards IB schools.
Nikel and Lowe‟s (Fig. 5,
2010) representation proposes a
piece of fabric as a metaphor,
anchored by seven conceptual
dimensions arranged “to emphasise
our view of the quality of education
as being like a „fabric‟ that is
„stretched‟ or maintained in
tension.”The arrangement shows
these qualities in tension, the pull
of each representing a degree of quality, though no normative scale is applied.
The authors seek “a contextually relevant balance among the seven dimensions,
where „balance‟ does not imply a simple equalizing across all seven”(Nikel &
Lowe, 2010). In the web model I have attempted to allow for this whilst
maintaining a uniform, easily-interpreted structure with a uniform 1-5 format
for degrees of quality of each radial(Tague, 2005, p.438). To allow for an overall
balance rather than equalizing or skewing scales, some components have been
separated. For example, instead of weighting the curriculum radial more heavily
than others, action and global citizenship education, which could be included as
part of a total curriculum, have been separated out as their own qualities, each
of unique importance to education in an international context. The fabric model
suggests “relations of both tension and complementarity among the dimensions
so that ‟adjustments‟ to one dimension have implications for the others in a
system of tension”,(Nikel & Lowe, 2010); with the examples in figures 6 and 7
Figure 5 The „fabric‟ of quality in education (Nikel
& Lowe, 2010).

3
below I will demonstrate how the changes in the degree of quality of some
radials of the web create tension in others, causing interaction.
Although the term radar chart is most common for this shape of data
visualisation, web chart is more valid in this context with the discrete multi-
variate nature of the data represented on the radials(Tague, 2005, p.437). The
evolution of its shape and structure can be seen in Appendix I with guidance on
how to create it in Microsoft Excel provided in Appendix II. A range of
achievement-levels from 1-5 is typical (Harding et al., 2008) allowing for
differentiation and growthwithout overwhelming the user with descriptors.
Initial versions of the web (see Appendix I) used a 1-7 scale, now shifted to 1-5 to
avoid perceived bias towards the IBO‟s 1-7 assessment system. The most closely
related radials are placed next to each other, where possible, to allow for a more
natural interpretation of patterns in the data(Tague, 2005, p.439).
Demonstrating the model
Figure 6exemplifies a comparative use of the web, comparing two
hypothetical schools with similar names but different approaches to
international education. The BRITISH International School is a stereotypical
example of an “expatriate national school (overseas school) … firmly rooted in a
national tradition,” (Hayden & Thompson, 1995), with enrolment limited to a
few nationalities and policies, students, curriculum, faculty and culture virtually
indistinguishable from its equivalent in the UK. On the other hand, the British
INTERNATIONAL School may be considered a more diverse and authentic
international school, with the name remaining as a vestige of years past. It is
the comparison between education in an international setting and an
international education.

4
Figure 6: Example of the web-chart as a comparative tool. The two hypothetical schools share a
name, but are very different in nature.
Figure 7 is modeled on a retrospective evaluation of my own experience in
the development of a small private school in Jakarta moving towards becoming
an established IB World School (andmight also illustrate the path of
development of the more international school in Figure 6). It is summarized
below.
Before Programmes (such as introduction of IB MYP), we see a small,
homogeneous school that adheres to local or national curriculum and governance
requirements. There are few expatriate teachers or students, and an ethos that
is more strongly nationalistic than international. As the school moves through
the Pre-Authorisation and Authorisation phases there is a need to re-evaluate
the philosophy, mission and curriculum of the school to fall into alignment with

5
the IB‟s Programme Standards and Practices(IB, 2012b). The school may hire
some expatriate staff and invest in professional development for teachers that
includes a philosophical element of international education.
Figure 7: A web chart illustrating the growth of the international dimension of a
hypothetical school form small national school to established international school.
Once Authorised, the school had a „seal of approval‟ of the IB, and potential
freater marketing power in recruitment of students and faculty. Through cycles
of evaluation and moderation, the programme implementation and degree of
global citizenship education improve, along with an action-oriented curriculum
and dedication to service. As the school becomes more Established, it continues
to develop, further attracting a diversity of students and faculty and becoming
recognized as a model by its contemporaries.

6
Although this example is perhaps exaggerated and idealized, it
demonstrates the spiralling nature of school improvement through measurement
of the radials. As some are improved, so others may strengthen, though some
radials may act as limiting factors on the overall international dimension of a
school. For example, if policy or local law dictates that only faculty with
approved passports may be hired, the faculty and leadership radial may always
act as an overall limiting factor, though strengths can be made up elsewhere.
Conclusion and Evaluation
The web chart is not intended to replace the work of others before, such as
the ISA‟s self-study tools, but to build upon them and visualize the abstract
notion of international education. It is easily-interpreted (Tague, 2005, p.438)
and could be used in a comparative manner. The natural interpretation of a
greater arearepresenting amore international school adds strength to the
analogy.It shows qualities of strength or weakness and can be used to plot
change over time or be used for comparative purposes.
With a clearlydefined rubric for each radial, the web chart could be used
in formative evaluation of a school‟s international dimension, to be followed by
setting targets for future development within a school or publication in
stakeholder documents or websites. Ongoing assessment of the targets against
the rubrics, with defined success criteria, will allow for a visualisation of
progress and evaluation of the success of the school in achieving its goals.
This early incarnation of the model is highly limited. If the tool is to be
used with validity and reliability for comparative purposes across schools and
organisations, significant work needs to be put into developing a set of robust
and operable descriptors for the each of the radials. Indeed, the radials
themselves would need to meet consensus approval, as would the measurement
system.
The current structure of the web necessitates an equal number levels for
each of the radials, although there are no rules to prevent individual radials
being adapted for what might be considered a more appropriate individual set of
levels (Tague, 2005, p.439). However, this is likely to lead to confusion in

7
interpretation of the diagram as data are skewed awkwardly and is impossible
to achieve on Microsoft Excel. I have attempted to address this limitation by
separating some components of radials, such as curriculum, global citizenship
education and action, as explained above. This negates the need to weight the
curriculum radial more heavily than others.
A fourth dimension of support material could be added to the model, such
as exemplars for evidence and key performance indictors for each radial, with
the purpose of improving the reliability of model when used for comparative
purposes. Where some easily-accessible quantitative data can be generated for
most radials, imagination and sophistication will be required to develop
descriptors and support for more abstract sources of evidence. As the web
develops in complexity and operability, it must also be subject to ongoing
evaluation for fitness for purpose. It will need to be tested in a diverse set of
contexts and should form the basis for much further discussion.
Thanks
Thank-you to John Lowe for his enthusiastic guidance and encouragement.
Thanks also to Mary Hayden and Jeff Thompson for their words of support with
this idea. Thanks also to DJ Condon, Head of School at Canadian Academy and
International Education enthusiast.

References
American Society for Quality, n.d. Radar Chart. [Online] Available from:
http://asq.org/service/body-of-knowledge/tools-radar-chart [Accessed 13 July 2013].
Apple, M., 2004. Ideology and Curriculum. [online]. Routledge Falmer.
Basler, M.H., 2009. Letter: Utility of the McNamara fallacy. British Medical Journal,
BMJ 2009;339:b3141.
Belle-Isle, R., 1986. Learning for a new humanism. International Schools Journal,
(11), pp.27-30.
Bunnell, T., 2008. The global growth of the International Baccalaureate Diploma
Programme over the first 40 years: a critical assessment. Comparative Education, 44(4).
Cambridge, J., 2002. Global Product Branding and International Education. Journal
of Research in International Education, 1(2), pp.227-43.
Cambridge, J. & Carthew, C., 2007. Schools Self-Evaluating their International
Values: A Case Study. In M. Hayden, J. Thompson & J. Levy, eds. The SAGE Handbook of
Research in International Education. London: SAGE Publications. pp.283-98.
Cambridge, J. & Thompson, J., 2004. Internationalism and globalization as contexts
for international education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International
Education, 32(4), pp.161-75.
Canterford, G., 2003. Segmented Labour Markets in International Schools. Journal of
Research in International Education, 2(1), pp.47-65.
Coates, H., Rosicka, C. & MacMahon-Ball, M., 2007. Perceptions of the
International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme among Australian and New Zealand
Universities. ACER.
Crossley, M., 1999. Reconceptualising Comparative and International Education.
Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 29(3), p.255.
Davies, L., 2006. Global citizenship: abstraction or framework for action?
Educational Review, 58(1). Special Issue: Global Citizenship Education.
Davy, I., 2011. Learners Without Borders: A Curriculum for Global Citizenship.
[Online] IBO Available at: http://blogs.ibo.org/positionpapers/2011/07/01/learners-without-
borders-a-curriculum-for-global-citizenship/ [Accessed 23 July 2013].
Dolby, N. & Rahman, A., 2008. Research in International Education. Review of
Educational Research, 78(3), pp.676-726.

2
Harding, A., Kaczynski, D. & Wood, L., 2005. Evlaution of blended learning:
analysis of qualitative data. In Proceedings of the Blended Learning in Science Teaching and
Learning Symposium (2005). Sydney, 2005. Open Journal Systems. http://ojs-
prod.library.usyd.edu.au/index.php/IISME/article/view/6436/7084.
Harding, A., Kaczynski, D. & Wood, L., 2008. Using radar charts with qualitative
evaluation Techniques to assess change in blended learning. Active Learning in Higher
Education, 9(1), pp.23-41.
Harris, K., 1995. Collected Quotes from Albert Einstein. [Online] Available at:
http://rescomp.stanford.edu/~cheshire/EinsteinQuotes.html [Accessed 19 July 2013].
Hayden, M. & Thompson, J., 1995. International Schools & International Education:
a relationship reviewed. Oxford Review of Education, 21(3), pp.327-45. Overview of
international schools & education from 1995. Sets up some descriptions of the field.
Hayden, M. & Thompson, J., 1995. Perceptions of International Education: A
Preliminary Study. International Review of Education, 41(5). Sets up a small but intersting
questionnaire on perceptions of international education from high school graduates. Could be
replicated now using online tools?
Hett, E., n.d. The development of an instrument to measure global-mindedness.
Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of San Diego. Scale outlined in Zhai and Sheer,
2004.
Hill, I., 2001. Early stirrings: The beginnings of the international education
movement. International Schools Journal, 20(2), pp.11-22.
Hill, I., 2006. Student types, school types and their combined influence on the
development of intercultural understanding. Journal of Research in International Education,
5(1), pp.5-33.
Hill, I., 2007. International Education as developed by the International Baccalaureate
Organisation. In M. Hayden, J. Thompson & J. Levy, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Research
in International Education. London: SAGE Publications. p.26.
IB, 2012a. Mission and strategy. [Online] Available at: http://www.ibo.org/mission/
[Accessed 20 July 2012a].
IB, 2012b. How to become an International Baccalaureate® World School. [Online]
Available at: http://www.ibo.org/become/index.cfm [Accessed 30 July 2012].
ISA , 2001. Self-assessing internationalism: an instrument for schools. Geneva:
International Schools Association.
Kelly, A.V., 2004. The Curriculum: Theory and Practice. [online]. London: SAGE
Publications.
Lawton, D., 1975. Class, Culture and the Curriculum. [online]. London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul Ltd.

3
Lindsay, J. & Davis, V., 2012. Flattening Classrooms, Engaging Minds: Move to
Global Collaboration One Step at a Time. Columbus, Ohio, USA: Pearson.
MacBeath, J., 1999. Schools must speak for themselves: the case for school self-
evaluation.. London: Routledge.
Marsh, C.J., 2009. Key Concepts for Understanding Curriculum. Teachers' Library
Series. [online]. 4th ed. London: Taylor & Francis.
Marshall, H., 2007. The global education terminology debate: exploring some of the
issue. In M. Hayden, J. Levy & J. Thompson, eds. The Sage Handbook of Research in
International Education. London, UK: Sage. p.Chapter 3.
Morais, D. & Ogden, A., 2011. Initial Development and Validation of the Global
Citizenship Scale. Journal of Studies in International Education, 15(5), pp.445-66.
Nieuwenhuys, E., 2010. The construction of a wheel web. [Online] Available at:
http://ednieuw.home.xs4all.nl/Spiders/Info/Construction_of_a_web.html [Accessed 22 July
2013].
Nikel, J. & Lowe, J., 2010. Talking of fabric: a multi dimensional model of quality in
education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 40(5), pp.589-
605.
OXFAM, 2006. Education for Global Citizenship: A Guide for Schools. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.oxfam.org.uk/~/media/Files/Education/Global%20Citizenship/education_for_glo
bal_citizenship_a_guide_for_schools.ashx [Accessed 7 August 2013].
Peterson, A., 1987. Schools Across Frontiers. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court.
Ritzer, G., 1983. The "McDonaldization" of Society. Journal of American Culture,
6(1), pp.100-07.
Robinson, J., 2003. Contemporary Globalization and Education. In S. Bartlett & D.
Burton, eds. Education Studies. London, UK: Sage. pp.239-64.
Sampson, D. & Smith, H., 1957. A Scale to Measure World-Minded Attitudes.
Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), pp.99-107.
Spring, J., 2008. Research on Globalization and Education. Review of Educational
Research, 78(2), pp.330-63.
Tague, N., 2005. The Quality Toolbox. 2nd ed. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA: ASQ
Quality Press.
Thompson, J. & Hayden, M., 1998. International Education: Principles and Practice.
401774th ed. London: Kogan Page.
Thompson, J. & Hayden, M., 2011. The Middle Years Programme. In Thompson, J.
& Hayden, M. Taking the MYP forward. Melton, UK: John Catt Educational. pp.13-18.

4
UNESCO, 1968. Guiding Principles Relating to Edcuation for Internaitonal
Understanding. In Recommendation no. 64 adopted by the Interntational Conference on
Public Education at its 31st session., 1968.
UNESCO, 2011. Culture of Peace and Non-Violence. [Online] Available at:
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/bureau-of-strategic-planning/themes/culture-of-peace-and-
non-violence/ [Accessed 7 August 2013].
Walker, G., 2010. East is East, West is West. [Online] IBO Available at:
http://blogs.ibo.org/positionpapers/2010/09/23/george_walker/ [Accessed 7 June 2013].
Zhai, L. & Scheer, S., 2004. Global perspectives and attitudes toward cultural
diversity among summer summer agriculture students at Ohio State University. Journal of
Agricultural Education, 45(2), pp.39-51.
Zschokke, S. & Fritz, V., 1995. Web construction patterns in a range of orb-weaving
spiders (Araneae). Eur. J. Entomol, 92(3), pp.523-41.

5
Appendix I: Spinning the Web - Evolution of the idea.
Web 1.0: Radar showing seven elements, each with seven levels. Tweeted on 9
July 2013
https://twitter.com/iBiologyStephen/status/354527359812124672/photo/1
Web 1.1: Ideology added to the Values element, with Leadership added to the
Faculty element. Shared on a blog post 10 July 2013:
http://ibiologystephen.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/how-international-is-your-
school

6
Web 2.0: Eight elements, five levels at each. Policy and governance have been
given their own element, and the number of levels has been cut to five. Seven
suggested too many descriptors, as well as a possible bias towards IB.
This version has been created in Microsoft Excel, which gives more options for
customization that onlinecharttool.com

7
Appendix II: Construction of the Web Chart in Microsoft Excel
This representation is simple to construct, using the the Charts  Other 
Filled Radar option:
Radial categories form the first column
Each following column represents a further data set – many can be
added, though after four clarity is lost.
Scores are added under the column headings
Right-click on the default scale on the produced graph in order to set
the maximum y-axis value (in this case 5).
Custom lines and fills can be used for each data point. For the
purpose of clarity in colour and b/w printing, I have chosen
differently-patterned perimeter lines and a gradient of part-
transparent blue-shaded shapes.

8
Appendix III: Key terms used in this paper
Glossary of key terms(as used in this paper)
International domain: the sum total of the inter-related radials of the school
that relate to the promotion of education in an international context.
Radials: individual qualities of the international domain of the school that
can be described and quantified. These are identified as: Values & Ideology,
Faculty & Leadership, Policy & Governance, Students, Culture, Curriculum,
Global Citizenship Education and Action.
Elements: individual qualities that contribute to each radial. For example
Students considers not only the diversity of the student population but also
the extent to which their cultural perspectives inform teaching and learning.
Web chart: diagrammatic representation of multi-variate data, also known
as a radar chart (Tague, 2005, p.437), but in this case used to represent a
degree of quality of each of eight radials.
Degree of quality: a 1-5 scale of the increasing extent to which a radial is
evidenced. This does not necessarily suggest that a high degree of quality of
the international dimension suggests a better school overall.

How International Is You School?

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (19)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à How International Is You School?

Similaire à How International Is You School? (20)

Plus de Stephen Taylor

Plus de Stephen Taylor (12)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

How International Is You School?