Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education

PAINS AND GAINS OF INTERNATIONAL MOBILITY IN TEACHER EDUCATION

Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education Edited by Thomas Goetz University of Konstanz, Germany Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Switzerland Gerit Jaritz Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Switzerland and Fritz Oser Université de Fribourg, Switzerland

SENSE PUBLISHERS ROTTERDAM / BOSTON / TAIPEI

A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

ISBN 978-94-6091-494-2 (paperback) ISBN 978-94-6091-495-9 (hardback) ISBN 978-94-6091-496-6 (e-book)

Published by: Sense Publishers, P.O. Box 21858, 3001 AW Rotterdam, The Netherlands www.sensepublishers.com

Printed on acid-free paper

All rights reserved © 2011 Sense Publishers No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface

vii

Introduction Thomas Goetz, Gerit Jaritz and Fritz Oser 1

2

3

4

5

1

Developing a Culture of (Inter)national Mobility in Initial Teacher Training: Expectations, Limitations and Ways Forward Gerit Jaritz

7

Working with Incoming Students: Culturally Responsive Teaching in Higher Education Dora Luginbühl

25

I wanted to Go to Spain but I Ended up in Finland – Analysis of and Conclusions About Student Exchange Matti Meri

49

Reflection on Normality: The Benefits of International Student Exchange for Teacher Education Bruno Leutwyler and Samantha Lottenbach

59

Staff Mobility in Europe: A Twelve-Year-Old Programme Armand Henrion

79

Conclusion Gerit Jaritz, Thomas Goetz and Fritz Oser

93

Authors

97

v

PREFACE

The present book is named after an international conference on mobility in teacher education hosted and organised by Thurgau University of Teacher Education in November 2008 in the lead up to the inaugural celebrations for its new campus. The aim of “Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education” was to promote international mobility in a field of study otherwise predominantly dependent on national regulations and embedded in local communities. Representatives of national and international partner institutions were invited to share their expertise and discuss the benefits and challenges of mobility in initial teacher education. The success and fast development of student and staff mobility at Thurgau University of Teacher Education has shown that it is essential to directly involve different actors and areas of the university. Therefore, the plenary sessions and workshops covered topics related to different areas of teacher training and provided participants with the perspectives of international coordinators, researchers, lecturers and students alike. The chapters of the book are based on a selection of conference papers highlighting different aspects of mobility in teacher education and hence equally provide the reader with a variety of perspectives. We wish to thank all the authors for their excellent collaboration and the association Friends of Thurgau University of Teacher Education (PHTG Förderverein) for their financial support of this publication. Our special thanks also go to Prof. Dr. Ernst Preisig, Rector of Thurgau University of Teacher Education, for his mediating role in connection to this publication and his continuous support of international projects and mobility at Thurgau University of Teacher Education. Moreover, we wish to acknowledge the financial support of the 2008 conference by the Aebli Näf Foundation for the development of teacher education in Switzerland. Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland 15th November 2010 The Editors

vii

INTRODUCTION

OBJECTIVES AND CONTENTS Thomas Goetz, Gerit Jaritz and Fritz Oser

There is strong consensus that the international mobility of education students and teacher educators is highly beneficial for a number of reasons: these students and teachers are likely to be more globally minded educators who can develop new professional horizons and a fresh perspective on the educational system of their home country, as well as gain access to jobs in other countries (Bruce, 1991; Quezada, 2010). All of these aspects are highly relevant for both initial teacher education and advanced teacher training. Results of a number of international large scale assessments conducted in the last two decades (e.g. TIMSS, PISA, IGLU; e.g. OECD, 2007) have clearly shown that educational systems can strongly differ in their structures and definitions of teaching quality. International mobility of education students and educators can broaden their perspectives by helping them to reflect upon aspects of education they consider to be a matter of course, but which turn out not to be after they have been confronted with differences in other countries and cultures. Bloemeke and Blaine (2008) outline the importance of “getting the fish out of the (home) water” with respect to the broadening of teachers’ perspectives. However, most of the “teacher fish” stay in their home waters: the statistics (EU data) of the ERASMUS programme (established 1987) shows that education students are less internationally orientated than students from other disciplines (see Chapter 1 of this book by Gerit Jaritz). The book focuses on the pains and gains of international mobility in teacher education – its challenges and benefits. The aim is on the one hand to identify some of the challenges which help to explain the low percentage of internationally orientated teacher education students and suggest how to overcome them. On the other hand, major benefits of international mobility in teacher education are presented in the form of competences that can be acquired through studying and teaching abroad. The five chapters of this book refer to reports on practical experiences with international mobility in teacher education at different institutions. The authors outline problems, challenges and advantages, as well as present empirical studies on the international mobility of teachers. The conclusion summarises the five chapters and provides possible directions for future practice and research with respect to international mobility in teacher education. The target audience for this book are persons organizing mobility programmes or working with international students and researchers in this field. This book aims to contribute to the promotion of international teacher mobility and to give suggestions on how to implement and optimize such programmes. T. Goetz et al. (Eds.), Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education, 1–6. © 2011 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

THOMAS GOETZ, GERIT JARITZ, FRITZ OSER

In the first chapter of this book, Gerit Jaritz emphasises that teachers are local actors who should be aware of global issues. She outlines how an institution of teacher education in Switzerland, the Thurgau University of Teacher Education, integrates an international dimension into its mainly locally oriented programme in teacher education. She gives reasons why teacher education students are less mobile than their peers in other degree programmes and analyses common expectations in regard to the benefits of mobility for these students. The author then presents results of an online survey conducted among students of the Thurgau University of Teacher Education who spent one semester at another national or international university. Implications from this study on mobility programmes in teacher education are outlined. The author of the second chapter, Dora Luginbühl, is in charge of cross-cultural education at the Thurgau University of Teacher Education in Switzerland, the same institution of focus in the first chapter. She outlines the theory behind the crosscultural education practised at this institution, an approach known as “culturally responsive teaching”. The author presents results from an interview study made with guest students from China and Mongolia, as well as countries in Europe. The focus of the interview is on the experiences of exchange students at the Thurgau University of Teacher Education. Implications for the development of teaching with guest students are outlined. Based on the strong increase of international exchange students going to Finland in the past few years, the author of the third chapter, Matti Meri, former Head of Helsinki University’s Department of Applied Sciences of Education, shows results of an explorative survey examining the decision processes students went through ultimately resulting in their going to Finland to study. The main results of this study were that friends and fellow students seem to have the strongest impact on the decision to study abroad. Furthermore, international exchange students have a very positive impression of Finland (e.g. modern equipment and facilities, open atmosphere) which strongly impacts their decision to study in Finland. Implications for making countries and institutions popular destinations for student exchange are outlined. In the fourth chapter, Bruno Leutwyler and Samantha Lottenbach present results of a study on teaching-specific competences as they develop during participation in an international student mobility programme. This study relies on theoretical assumptions and previous investigations in this field, which are based mostly on anecdotal evidence. Extending beyond previous studies, the authors show that a key benefit of international student mobility is students’ enhanced awareness of their own ideas about what is normal. Based on their results, the authors introduce a four-stage model for reflection on normality. The authors further outline how this model might be helpful for working with students who participate in an international mobility programme. The focus of the fifth chapter by Armand Henrion differs from the other ones as its focus is not on student’s but on staff mobility. As a lecturer and coordinator of international relations at the Haute Ecole Catholique du Luxembourg Blaise Pascal in Belgium, the author has himself participated in staff mobility programmes 2

INTRODUCTION

numerous times. He shows that despite the importance of staff mobility we clearly lack empirical knowledge in this area. He subsequently outlines an informal survey of 10 years of staff mobility at his home institution and further suggests options for improving staff mobility. For example, the author describes the advantages of international weeks, assumed to be one important way to improve staff mobility. In the conclusion section, the editors of the book summarize the main results and implications of the five chapters in this book. They outline further steps that might be taken in respect to the development of international mobility in teacher education and empirical research on this topic.

INTERCULTURAL LEARNING AS A KEY COMPETENCE FOR PROFESSIONALIZATION Fritz Oser

One of the expected benefits of studying and teaching abroad is the acquisition of intercultural competences. It is therefore important to ask oneself how they can be acquired as an integral part of professionalization in the teaching profession. When a student teacher acquires a new competence, he/she acquires it with the help of cognitive structures already present. Piaget calls it assimilation. Assimilation is the most common form of additive learning, but it needs more in order for comprehensive change to occur. The most profound form of change is accommodation. There are two possibilities for this real change towards a more profound form of learning to occur, namely a) if a student teacher learns by failure and mistakes, or b) if he/she dramatically changes context (Lave & Wenger, 1992). The second possibility is important for every aspect of intercultural learning, because to change context means to see things with different eyes. It is similar to the type of work done by an ethnographer. Ethnography can be seen as a discipline that is sophisticated and simple at the same time: ethnographers are investigating the front lines of a culture, the lights and the shadows of a living situation. That is why our hypothesis (and our wish) is that student teachers become, if they leave their homeland for a study time in a foreign country, pedagogical ethnographers, school ethnographers searching the inside of a different educational world for new insight. Ethnographic behaviour is therefore central for intercultural competences. With this in mind, a study from 2001 yields astonishing results: at the end of their training student teachers were asked about how much they learned on how to integrate foreign students. In the secondary II track, for example, 68% never had the opportunity to learn something like this, 22% heard only theoretically about this issue, and only about 2% felt that they developed a portfolio and knew what skills this competence would require. Thus, if teacher-training students leave their home institution to ethnographically become part of a different training world, this would of course overcome the gap presented in the aforementioned study. But what would be a 3

THOMAS GOETZ, GERIT JARITZ, FRITZ OSER

more profound benefit of student teacher mobilities? We think that at least three potential results are important: – To allow for the possibility to experience a different teacher training system. – To build up personal relations with researchers, professors, principals and teachers in different countries. – To be aware of the problems and questions those people discovered which led them eventually to do research. Awareness of the special quarries of teacher training situations in a foreign country (e.g. content studies vs. pedagogical studies, university studies vs. practical studies, knowledge vs. competence orientation, socialization into schools vs. experimental school behaviour, etc.) open the possibility for seeing that other nations also try to do their best, but may choose a different way. Student teachers outside their home country do not only inquire about how others act or call for advice, but they also become part of a new community by exchanging ideas and fundamental concepts of what education could be. Included in this there is also a possibility to learn on three levels, a) a different culture (e.g. China, Japan, Slovenia, Latvia, Norway), b) different teaching styles and practices (e.g. Calabria, Finland, Japan) and c) to find out about different reform projects (e.g. Just Community project in Boston and New York). Suddenly they find out that frequently discussed psychological issues in their home country, like small class sizes, are meaningless in a country like Eritrea, for instance, because only a part of the children go to school and class sizes are mostly over eighty. Another example is that different key aspects of school can make sense in other countries (e.g. art gymnasium in Austria) or that private schools can be financially supported by the state if the basic curriculum is the same as the curriculum in state schools (e.g. Montessori schools in the Netherlands). And finally young students can learn about Poverty (e.g. Africa) and country-specific phenomena like centralistic school systems (e.g. France) or hiring and firing procedures with respect to teachers (e.g. USA). Another important factor concerns the different experiences student teachers can gain if they leave for one or two semesters to study abroad. Here we would like to review an unpublished study on a student teacher exchange with a third world country – the Chad (Tschad) (see Gugolz, 2001). On an initiative of the Swiss Foundation for Education and Development Swiss Universities of Teacher Education started an exchange with students of N’Djaména and Moundou. 20 students from the Chad exchanged with 20 student teachers from Basel, Chur, Lausanne, La-Tour-de-Peilz, and Fribourg. All students were prepared for their new task in a 3 days seminar; they received special observation tasks that they should focus on as preparation for the journey. The elements were teacher training structure, school climate (student interaction), classroom teaching, special activities (games, music, values, male-female relationship, etc.), and village life, work and food/water situation. The goals were to become aware of differences, to learn about the basic culture, to deal with a foreign lifestyle that could be severe at times, to become flexible, to estimate the scope of action, and to learn to change perspectives and think abstractly about the deep structure of the otherness of a 4

INTRODUCTION

culture. The changes were expected to occur at three levels: with respect to relevance estimation, with respect to personal preferences, and with respect to local and global action perspectives. Interviews yield the interesting result that not all the students felt positive with respect to the experience. Some felt exhausted, some insecure and some, of course, very positive. Here some interview examples (from Gugolz, 2001): – “At the moment I feel empty in my head. I cannot yet deal with all these experiences. I need a break.” – “These last weeks were the longest in my life. I will enjoy going home and having all easy possibilities. But I would not have wanted to miss the experience of Chad (Tschad).“ – “I loved this journey. If I could decide, I would stay a month longer in Africa. I am sad to leave these people with whom I experienced great moments.” The three examples represent three views expressing the feelings after having been immersed in a teacher-training situation in Chad (Tschad). It is important to notice that the experiences represent a deep, but also tough reality. The interviews reveal themes of confrontation, surprise, conflict, demandingness, fear, anticipation, consternation, happiness, recreation, even hate and frustration. All in all we can say that intercultural learning is an experience and an international process of understanding wherein both the foreign and one’s own culture become clearer. From that point on something new occurs, namely a richer knowledge base and a more encompassing experience. A student teacher today can go out and travel somewhere else for study purposes, even within the fixed frame of Bologna (ERASMUS). As seen with the Chad experiences exchange participants can and need to be kept busy: the preparation, the observation tasks, the special field experience, the school experience, reporting, etc. Thus the main issues are to get students involved, to allow them to become part of a new experience, to make them work on an analytical task (ethnography), to give something to the host country and something back home. All this allows for the opportunity to see what is similar, what is different and what is universal (accepting against rejection). Most of the criticism of student teachers who return from studying abroad rests on not having enough critical incidence or not having dealt enough with failure in the second half of the stay. Another problem can be intolerance with respect to cultural ethnocentrism. That is why the following recommendations can be made for teacher training institutions: – Let student teachers go as late as possible in their study career. – Let them go until their limits are tested and let them bring home at least one new friendship. – Help them transform the concept “I will profit” into “I am getting involved”. – Let them think always about keeping what is positive at home and supporting the other context positively while away. – Try to measure change and stimulate change in new teaching ideas and even children’s thoughts.

5

THOMAS GOETZ, GERIT JARITZ, FRITZ OSER

– Like this, we can slowly begin to understand what an intercultural competence could be, accepting that travellers always return and vagabonds never, while also remembering that “a foreigner always has his homeland in his arms” (Nelly Sachs). REFERENCES Bloemeke, S., & Paine, L. (2008). Getting the fish out of the water: Considering benefits and problems of doing research on teacher education at an international level. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 24(8), 2027–2037. Bruce, M. (1991). Internationalizing teacher education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 39(2), 163–172. Gugolz, M. (2001). Drei Welten entdecken: Der interkulturelle Lernprozess von Schweizer Seminaristen und Seminaristinnen während einer Reise in den Tschad. Arbeitsbericht. Fribourg: Departement Erziehungswissenschaften. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. OECD (2007). PISA 2006. Science competencies for tomorrow’s world. Paris: OECD. Oser, F. (2001). Standards: Kompetenzen von Lehrpersonen. In F. Oser & J. Oelkers (Eds.) Die Wirksamkeit der Lehrerbildungssysteme (pp. 215–342). Zürich: Ruegger. Quezada, R. L. (2010). Internationalization of teacher education: Creating global competent teachers and teacher educators for the twenty-first century. Teaching Education, 21(1), 1–5.

Thomas Goetz University of Konstanz, Germany, Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland Gerit Jaritz Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland Fritz Oser Université de Fribourg, Switzerland

6

GERIT JARITZ

DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF (INTER)NATIONAL MOBILITY IN INITIAL TEACHER TRAINING: EXPECTATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND WAYS FORWARD

1. SCHOOLS AND TEACHER EDUCATION IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBALIZATION AND MIGRATION

It is true that teachers and schools are still very much embedded in local communities and tend to be local activists rather than global players. However, local and national issues can often be better understood if embedded in a wider global context. Thus, developing cultural sensitivity and a sense of our global interdependence is becoming a real challenge to all educators, and cross-cultural experiences and global issues are slowly becoming components of both Swiss and European curricula. Our increasingly diverse and multicultural society and today’s interconnected world require teachers who are equipped with “global competency and cultural intelligence” (Stewart, 2008, p. 16) and will develop a global perspective in their students. It is therefore clear that teacher education has to take these societal developments into account and incorporate an international dimension into teacher training programmes. Despite such clear trends and a growing demand for more flexibility, teacher education policy remains predominantly nationally orientated, and teacher qualification requirements are still heavily dependent on national degree structures and regulations. Stewart highlights that this is the case worldwide, with the state normally acting as the main employer and exerting a strong political influence on the structure and content of teacher training (Stewart, 2008, p. 12). However, the integration of teacher education into tertiary or higher education can be considered a strategic step towards more openness in this field. The vision of the Bologna Process is to establish a European Higher Education Space by 2010, with enhanced employability and mobility of European citizens across the continent as one of the main objectives. This entails the adoption of a European or international dimension to higher education programmes of study in all participating countries through international cooperation promoting the exchange of students, staff and ideas.

T. Goetz et al. (Eds.), Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education, 7–24. © 2011 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

GERIT JARITZ

2. HOW MOBILE ARE FUTURE TEACHERS?

The main EU mobility programme – ERASMUS1 – has of course made an essential contribution to the fulfilment of Bologna objectives in terms of internationalization and mobility in higher education. EU Data show, however, that the share of student teachers within the ERASMUS programme is proportionally much lower than in most other disciplines of study. Table 1. Share of Teacher Education Students in the ERASMUS Programme2 Field of Study Business Studies Languages, Philological Sciences Social Sciences Engineering, Technology Education, Teacher Training Agricultural Sciences

2004/05 20.36% 14.94% 11.80% 10.80% 3.15% 1.86%

2005/06 20.52% 15.18% 11.31% 10.99% 3.13% 1.94%

2006/07 21.05% 15.29% 11.16% 10.91% 3.21% 1.93%

Note. The data are from Erasmus Student Mobility: Subject Areas, European Commission.

According to the statistics of the European Commission, student teachers account for approximately 3% of all ERASMUS students within the European Union, or even fewer if students of educational sciences have not been counted in the same category. A final report on a study commissioned by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Education and Culture on the mobility of teachers and trainers points in the same direction when it concludes that “the apparently low take-up of Erasmus exchanges by students attending teacher training […] could suggest that international mobility is not a common preference of future teachers” (European Commission, 2006, p. 6). However, the reasons behind the comparatively low popularity of this form of mobility are likely to be far more complex and might be directly linked to the orientation and structure of teacher education as a discipline. As mentioned above, teacher education is still a very nationally orientated discipline which usually prepares students to follow a national curriculum in a local state school using national textbooks. Consequently, many teacher training institutions require their students to take the majority of their courses at their home institution and do their teaching practice in local schools. The relative ignorance of and lack of trust in a different training or school system often prevents student teachers from completing a part of their studies at a different teacher training institution without having to prolong their studies at their home institution. Paired with the relative shortness of some teacher training courses, this certainly represents one of the main obstacles for a widespread implementation of longer periods of mobility of students in initial teacher training institutions across Europe. Nevertheless, even though it seems that many of these institutions and faculties of education remain at the periphery of internationalization, one must not fail to 8

DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF MOBILITY

recognize the increasing efforts which can be observed throughout the field. Furthermore, many universities and teacher training institutions offer short placements abroad or the possibility to develop mobility projects within the framework of Comenius, another EU programme. This allows student teachers to make short stays abroad during which they can get to know other educational systems and teaching approaches (Beernaert, 2002, p. 81). 3. SWISS UNIVERSITIES OF TEACHER EDUCATION AND STUDENT MOBILITY

Swiss Universities of Teacher Education were created from 2001 onwards, following a reform in teacher education3 which led to a tertiarization of teacher training at all levels. Among many other things the societal developments mentioned above had to be taken into account, and the integration of intercultural aspects of teaching and learning into the newly developed programmes of study was a requirement for initial recognition. Furthermore, the promotion of professional and academic mobility and the removal of any existing barriers had to be adopted as a strategic goal by the Swiss Conference of Rectors of Universities of Teacher Education (COHEP) in order to comply with the European Bologna Declaration’s broader objectives (see COHEP, 2007). This was an important step towards the internationalization of Swiss teacher education, considering the fact that prior to the reform most pre-school and primary teaching diplomas had only been recognised by the canton of the issuing institution. Consequently, for many years even national mobility for qualified and student teachers had been limited to short home-stays or placements. Student mobility in the form of academic long-term exchanges does not have a long tradition in Swiss teacher training compared to other disciplines; with this background possibly representing an additional barrier to mobility, it is not surprising that numbers of mobile student teachers in Switzerland are as low as in the EU (CRUS, 2006–2008). Table 2. Share of Outgoing Student Teachers in the ERASMUS Programme (Switzerland Only) Outgoing CH Total ERASMUS OUT Share of student teachers

2004/05 1 885 29 (= 1.5%)

2005/06 2 080 53 (= 2.5%)

2006/07 2 118 71 (= 3.4%)

Note. The data are based on ERASMUS-Austauschstudierende – Schlussberichte, Feb. 2006 – Feb. 2008, CRUS (row 1) and on the statistics of individual institutions (row 2).

Nonetheless, it does seem justified to predict an increase in student teacher mobility for the years to come. Especially the number of Swiss student teachers spending one or two semesters at a different higher education institution in Switzerland or abroad has slowly but steadily been rising over the past three years, 9

GERIT JARITZ

thanks to the individual and joint efforts of Universities of Teacher Education across the country. The present paper will therefore concentrate on this aspect of mobility and not take into account other forms of mobility, such as short teaching placements or stays aimed solely at improving language competence which are often obligatory during their foreign language training. 3.1 Current Efforts Over the last years, Swiss Universities of Teacher Education have been putting varying degrees of effort into the establishment of international cooperations and the setting-up of internal structures and resources geared towards the promotion of mobility. There is general consent that the promotion of mobility and internationalization should play a central role in teacher education as teachers are seen as central opinion multiplicators in an increasingly multicultural society and have to be competent foreign language speakers.4 To this end, most universities now have an international coordinator responsible for the organization and coordination of student mobility programmes, which lie at the heart of initial efforts towards developing a culture of mobility in their initial training courses. It has, therefore, become much easier for student teachers to attend one or two study semesters at a different Swiss or European higher education establishment. Nevertheless, some of the obstacles mentioned above still persist. Due to the shortness and at least partially local orientation of the courses, exchange semesters are often still not truly embedded into initial training and can lead to a prolongation of studies or an increased workload upon return for mobile students. In order to further improve and foster mobility in teacher education and encourage universities to consider student mobility as an integral part of their degree courses, the Swiss Conference of Rectors of Universities of Teacher Education (COHEP) has published a set of very detailed recommendations regarding the promotion of national and international mobility. The recommendations, based on best-practice examples from different universities and the experience of international coordinators from all Swiss language regions, have been approved by all rectors and are intended to serve as a foundation for every university’s individual mobility concept (COHEP, 2008). 3.2 The Mobility Concept of the University of Teacher Education Thurgau (PHTG) as an Example The PHTG mainly trains future primary school teachers for schools in and around the canton of Thurgau. Consequently, the study programme for primary education has a relatively local orientation in many aspects. Being aware of their importance and supposedly positive impact on student teachers, the PHTG has built up international cooperation and integrated exchange programmes into the BA for Primary Education programme as an important tool of internationalization. The 10

DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF MOBILITY

internationalization process started only in 2005, but thanks to thorough planning and coordination with stakeholders at all levels of the programme, a concept has been developed which allows students to study at a different higher education institution in Switzerland or abroad for at least one semester without having to fear any negative consequences. Exchange figures show that the category “students OUT” is by far the most visible and successful component of our internationalization concept so far and confirm that we seem to have succeeded in putting into practice most of the recommendations regarding the mobility of Swiss student teachers (see COHEP, 2008). Table 3. PHTG Student Mobility, Primary Education Course Academic year 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09

Students enrolled in year group (P5) 100 103 89

Students in “mobility semester” 16 17 16

Percentage 16.0% 16.5% 18.0%

First of all, a clearly designated time window for what we call a mobility semester had to be defined by identifying which was the one semester with the least restrictive and pre-defined schedule and programme. In our case this is currently the fifth and penultimate semester of the undergraduate Bachelor course. Generally, this is the semester with the greatest freedom of choice with regard to the possibility of in-depth studies of certain subject areas and the lowest number of obligatory, strictly curriculum-based modules. No different from their peers who stay at home, mobility students have to choose three specialization subjects and a topic and research area for their Bachelor dissertation, which has to be written after their return and during the 6th semester. This allows for a very individual study programme at the host institution and gives us the necessary flexibility when approving our students’ usually tailor-made study plans. The opportunity to choose their subjects from a very different and sometimes wider course offer as a theoretical foundation for their Bachelor dissertation, as well as the possibility to do the necessary research abroad, maybe in an entirely different school environment, has proven to be one of the incentives for our students to embark on the adventure of a mobility semester. The linking of mobility with research and/or the Bachelor dissertation is highly recommendable, as it not only allows for flexibility but also makes students reflect on their experiences more deeply. Furthermore, this accounts for very interesting dissertation topics and sometimes even encourages students to explore the basics of comparative educational research. Another important recommendation urges universities to provide the opportunity for mobility students to enrol in the obligatory curriculum- or practicebased modules they might miss at their home institution. One way of doing this is to design online or other self-study modules, or to repeat single modules for 11

GERIT JARITZ

returning students provided that there are enough returning students to reach the minimum group size prescribed by that institution. In the PHTG’s case this has to be done, for example, in most arts subjects; these usually carry much less weight in most of our partners’ training concepts, whereas our primary education students are actually obliged to specialize in either arts, music or sport during their last year. It is essential that such institutional particularities do not hinder mobility but are taken into account from the very beginning. Generally, thorough and detailed planning for a concept for student mobility OUT, involving programme coordinators and department heads, seems inevitable. The parameters need to be clear and simple enough to encourage students to take on the challenge of adjusting to a different teacher education and school system within and for a short time only. In the future, whilst continuing our efforts to promote and further improve conditions for the mobility semester of our students, we will concentrate our efforts on providing equally good parameters for the exchange of teaching staff and the reception of incoming students who do not speak German. 4. MOBILITY IN TEACHER EDUCATION: NECESSITY OR NICE-TO-HAVE? EXPECTATIONS AND LIMITATIONS

Given the increasing popularity of and demand for mobility in teacher education, it is interesting to assess what its main objectives are and whether they can be fulfilled by participation in current student exchange programmes, such as ERASMUS. 4.1 Expectations Generally, exchange programmes seek to provide opportunities for students to develop different skills in relation to other societies and cultures and to expand their horizons. They are designed to give student teachers opportunities for experiential learning to improve their academic, personal and career development. Reading through the policy documents of the European Commission and mobility concepts of several higher education institutions, one can pinpoint the following main common objectives. The EU objectives in education and training systems go hand in hand with the Bologna Declaration’s aim of adding an international dimension to the area of European higher education. Accordingly, all European education and training systems should teach “skills required in an increasingly international and multicultural society” (Council of the European Union, 2001) and (future) teachers should be given first-hand experience gained in other European countries in order to prepare learners for their role in society (European Commission, 2005a, p. 2). The most commonly expected benefits of participation in a student exchange programme could thus be defined as intercultural competence and foreign language proficiency, both figuring among the eight key competences for lifelong learning defined by the EU (European Commission, 2005b). Mobility programmes are seen

12

DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF MOBILITY

as a key element in reaching this goal and thought to have a sustainable effect encouraging lifelong learning and professional mobility. Further positive outcomes of student mobility in teacher education are expected with regard to education and training. Student teachers are not only supposed to widen their horizons but also to get to know different educational systems and pedagogical approaches whilst generally increasing knowledge related to their field of study (Beernaert, 2002, p. 80). Moreover, the general objectives of mobility could be expressed in terms of flexibility and employability. A European study on careers in higher education has shown that overall mobility students seem to need slightly less time for finding their first employment and generally earn more than students who never participated in an exchange programme (Jahr, Schomburg & Teichler, 2002, p. 49). There has been no evidence found so far whether the same is true for teachers. However, the qualities and competences associated with mobility experience are likely to have a positive effect on the employability of a teacher, as mobile students have to be ready to tackle new challenges and adapt quickly to a new (study) environment and cultural setting. This is considered to be a useful skill not only in the classroom, but also in the ever-changing work environment that schools represent, requiring teachers to be open to innovations and to continuously adapt to new situations. 4.2 Challenges and Areas of Difficulty The expectations are numerous and varied. A few key factors need to be taken into account in order to meet them and reach the desirable outcomes mentioned above. Student mobility should not be advocated just for the sake of policies or even trendiness, since it requires a great deal of preparation and guidance if it is to reach its goals. Too often universities seem to follow a “politique paradoxale” (Kohler, Lallemand & Lepez, 2008, p. 139), which on the one hand strongly encourages student mobility for strategic or political reasons, but on the other hand does very little to prepare their mobility students and guide them towards the best possible learning effects. In terms of preparation, universities need to go beyond mere administrative support and prepare their students for the intercultural challenges of studying in a different cultural and academic environment. Without this support, students are often left alone with their ethnocentric viewpoints, and the desired development of intercultural awareness – the transformation from a monocultural to an intercultural perspective – is likely to remain very limited (Pettersson, 2007, p. 181). Such a lack of preparation by the home institution paired with a lack of support by the host institution might result in disillusionment and withdrawal and consequently in a ghettoization of international students. Many students report that it is very difficult to meet local students and that international and ERASMUS students tend to form strong identity groups (see also Cédric Klapisch’s film “L’auberge espagnole”). This often prevents students from getting a real insight

13

GERIT JARITZ

into the way of thinking and culture of the host country and also from improving their language skills. Just as important as sufficient preparation is a thorough follow-up at the end of the mobility period. Final reports, in which the students summarize their experiences and reflect on learning outcomes are the minimum follow-up and are usually required from all students participating in an exchange programme. However, very often these reflexions remain rather superficial and do not allow students to understand and analyse which professional, social and personal competencies they have acquired in order to successfully transfer them to their studies back home and their future career as teachers. A lack of reflection during and after mobility can also lead to a reinforcement of stereotypical viewpoints of the other, when in fact the main objective was a meeting of minds and a breaking down of prejudices (Brodnicke, 2007, p. 102). A third necessary development in the field of mobility in teacher education would be a clearer policy of recognition of mobility experience by the home institution. The recognition of academic credits from partner universities continues to be difficult, and mobility can therefore lead to a prolongation of study time. The development of “mutual trust and recognition of the competences and qualifications of teachers” (European Commission, 2005a, p. 2) between different teacher education institutions and countries thus needs to be improved further. A lack of recognition may be observed not only in terms of academic achievements but also in terms of mobility experience in general. The (hopefully) enhanced bundle of competences brought back by students after a period of mobility does not usually receive sufficient recognition, and opportunities for a transfer or dissemination of the newly acquired knowledge and practical experience are scarce or completely absent. 5. A SURVEY OF THREE YEARS OF STUDENT MOBILITY IN PRIMARY TEACHER EDUCATION

Having invested a great deal of time, energy and money into the setting-up of our student mobility programme, we wanted to find out as an institution whether the exchange programmes in place really do fulfil our and the students’ expectations. Final reports and informal oral accounts have always delivered a very positive tenor but provided mainly general feedback. In order to obtain some more specific answers, an online survey was conducted among PHTG students who had spent one semester at another Swiss, European or overseas teacher training institution during their initial primary teacher training. The survey, containing six questions, was conducted among our mobile students of the past three years, from 2005 (beginning of student mobility at PHTG) to 2007. A total of 36 students and alumni were contacted, and the response rate was a pleasing 69.4% (n=25). Due to the small number of participants and its basic research setting, this survey was not intended to deliver representative results for student mobility in teacher education in general but to provide PHTG with orientation knowledge regarding its efforts to develop a culture of mobility in initial primary teacher training. Furthermore, the 14

DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF MOBILITY

results brought us closer to answering the following questions: What is the main motivation for being mobile during their studies and how do students decide which host university to apply for? What are the learning outcomes of having experienced a different teacher training and educational system? Are they mainly personal or also professional? Do our returning students come a step closer to being the multilingual, cosmopolitan and interculturally experienced teachers we want them to be? These questions were designed to help us better understand the outcomes of participation in our exchange programmes. The data was then used to begin to identify specific learning outcomes and to enhance our programme. A selection of the results is presented below. 5.1 Selected Results 5.1.1 Reasons for Mobility and Criteria for Selection of Host University With an average of around 17% per yearly intake our students seem to quite readily embark on the challenge of studying at a different university in a different country or language region. In question 2 participants were therefore asked about the main reasons which influenced their decision to participate in a mobility programme. Students were given nine different reasons to choose from but also had the possibility to add a reason of their own. They then had to allocate a total of ten points to the different reasons according to the value they attached to them. The answers provided us with an idea of what students’ expectations prior to departure are and whether they correspond to expectations from an institutional point of view. Five participants misread the question and allocated a considerably higher number of points to their chosen reasons, which made a correction by linear division necessary.5 Table 4. Question 2: Reasons for Mobility (n=25) Motivation/Reason language proficiency experience/personal development travel/adventure enhancement of intercultural competences employability experience of a different school system dissatisfaction with my own university possibility to study at a bigger university knowledge increase/further training

Mean 2.39 2.12 1.92 1.28 0.54 0.53 0.47 0.41 0.33

The low spread of the mean values shows that participants seem to have several reasons for participating in a mobility programme and, consequently, allocated a low and almost equal number of points to four to six different reasons rather than highlighting one or two. 15

GERIT JARITZ

This might show that the expectations are high and manifold and that students have quite complex goals when it comes to their decision to do a mobility semester. It is nevertheless justifiable to have a closer look at the three reasons which received the highest number of points, as their importance is underlined by the fact that almost all the students allocated at least one point to each of them. The first one, improving one’s foreign language skills, seems to be central to all students, except for the very few who chose a German-speaking university. This is hardly surprising considering the fact that all students are required to pass a challenging language proficiency test as part of their French or English language teaching qualification. Here, the students’ and institution’s expectations match perfectly and also correlate with what was earlier identified as one of the most commonly expected benefits of mobility in general (see Section 4.1). Furthermore, in an attempt to distinguish between more professional or more personal objectives, it can be observed that the two runner-up criteria can be quite clearly attributed to personal rather than professional development goals. Their significance is again underlined by the fact that all but two students indicate them as a motivation factor. This is an interesting observation, since other goals such as an increase in knowledge, experience of another school system and employability in general, considered very important from a teacher trainer’s point of view, do not seem to rank among our students’ priorities. Question 3 dealt with the selection criteria for a particular host university. Again, a total of ten points could be allocated to a maximum of seven criteria. Once again, three answers had to be corrected (see also question 2). Table 5. Question 3: Selection Criteria for Host University Selection Criteria language of instruction = everyday language attractiveness of location / host country course offer recommendations of international coordinator opportunity to do teaching practice recommendations of past mobility students Others (e.g. allocation by home university)

Mean 3.23 3.21 0.96 0.75 0.59 0.30 1.04

When selecting a particular university as host university for their mobility semester, students clearly seem to be judging location as the most decisive criterion of choice. In many cases, they are looking for total immersion in a language and/or an attractive geographical location. Both criteria were not only mentioned by the majority of participants but also received the full ten points from some respondents. Again, language plays an important role, and it looks like students feel that better language proficiency, which is one of their main learning objectives, can only be reached by totally immersing themselves in the target 16

DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF MOBILITY

language. Likewise, the basically equally important criterion of an attractive location correlates with another one of the students’ main expectations, namely gaining some travel experience. However, these criteria do not necessarily depend on each other. Stockholm is a good example of this, as it always ranks very highly in applying students’ first choices despite the fact that the language of instruction does not correspond to the everyday language. All other criteria seem to play only a minor role, which underlines the outcome of question 2, indicating that except for foreign language proficiency and maybe the acquisition of intercultural competences, other factors contributing to professional development are not really decisive from a student point of view. 5.1.2 Perceived Values and Learning Outcomes In question 4 participants were asked about the learning outcomes and other expected benefits of their mobility experience. Points had to be assigned according to what extent they feel they have benefitted in a particular area: Table 6. Question 4: Perceived Values and Learning Outcomes Values / Outcomes experience/personal development personal contacts language proficiency enhancement of intercultural competences inputs for bachelor dissertation knowledge increase extension of teaching methodology

Mean 3.80 3.48 3.38 3.36 3.00 2.76 2.04

4 = considerable benefit 3 = some benefit 2 = little benefit 1 = no benefit

One first observation which can be made concerning the effects and outcomes of mobility in the case of our sample group is that they are varied and that, with the exception of two areas, all participants seem to have gained at least some, if not considerable benefit in all of them. Once more, it is striking that the highest values in terms of benefits can be found in the area of personal development and experience. From a student point of view this must certainly be satisfying, as it indicates that their initial expectations have been fulfilled. A clear correlation between expectations and outcomes can also be observed in the two most highly ranked areas based on professional benefit. Firstly, most students seem to have quite clearly fulfilled their expectations in terms of foreign language proficiency, with all but three indicating at least some progress. Secondly, with regard to the enhancement of intercultural competence, generally considered to be one of the main objectives of mobility programmes, all but one student indicated some benefit. Such correlations between expectations/motivations and benefits/outcomes of mobility are pleasing. It must, however, not be overlooked that other expectations in the field of education and training were either not or only partly 17

GERIT JARITZ

fulfilled. Only six students report having gained considerably from their studies at a partner university in terms of knowledge increase or being able to study a subject in greater depth. Even less benefit was reported in the area of teaching methodology, with only six students feeling their stay has contributed somehow towards an extension of their methodological repertoire and almost a third (7) claiming not to have learned anything in this respect. 5.1.3 Self-Perception after Mobility Experience The final question was intended to summarize the overall satisfaction and impact of mobility on our outgoing students by asking them to self-assess their personal state of being. The adjectives chosen for this purpose are meant to mirror their personal development in general, but also to allow for hypotheses about the impact of personal experience on professional qualities. Participants were asked to choose the three most appropriate adjectives from a choice of sixteen. Five participants chose more than three answers and they, therefore, had to be dismissed (n=20). Table 7. Question 6: Self-Perception after Mobility Experience Aspect of Self-Perception self-reliant / independent tolerant frustrated flexible open-minded thoughtful relieved tired critical motivated patient relaxed proud disillusioned self-confident mature

n 11 4 0 6 7 5 1 2 1 10 1 2 4 1 5 0

The table shows that a good half of our students returns feeling more “independent and self-reliant”. One possible interpretation of this result would be that it is good to leave the very protected and nurturing environment of our small university in order to prepare for working life, for which independence is certainly considered a strength and a key quality. Likewise, half of the participants felt very motivated after their mobility experience. In our particular context, this can be interpreted in regard to the end of their studies and/or their future teaching career. Both choices thus represent a pleasing result also from an institution’s point of view.

18

DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF MOBILITY

Furthermore, around a third of participants felt either more open-minded or flexible, or both, upon their return. The original version in German of the questionnaire uses the word “weltoffen”, which mainly refers to a cosmopolitan outlook and an openness towards otherness in terms of culture. This could confirm once more that one of the expected and assumed outcomes of student mobility programmes is indeed increased cultural awareness and the acquisition of intercultural competence. It remains to be interpreted what this could mean for future teachers if they perceive themselves as being flexible. Returning students often mention in their final reports how they had to adapt to a very different system of teaching and learning and to a different rhythm of life and mentality on a personal level. Those who manage to do so in the short period of four months certainly have to show a certain degree of flexibility. It would without any doubt be desirable if this quality, acquired or at least reinforced during a mobility semester, could be maintained as a useful skill for their future careers as teachers. As for the more negative self-perceptions, it is a relief to see that so far no one seems to have returned feeling “frustrated” and only two were “relieved or disillusioned” after their experience. On the other hand, several came back “thoughtful”, which possibly hints at a mixture of positive and negative experiences but could also be considered as a good foundation for a critical and possibly comparative approach in their future teaching. 5.2 Conclusion An analysis of the main reasons for a participation in a student exchange programme has shown that language acquisition is the main professional goal for our primary education students. However, more personal aspects like the wish for a change of location and undefined new experiences, which might broaden their horizons, are rated almost equally high. On the other hand, (discipline) knowledge increase and the extension of students’ professional horizons through the experience of a different training and school system seem to play only a marginal role in the “motivational package”. It was therefore not very surprising to find that these factors did also not figure among the learning outcomes considered most valuable upon return. This is clearly a weakness from our point of view, as we carefully select partner universities and go to great lengths to establish individual and tailor-made programmes for outgoing students before their departure. It is interesting to compare our results to some major studies on this issue, as it confirms their findings related to the motivation for and the perceived value of student mobility. The Socrates 2000 Evaluation Study by Gordon, Maiworm, and Teichler (2001), commissioned by the European Commission, shows, for example, that within the ERASMUS programme students of education generally “underscore cultural reasons” as opposed to an interest in academic and educational matters (p. 69) as their main motivation for studying abroad. Moreover, their overall assessment of the impacts and outcomes of temporary study abroad in Europe correlates very much with what our students perceive as the highest values of their 19

GERIT JARITZ

mobility semester: cultural enhancement, personality development and language proficiency (p. 96). Such a comparison shows that as different as the structure of teacher education seems to be at first glance and as little prone to student mobility, student teachers have similar goals and ambitions and are able to achieve them to the same extent as their peers from other degree courses. The results of the survey also confirm the impressions we had from returning students’ final reports, namely that practically all students return with the belief that their study period away from the PHTG was a valuable experience. The data, even though modest, thus provided us with a tangible tool for the further development and promotion of our existing mobility programmes. It proves, on the one hand, that our efforts are worthwhile and that we do seem to be helping some of our students to get a step closer to being multilingual, open-minded and interculturally experienced professionals. On the other hand, it allows us to identify some limitations and weaknesses of current practice. It thus remains for the future to explore possibilities of how to reap and maybe channel even better the benefits of our student mobility programmes. 6. REAPING THE BENEFITS AND ENSURING SUSTAINABILITY

The results of this first analysis of our student mobility programme are overall very encouraging, but also highlight aspects open to improvement. They provide us with important orientation knowledge and show us in which direction to gear our future efforts. Hopefully, it might also assist teacher training institutions with a similar student body and educational focus in establishing or reviewing their own programmes. Our policy document on the implementation and promotion of mobility clearly states that the main goal of student mobility is the enhancement of students’ subject and methodology skills alongside the acquisition of intercultural and language competences. However, this survey has clearly shown that the benefits in terms of students’ education and training are somewhat limited and could be increased. This will be achieved through the implementation of some new measures before and after the mobility semester. Once a year an information event is organised during which students are informed about administrative prerequisites and given a short overview of our partner universities. For time reasons, universities are only superficially introduced and not much is said about the study programme or courses offered. This most likely contributes to the fact that our students’ choice of a host university is mainly based on the attractiveness of its location and the official language of the host country. The study content, even though likely to influence the topic of their final dissertation, seems to play a clearly subordinate role. In the future, students should be made more aware of the strengths and special competences of our diverse partner universities in order to encourage them to make a choice which allows them to profit from an in-depth study of an area of their particular interest. To this end, clearly identifiable special interest or competence areas of each partner 20

DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF MOBILITY

university will be listed on our homepage. With this more thematic approach to mobility we would also like to target students who are not looking to improve their language skills or gain intercultural experience and who therefore are usually not thinking about studying abroad. We have, for example, excellent partners in Switzerland and the neighbouring countries of Germany and Austria, who are rarely solicited despite their excellent course programmes. Moreover, preparation prior to departure will be improved through contact with past mobility students and the integration of obligatory reflexion and observation tasks. A meeting with returned students will allow aspiring mobility students to obtain first-hand information and cross-check their expectations against the experiences of their peers. Like this, one can identify difficulties and analyse possible reasons for low learning outcomes in certain areas. This information will then be used for personal AND professional goal-setting with regard to their mobility experience. Another important aspect of preparation is the integration of some reflexion and guided observation tasks in students’ learning agreements. Having realised that, after handing in their final report, returning students are given no opportunity to reflect upon their experience or share it with their trainers and peers, we feel the need to improve the sustainable effects of our exchange programmes. The meetings described above are one step in that direction. Furthermore, the obligatory observation task set by one of our teacher trainers in the field of classroom management is intended to increase student awareness of differences and guide them towards a comparative learning approach during their teaching practice abroad. Upon their return, all mobility students attend a course on classroom management together, which has always been topically linked to their teaching practice in Switzerland, but now also integrates this comparative approach and is based on the observation task set before their departure. As this is not possible with all courses, we are further asking students to use their professional portfolio to record parts of their experience and reflect upon this. At most Universities of Teacher Education in Switzerland, the professional portfolio is used as a tool to support the acquisition of teacher-specific competences and document the achievement of certain professional standards. Portfolio entries link theory with practical experience and are presented in the form of written reflexions. Students are now required to make at least one entry during their mobility semester, which ensures at least some feedback from their tutors, when the portfolio is submitted, and thus underlines the value of mobility from a professional point of view. The idea of using a portfolio in order to increase the lasting effects of mobility is not new. The EU Comenius project “LinE – LehrerIn in Europa”, aiming to provide European competence in teacher education through placements in other countries, has developed a portfolio to allow student teachers to record their personal and professional development not only during their LinE placement but also during subsequent stays abroad (Hilligus, 2007). Beernaert, in an analysis of the necessary future developments in the field of teacher mobility, also suggests the use of a European dimension portfolio for teachers (Beernaert, 2002, p. 83) in 21

GERIT JARITZ

order to enhance the recognition of mobility and promote lifelong learning. He further criticizes the fact that, contrary to other professions, mobility experience is not recognised in any way in the career of a teacher and does not contribute towards promotion. The European Europass “Mobility”, which documents any kind of learning experience abroad, points in the same direction but is not in use in Switzerland. For the time being, we strongly recommend our students to collate a mobility dossier containing their Transcript of Records, teaching practice reports and a short general summary of their experience. This is intended to bring added value to job applications and give them a differentiated profile. These are the measures that have been or are going to be taken as an immediate reaction to the results of the survey, which indicate that there is still some room for improvement in terms of the professional development outcomes of our student exchange programmes. At the same time, we would like to increase the sustainability of mobility experience, firstly, with regard to further studies after students return and secondly, with regard to their future careers as teachers. Even though more detailed research is needed on the impact of prior cross-cultural experience on students’ and teachers’ attitudes, it can be assumed that teachers with study or work experience abroad are more committed to integrating global issues into their teaching, provided that teacher trainers are more cognisant of and build upon such experiences during their training (Holden and Hicks, 2007, p. 22). 7. FUTURE NEEDS AND DEVELOPMENTS

A fast-changing society creates numerous new demands on schools and teachers, and teacher education is today facing many new challenges. One of these is migration and globalization. Mobility – and international cooperation in general – constitutes an indispensable tool in order to meet the needs of the future. This involves, however, systematic efforts at all levels of an institution to overcome obstacles created by national degree structures and curricula, which often enclose teacher education institutions within national borders and hinder a real culture of national and international mobility from taking root. Even though no one really questions the utility of student teacher mobility as one of the main components of such a culture, and internationalization endeavours feature in almost every higher education institution’s strategic development plan, much remains to be done. Mobility has developed from a “nice-to-have” to a “must-have” offer, which does not, however, always guarantee its development from a popular term into an integral concept of a training programme, with clearly defined goals and expected long term effects. The lack of research on ideal settings and outcomes of student mobility, taking into account the particularities of teacher education, may be seen as one of the inhibiting factors here. An increased understanding and more scientifically supported recommendations would be necessary to significantly impact institutional policies and help to better articulate and demonstrate needs such as clear parameters, sufficient human and financial resources and more goal-orientated exchange programmes. 22

DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF MOBILITY

NOTES 1

2 3

4

5

The ERASMUS part of the EU Lifelong Learning Programme enables university students to study abroad for a minimum of three months or a maximum of a full academic year through student mobility grants. Not all disciplines of study are mentioned. For more information see CRUS [Rectors’ Conference of the Swiss Universities]. (2008). Studying in Switzerland: Universities of Teacher Education – 2008. Bern: CRUS. In Switzerland, English and French are already taught at primary level. The first foreign language is introduced in 3rd grade and the second in 5th grade. e.g. 54 (= total of allocated points)/10 (= total of points that could be allocated) = 5.4 (= division factor for allocated points). In this way, the original weighting of the participant remained intact and the answer did not have to be dismissed.

REFERENCES Beernaert, Y. (2002). Mobility in school and teacher education in the European Union and beyond. In A. Hilligus, H. Rinkens, & C. Friedrich (Eds.), Europa in Schule und Lehrerausbildung. Münster: LIT. Brodnicke, M. (2007). Praktika und Studienaufenthalte – Lohnen sie sich? In A. Hilligus & M. Kreienbaum (Eds.), Europakompetenz – durch Begegnung lernen. Opladen & Farmington Hills: Budrich. COHEP [Swiss Conference of Rectors of Universities of Teacher Education (SCTE)] (2007). Strategie der COHEP. COHEP [Swiss Conference of Rectors of Universities of Teacher Education (SCTE)] (2008). Empfehlungen zur Förderung der nationalen und internationalen Mobilität. Retrieved from http://www.cohep.ch/de/publikationen/empfehlungen Council of the European Union. Report from Educational Council to the European Council: The concrete future objectives of education and training systems, 14 February 2001. CRUS [Rectors’ Conference of the Swiss Universities]. (2006–2008). ERASMUS-Austauschstudierende [2004/05, 2005/06, and 2006/07] – Schlussberichte, Feb. 2006 – Feb. 2008 [Data files]. Retrieved from http://www.crus.ch/information-programme/erasmus/berichte.html European Commission. (n.d.). Erasmus student mobility [2004/2005, 2005/2006, and 2006/2007]: Subject areas [Data files]. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/erasmus/doc920_en.htm European Commission/Directorate-General for Education and Culture (2005a). Common European principles for teacher competences and qualifications. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/ education/policies/2010/ doc/principles_en.pdf European Commission (2005b). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on key competences for lifelong learning. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/languages/ pdf/doc775_en.pdf European Commission/Directorate-General for Education and Culture (2006). Mobility of teachers and trainers, Final Report December 2006. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/pdf/ doc258_en.pdf Gordon, J., Maiworm, F., & Teichler, U. (Eds.). (2001). SOCRATES 2000 evaluation study. Brussels: European Commission. Hilligus, A. (2007). LinE Portfolio und Guidelines – Instrumente zur Dokumentation, Reflexion und Organisation von Schulpraktika im Ausland. In A. Hilligus & M. Kreienbaum (Eds.), Europakompetenz – durch Begegnung lernen. Opladen & Farmington Hills: Budrich. Holden, C., & Hicks, D. (2007). Making global connections: The knowledge, understanding and motivation of trainee teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(1), 13–23.

23

GERIT JARITZ Jahr, V., Schomburg, H., & Teichler, U. (2002). Internationale Mobilität von Absolventinnen und Absolventen europäischer Hochschulen. Werkstattberichte – Band 61. Kassel: Wissenschaftliches Zentrum für Berufs- und Hochschulforschung der Universität Kassel. Kehm, B. (2005). The contribution of international student mobility to human development and global understanding. US-China Education Review, 2(1), 18–24. Kohler P., Lallemand, I., & Lepez, B. (2008). Logiques des institutions versus expériences des étudiants : la mobilité universitaire internationale. In G. Zarate, D. Lévy & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Précis du plurilinguisme et du pluriculturalisme. Paris: Editions des archives contemporaines. Pettersson, M. (2007). Die “folkeskole” – Reform von Schule und Lehrerausbildung in Dänemark. In A. Hilligus & M. Kreienbaum (Eds.), Europakompetenz – durch Begegnung lernen. Opladen & Farmington Hills: Budrich. Stewart, Y. (2008). Mainstreaming the European dimension into teacher education in England – Enabling and disabling factors. Retrieved from http://www.pef.uni-lj.si/tepe2008/papers/Stewart.pdf

Gerit Jaritz Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland

24

DORA LUGINBÜHL

WORKING WITH INCOMING STUDENTS: CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION

1. INTRODUCTION

Incoming students are very welcome in Swiss teacher education. They contribute to a desirable internationalization of higher education. Universities of teacher education1 in Switzerland take part in mobility programmes and have an interest in enabling their students to study abroad for one semester while, on the other hand, classes for incoming students are offered. It is only fairly recently that this process of internationalization has begun to spread in teacher education, and the question arises as to which training courses and instructional forms are particularly suitable for teaching culturally mixed groups at university level. In parallel to that, regulations and recommendations concerning teacher education are formulated from the perspective of culturally responsive teaching:2 teachers are expected to possess competences in dealing with cultural diversity in class and they should be prepared for coming into contact with parents in a multicultural environment. For about two decades experts on culturally responsive teaching have been seeing to it that intercultural curriculum content is rendered mandatory for all students in teacher education. Moreover, they try to make it possible that people with a migration background can increasingly gain admission to universities of teacher education either as students or as lecturers (see COHEP, 2007b). To what extent internalization through mobility programmes is capable of furthering these efforts shall be reflected later on the level of teaching and learning with incoming students and then be critically examined. Reflection on teaching processes is a central element of any form of teacher education. How can useful and instructive settings for incoming students3 be created which at the same time give local students the opportunity to take part in interculturally instructive interaction? How can the incoming students’ stay at their host university of teacher education be made fruitful for everyone’s learning? These questions shall be dealt with by presenting some selected research findings and having a closer look at one specific concept of teaching. The statements of ten incoming students shall afterwards be reflected with reference to those theoretical foundations and to actual practice at one particular university of teacher education. In doing so a contribution to the internal quality management of our and similar institutions is made which goes beyond quantitative activism regarding internationalization and also focuses, besides the numbers of the comings T. Goetz et al. (Eds.), Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education, 25–47. © 2011 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

DORA LUGINBÜHL

and goings among the students, on the quality of teaching and the learning success of all persons involved. The Thurgau University of Teacher Education (PHTG) is one of fifteen Swiss universities of teacher education. It is located close to the border, near Konstanz, Germany. With a notable proportion of German students and a close cooperation with the University of Konstanz it forms part of an intercultural learning community and is thus involved in German-speaking internationalization. Every year, 15–20 local students study abroad for one semester, mainly in England, France, Belgium, or in the Scandinavian countries, while in the same way about ten incoming students come to the PHTG for one semester or two. 2. IMPARTING INTERCULTURAL COMPETENCES AND INTERNATIONALIZATION AT UNIVERSITIES OF TEACHER EDUCATION

2.1 Culturally Responsive Teaching in Teacher Education For the past two decades, Swiss teacher education has been pursuing different approaches with the aim of compulsorily implementing culturally responsive teaching in the curriculum. Until tertiarization in 2003, most of the training courses offered were based on the theoretical foundation of the encounter and dialogue thesis4 (see Gogolin & Krüger-Potratz, 2006). Study trips to the regions of origin or meetings on the spot were organized. Some propagated the introduction of curricular elements like, for example, study weeks on culturally responsive teaching or the development of an appreciative attitude towards multilingualism in foreign language instruction. These training opportunities depended on single proponents, who mostly had an educational background or were sometimes specialized in foreign language teaching. The official acceptance regulations for universities of teacher education laid down the condition that new training programmes have to include curriculum contents on dealing with cultural diversity which are mandatory for everyone (see EDK, 1999). COHEP5 (2007a, 2007b) passed a basic report and recommendations for the attention of the universities of teacher education. Recommendation 5 6 encourages them to open teacher education nationally as well as internationally, and to overcome their monocultural and monolingual stance. The process initiated by COHEP is still going on. The fundamental guidelines (see COHEP, 2007a, 2007b; Sieber & Bischoff, 2007) and national conferences offer guidance in regard to the development of still “insufficient teacher education, especially in-service training” (Allemann-Ghionda, 2008, p. V). Internationalization is seen as one possibility among others of establishing intercultural study groups and of promoting culturally responsive learning.

26

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING

2.2 Multicultural Students as Stimulation for Intercultural Learning Processes As early as in the nineties surveys showed clearly that too few young people with a migration background attended courses of higher education, especially with respect to seminaries and teacher training programmes (see Allemann-Ghionda, Perregaux & de Goumoëns, 1999). Why the teaching profession was less accessible or less attractive to this group was accounted for in several ways. Stadler (1999) assumes different selection hurdles, which made – and presumably still make – it difficult for young people with a migration background to succeed at a university of teacher education. He describes five selection hurdles,7 starting with the monocultural stance of public school. This first hurdle must be overcome in an initial step in order to make moving to secondary level 2 worth considering at all. The fifth level, which concerns the selection processes of the local education authorities, constitutes the last hurdle (see Stadler, 1999, p. 293). The current enrolment lists of the PHTG indicate that a change towards increased cultural diversity is going on. The future will show whether the rising cultural diversity at public schools will gradually be reflected in teacher education too. Perhaps the ongoing internationalization of universities of teacher education can also, besides promoting increased reflection on and change of the five selection hurdles, attract more young people with a migration background, since a positive assessment of foreign languages and cultural differences at an institution is likely to appeal to people with a migration background. If the developmental stages of culturally responsive teaching are taken into consideration (Gogolin & KrügerPotratz, 2006), it becomes obvious that teacher education was an oasis of a culturally homogeneous training group for a long time. Only every now and then did a second generation student make his or her way into this profession. While teacher education has reacted with some delay to the social structure of the population with its high proportions of people with a migration background, transcultural8 concepts and identities are already applied in the context of the growing-up of today’s pre-school and school children (see Welsch, 1995). Internationalization in teacher education could at best become a means of gradually facilitating cultural diversity and thus of promoting the acquisition of intercultural or transcultural competences in the course of the study. In the face of this lack of cultural difference at institutions of teacher education there is a need for model elements and a theory of teaching in a context of cultural diversity on this level of education, especially in the European educational area. Research findings are rare as well. Apart from the gain resulting from multicultural students and staff it needs to be clarified in the future whether a culturally diverse structure by itself can prompt desirable culturally responsive learning. At this point it is now worth having a look at the relevant literature. In what follows, suggestions for the creation of a teaching culture which embraces incoming students shall be searched for on a conceptual level as well as in research reports.

27

DORA LUGINBÜHL

3. TEACHING AND LEARNING WITH INCOMING STUDENTS – EXPLORATIONS INTO THEORY AND RESEARCH

The search for investigations on educational questions centred on incoming students leads to a broad range of subjects and questions. Research findings which specifically relate to internationalization in teacher education are nevertheless rare. This is comprehensible since teacher education still has only little experience with internationalization. The results presented below have been selected because they are regarded as being relevant to the work with incoming students from the perspective of the staff and the universities of teacher education. 3.1 The Significance of Internationalization in Higher Education Globalization has an influence on academic training and the currently intensified promotion of internationalization. In recent times the call for internationalization of all types of university has very much stimulated activities in this field. In the academic landscape increasing internationalization has been recommended as a concept of dealing with globalization. Yet it is controversially discussed whether or not the effects of this coping strategy are sometimes overrated. In particular, the question is raised whether all parties involved profit equally from the ongoing processes (see Altbach, 2004). The fact of the matter is that educational systems of the industrial nations, especially the one of the US, with their high tuition fees and export of intellectual goods (books, etc.) are those who really profit from internationalization. Moreover, it is feared that the globalized education market might have negative consequences, for example in the form of another colonization of the developing countries. These fears are less relevant to ERASMUS programmes which are based on the idea of exchange within Europe and which are still predominant in teacher education. Although the costs of a study are apparently a major burden even on European students (see Pixner & Kolb, 2007), European universities can, in financial respects, hardly be regarded as profiteers of internationalization. International opening seems to constitute a complex challenge to universities, apparently and in particular when it comes to exchange with threshold countries and developing countries. Hence, the central idea that relations in the spirit of partnership should be established by way of international exchange still remains an ambitious goal: “The challenge is to recognize the complexities and nuances of the modern context and then seek to create a global academic environment that recognizes the need to ensure that academic relationships are as equal as possible” (Altbach, 2004, p. 23). Professional teacher training is differently structured even in the Germanspeaking countries of Europe and it is closely tied to national traditions in educational matters. This might have been a reason for the rather inwardly-looking attitude of traditional seminaries9 (see Isler, 2008, p. 14). Besides the multicultural development of society, it is the introduction of early French and early English into the curriculum of primary school which particularly prompted an international opening in this type of institution. Stays abroad or at least in the other part of the 28

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING

country with a foreign tongue have become a compulsory part of education. Like this a movement towards more internationality was made possible and at the same time required of all students in the form of a mandatory stay abroad. An important motive for a semester abroad is still the acquisition of linguistic skills. It is for this reason that French-speaking and English-speaking universities are largely preferred. This makes special demands on German-speaking universities of teacher education. The ERASMUS programme calls for attractive conditions and environments for incoming students since German as a second language is less popular than English. Swiss universities wanting to send their students abroad must therefore be ready to welcome guests and to teach them as well. In order to preserve the attractiveness of one’s home university educational programmes which are as appealing as possible need to be developed (see Wolfer, 2009). To summarize, it can be observed that internationalization is significant to Swiss universities of teacher education in several respects: – It fosters education which is ready for globalization. – Required intercultural or even transcultural learning and acting is promoted. – Internationalization enables the improvement of linguistic skills in a second language of outgoing, incoming as well as local students. If universities of teacher education succeed in reflecting on the complexity of intercultural and multilingual teaching and learning and at the same time pay attention to equality in multicultural relations (see Altbach, 2004), internationalization is a real gain for Swiss teacher education. 3.2 Well-Being of Incoming Students at Their Host University Various studies are concerned with demands and strains of incoming students and with options of social support. Apparently, international students are in general faced with special challenges which lead to a higher degree of study-related problems and drop-outs. It is obviously not just stimulating and instructive to study temporarily or even to complete a study at a ‘foreign’ university, mostly in a second language. Difficulties in adapting, acculturative stress or other challenges can lead to health problems or mental blocks in the course of the stay (see Poyrazli et al., 2004, cited in Pixner & Kolb, 2007). According to a survey among experts and as a result of a workshop with tutors in which critical incidents were analyzed the following aspects posed the most important problems to incoming students at the University of Freiburg (Germany): insufficient linguistic skills which would be necessary to cope with the various study-related requirements, financial problems, lacking contact with Germans, what, in turn, can be put down to lacking knowledge of the German language. Only second come homesickness and difficulties with cultural adaptation as well as with the organization of learning activities (see Pixner & Kolb, 2007). Another point concerns support options as regards coping with the high demands made on incoming students during an academic stay in a foreign culture. In their survey among 96 foreign and 171 local students at the University of 29

DORA LUGINBÜHL

Kaiserslautern, Dutke, Born, Kuhnert and Frey (2004) hit upon an interesting result: foreign students ask for more support on the professional part (professors as well as fellow students) than German students. Moreover, study-related and problem-oriented support is preferred to emotional support. This result is in accord with findings of Jou and Fukada (1995) which focus on incoming students in Japan showing that social support provided by professors of the host university is a more effective prevention when it comes to difficulties with adaptation and learning than assistance by other persons. Emotional and cognitive demands on part-time or full-time students in a foreign culture are high. It is for this reason that accompanying support structures are important in order to make constrictive learning possible and to avoid drop-outs. Institutional facilities common to ERASMUS such as the International Office and sometimes mentoring concepts10 (also referred to as tutoring) comply with the call for university-internal support. The thesis that support provided by the staff is especially effective ought to be pursued and converted into conceptions of possible courses of action at universities of teacher education. 3.3 Language as a Central Communication Aid in Learning Language is a central topic in most of the studies mentioned above (Altbach, 2004; Pixner & Kolb, 2007). In connection with universities of teacher education in German-speaking regions the additional question is raised whether foreign students should already have a good command of the German language or whether classes in English should additionally be offered in order to attract more incoming students. At the Zurich University of Teacher Education (PHZH), for instance, mastery of the national and therefore instructional language is given priority: “Gute Deutschkenntnisse sind Voraussetzung für ein erfolgreiches Studium an der PHZH” (i.e. a good command of the German language is a precondition for successfully studying at the PHZH) (Pädagogische Hochschule Zürich, 2007, p. 17). In spite of this firm statement and a range of German courses, even the PHZH offers a ‘Semester programme in English at the PHZH’. The University of Teacher Education St. Gallen has recently introduced a similar format, namely a so-called ‘international class’ (Wolfer, 2009), while the PHTG runs some modules of the general curriculum in German and in English. This engenders an additional gain for the local students since they can freely choose the German or the English version. Surprisingly many of them take the opportunity and go for the English module in order to improve their linguistic skills. The various ways of handling the questions related to the language in class at the different universities give a first hint as to which objectives and values are pursued in the process of internationalization. Allemann-Ghionda (2008) notes critically that an extensive orientation towards English as instructional language could lead to a “striking contradiction” with regard to education in Europe which is not least characterized by the variety of languages and cultures (p. 49). From the perspective of culturally responsive teaching, an institution which offers special, separative and English-speaking training severely restricts the possibility of 30

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING

intercultural contacts for most of the local students. Whether the incoming students in an ‘international class’ are more adequately assisted than in standard classes and whether their needs are given more time and attention is still be up for investigation. Linguistic skills and language instruction remain a central topic for all the parties involved. Lecturers who are able to competently teach modules in English or in French are rare. Incoming students need linguistic support in order to know their way around the academic business at a university of teacher education. With sensitivity, linguistic assistance or as mentors local students can provide valuable support and thus gain intercultural experience as well as experience in language teaching. 3.4 Learning – Learning Styles and Learning Strategies From an Intercultural Point of View According to Kolb (1984) and Honey and Mumford (1986) cultural differences in learning styles and learning strategies are very extensively explored. Charlesworth (2007) analyzed various research findings in detail and compiled them. Her analysis is complex and yields some partly contradictory results. In throwing a glance at the literature it can be observed that particularly in English-speaking parts of the world cultural differences are often described with a focus on the learning styles of students. The procedure of attaching labels by way of cultural ascriptions is questioned and critically examined by taking recourse to a study carried out with Indonesian, French and Chinese students at a university of tourism management. The spectrum of learning styles was quite broad at the beginning of their academic study, and became more uniform in the course of time. It is obvious that the learning culture and with it a certain educational culture influence learning styles and the learning strategies made use of as well. Hence, the difference between an eastern and a western learning culture is not called into question at all. What is rather called for is a detailed and in-depth analysis of the concepts of learning and culture. Learning strategies and learning styles are individually interpreted and applied while being adapted to the new learning culture in the course of studying abroad. As Charlesworth (2007) points out it is important in this connection not to speak of assimilation but rather of a growth in competence. In the recommendations for action for educational institutions and staff the following further remarks are added (see Charlesworth, 2007, p. 109 ff.): – Cultural differences with regard to learning cultures and learning styles do exist. The differences between learning styles and learning strategies in different cultures are not clearly identifiable. – At the beginning, incoming students are subject to stress factors similar to those to which all first-year students are exposed. The host university should react to this special situation with adequate support and guidance. – Reflection on differences in learning culture and therefore differing demands on students facilitates a broadening of the incoming students’ competences.

31

DORA LUGINBÜHL

4. INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION AT UNIVERSITY LEVEL – A CONCEPT OF ACADEMIC TEACHING FOR MULTICULTURAL GROUPS OF STUDENTS

Curriculum contents, learning success, learning gains or the subjective feelings in class could not be identified as topics dealt with in research reports. In the same way empirical investigations focusing on models of academic instruction for multicultural groups which have a good look at incoming students are lacking. Learning and teaching are essential to teacher education. It is likely that hardly any other academic discipline is so much concerned with its own training as is teacher education. The methodological and educational subject matter presented in class by the lecturers generates criteria for observation and criticism with respect to good teaching. Hence, teacher students feel obliged to constantly keep on scrutinizing and criticizing the tuition they get more thoroughly then students of other disciplines. Hence, it is in this respect that education on university level is effective not only via its contents but also via its methodological and educational arrangement. It is not merely a matter of simplified demonstrating and imitating, that is to say a simple transfer of teaching experienced at university to public school. The concept of the ‘educational biplane’ primarily starts out from an effect of explicit reflection on actual, experienced teaching on teacher students (Wahl, 2006). The quality of tuition plays a part too, but it is only of secondary importance for one can learn of mistakes as well. It is not so much imitation of teaching on the target level which is effective (see Isler, 2008), but rather reflection on parallels and wellchosen similar questions. The concept of Wlodkowski and Ginsberg (1995) is based on experience in teaching intercultural groups in higher education. Various aspects led to the decision to take this concept as the theoretical foundation of interviews with incoming students at the PHTG: – The perspective of the constructivist and systematic approach which is consistently kept up is considered as positive and helpful to a solution- and support-oriented procedure. The multitude and the concise, but nevertheless significant presentation of the manifold ideas about structures, norms, and processes are impressive. This renders the concept useful in creating learning processes at universities of teacher education. – Putting inclusion right at the beginning of the learning process is daring and appealing at the same time. Inclusion11 is often conceived of as an aim and hardly ever as an essential element of a learning process, whereas in the present context and with reference to the tradition of culturally responsive teaching integration of the students’ cultural backgrounds is regarded as the foundation of learning processes. What does the concept of culturally responsive teaching include? A detailed clarification of the matter is presented in Gay (2000) by way of a historical and

32

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING

theoretical account of the facts given. Her definition shows which elements are basic: Culturally teaching can be defined as using the cultural knowledge, prior experiences, frames and reference, and performance styles of ethnically diverse students to make learning encounters more relevant and effective to them. It teaches to and through the strengths of these students. (Gay, 2000, p. 29) The origins of this approach lie in the seventies when America became aware of the ethnocentric tendencies in its educational system which particularly neglected the big minority of black people. It is for this historical reason that orientation towards resources and a strong consideration for minorities are crucial to Gay’s definition. However, from the point of view of culturally responsive teaching, the learning of ‘all the people involved’12 is still not enough focused. Wlodkowski and Ginsberg (1995) applied the basic ideas of their approach to the educational realities of American universities where many migrants and incoming students study. As the United States are a classical immigration country, local educational institutions have a tradition and more experience of dealing with migrant people in general and incoming students in particular. In spite of these differences, the concept can be considered as relevant and transferable to the tuition given to incoming students in Europe. Teaching in general and teaching in the context of cultural diversity in particular is determined by a reciprocal process in the course of which four conditions or learning domains mutually influence each other in an interactive way. Moreover and at the same time, they are always condition and objective of the learning process (Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995, p. 27). Figure 1 clearly shows the high degree of complexity which results from the mutual influence of different subjects and conditions. The comments on the four learning domains are structured into criteria, norms, processes, and structures. Processes are understood to be teaching methods. Structures are organizational patterns which structure the learning process from a superior level. At the PHTG these structures include, for instance, the requirement that every module needs to be completed by a proof of academic achievement, particular agreements concerning the curriculum etc. Many structures cannot be created by a teacher individually, but are institutionally fixed. “A congruent set of norms, procedures and structures create the symmetry that enables culturally responsive teaching to have its impact and evoke student motivation” (Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995, p. 35).

33

DORA LUGINBÜHL

Figure 1. Motivational Framework for Culturally Responsive Teaching (Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995, p. 29)

4.1 Establishing Inclusion The learning domain ‘Establishing Inclusion’ is regarded as a condition and base for learning in multicultural groups. On the process level, the authors describe above all instructional environments which enable students to express themselves and to make themselves heard in groups of various formations and with different tasks to fulfil. Forms of cooperative learning are presented and the conception of writing groups or peer teaching is explained. The aim of all of these teaching methods is ‘inclusion’ or a potentially high degree of positive integration in the study group. The criteria for success are respect and multi-faceted relationships between local students and incoming students, experienced inclusion, and close connections with the group. For the purpose of exemplification, one of these processes shall be described at this point, namely the need for the communication of rules. Rules ought to be negotiated. From the clear definition of interactions which are to be promoted or avoided a climate of security and mutual respect results for teacher and students (see Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995, p. 101). It is for this reason that the first lesson should be used to introduce the rules. 34

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING

4.2 Developing Attitude A generally open and curious attitude is basic to learning in multicultural groups. As a consequence, the question arises as to how such an attitude among students can be cultivated. The authors describe two norms which promote the establishment of a positive attitude towards learning (see Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995, p. 119): – The teacher and all the students are aware of the fact that learning is contextualized in the individual experiences and the knowledge of each single student. The teacher can intentionally manifest an open and welcoming sensitivity for these experiences and a corresponding interest. – Another way of attaining this attitude towards learning consists in the possibility of an independent formulation of individual learning objectives and in engendering inner affection while learning. At this point, the authors have a critical look at the significance of language in multicultural settings. (The following remarks add to the research findings and comments presented in Section 3.3.) In a multicultural context, language use should be paid attention to in a particularly careful manner. Which words might be hurtful and blocking in intercultural communication? As regards incoming students who speak the language of the host country as a second language the authors refer to the theory of Cummins (1981, cited in Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995), who drew a distinction between BICS13 and CALP14 (see Griesshaber, 2005; Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995, 116 ff.). The linguistic skills of incoming students from Asia mostly correspond to the BICS-level, whereas communication in lectures and exercise sessions is located on the CALP-level. This can lead to frustration on both sides, viz. incoming students and hosts (i.e. staff and students). As regards language use in Switzerland it should be taken into account that the incoming students’ linguistic adjustment is made even more difficult by the frequent use of Swiss dialect. The following general approaches are considered as helpful in education (processes): – transparently and intelligibly defined objectives – fully-formulated learning agreements – paying attention to learning styles (see Section 3.4) – clear criteria for the requirements regarding the completion of modules and assessment. 4.3 Enhancing Meaning Understanding and critical questioning make up the foundation for sustainable intercultural learning processes. In addition to that, sense and subjective meaning are essential to successful learning processes as well. Every form of inclusion increases the individual’s participation and together with it his or her involvement as well as a subjective connection of the things learnt 35

DORA LUGINBÜHL

(e.g. relating newly acquired knowledge and skills to exemplary cases stemming from the native country, recounting stories associated with the things learnt in groups, answering questions from the angle of the native culture and discussing them with other students). Learning should create challenges: “Challenge includes any opportunity for action that humans are able to respond to” (Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995, p. 168). It is also for this reason that learning in a multicultural context can be demanding from time to time. According to Oser (1994), however, certain things can and should be expected of learners. Fundamental to subjectively meaningful learning is the theory of constructivist learning. How can the differing views of the students find their way into the learning arrangements and be activated in class? Far too often, the opinion or knowledge imparted by the teacher is at the centre of the lesson and is presented as universal truth or at least it is interpreted like this by the students. What it comes down to in the end is, according to Wlodkowski and Ginsberg (1995, p. 174), an authentic dialogue which is characterized, among other things, by the following features: – Analyse with learners’ participation. – Encourage learners to come up with thought-provoking questions for discussion. – Be patient in listening to learners and giving them time to think on their feet. – Invite learners to speak from experience, realizing that knowledge consists of one’s everyday lived experiences, and integrating this material into social issues and academic themes. 4.4 Engendering Competence The paramount aim of learning is always an increase in competence. At educational institutions this increase is evaluated and assessed. Wlodkowski and Ginsberg (1995) go in detail into questions centred around testing, assessment, and feedback on learning outcomes. Crucial to any kind of study circle are not only objectives (whether personally and independently set or externally fixed) and constructivist, meaningful dialogues in class, but also evaluation and assessment of outcomes. As an essential condition for evaluation the authors suggest that the purpose and objective of assessments ought to be a gain in competence. By demanding authenticity of the assessment of the increase in knowledge they claim that the required achievements ought to be related to the competences which will be asked for in the future. In the same vein, they stress the point that both the process and the outcome are important to the learning individual. The following recommendations are proposed for an adequate ‘assessment philosophy’: – The form of the exams or the proofs of academic achievement is connected with the background of the incoming student (cultural origin, learning level and objectives).

36

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING

– The acquired skills can be presented in different ways. At this point the authors call for forms of presentation which are more formative than the usual procedures at universities. The primary move is to admit multi-faceted modes of expression (oral, written, assignments, web-based forums and tests, presentations, etc.). – Self-assessment is essential and in fact the paramount evaluative process in learning. Because learning has something to do with change, the confusions and opportunities connected to it need to be captured and located in individual and rather personal assessments and reflections. – Attention should be given to the way in which the feedback on learning outcomes is presented. 4.5 Critical Objections to the Concept of Teaching After the above presentation in summary form, some critical objections to the concept of Wlodkowski and Ginsberg (1995) are added: – The methodological ideas and examples sketched in connection with each of the four learning domains are useful. These foundations could actually be productive in settings without incoming students as well. This is relieving and sobering at the same time. Good teaching – whether in culturally mixed or culturally homogeneous contexts – is characterized by similar factors. However, the concept provides a localization of accepted general approaches of the theory of education within a culturally mixed study group. – The authors are convinced that a coherent application of the four learning domains furthers the students’ intrinsic motivation. Yet there are doubts whether the very high expectations set in the connection between intrinsic motivation and the methodological options suggested above could be verified by empirical research. – What is striking is the neglect of the institutional context in which teaching always takes place. A progressively organized educational institution has a large influence on all the objectives and learning domains described above. Learning is not primarily or exclusively organized in study groups and seminars (or exercise sessions) anymore, but takes place on the campus in general and is decisively influenced by the culture and the rules of the institution. This dimension is almost completely missing in the concept at hand. It is merely mentioned in passing, namely in connection with structures which are mostly cultivated beyond the bounds of the study group. The institutional context is going to play a part in the survey among incoming students at the PHTG and in the outline of possible further developments of an internationally open teaching culture.

37

DORA LUGINBÜHL

5. SURVEY AND REPORTS OF INCOMING STUDENTS AT THE PHTG

Since 2005 incoming students from diverse countries have been attending classes at the PHTG. On the basis of the concept presented above (Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995), first two Chinese women and one Mongolian woman and afterwards two Mongolian women were questioned about their experiences as incoming students and their impression of their personal situation at their host university of teacher education in two group interviews. In addition, five written final reports of incoming students from Europe (1 German woman, 3 Luxembourgian women who study in Belgium and 1 Finnish man) were analytically evaluated. These reports comply with the structure which is dictated by the ERASMUS programme. The statements of the students are compared with regard to gains and pains, the four learning domains presented above and explanatory research findings. From this, developmental needs of universities of teacher education shall be derived (see Section 6). 5.1 The Incoming Students’ Cultural Background The two groups differ in their expectations in their host university and their personal educational objectives. The Asian women are language students and primarily want to learn German and in some cases English. Incoming students from Europe come via the ERASMUS programme, and they take teacher training in their native countries. Among the five analyzed reports there are four by Germanspeaking students whose situation is rather special. At home, the three Luxembourgian women speak German to their family, but they completed their school education for the most part in French. Now they study at a Belgian university close to the border of Luxembourg. Only one Finn did not speak German when he came to Switzerland. All in all, the proportion of incoming students from Asia is higher at the PHTG than at European universities in general. In most cases, they stay longer at our university, namely up to one year, and were thus more easily available for an interview. 5.2 Key-Topics from the Perspective of Incoming Students The very positive presentation of the various experiences in almost all reports is rather surprising. On the whole, the two Chinese students are the most likely to feel unsure and to be critical of basic matters. The interviews enabled the participants to address critical points. Hence, since only the students from Asia were interviewed, it would be necessary to add similar interviews with European students to the data base. The topics raised and described shall now be summarized and then be assigned to one of the four learning domains (see Section 4). 5.2.1 Developing Attitude It is frequently mentioned that the incoming students are individually perceived and addressed in class. 38

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING

Language: Language is an issue for all incoming students. Yet the two groups differ clearly. Whereas the Luxembourgian students look forward to teaching German in their period of practical training, the German student recalls SwissGerman dialogues between the local students which to grasp took her some time. The Finn appreciated the courses taught in English and felt supported while learning German in spite of many frustrating moments. The Asians describe their first encounters with Swiss dialect as a shock. In the first group interview, one Mongolian student explains this experience as follows: “At the beginning, we could not understand anything and simply listened. Then we thought: Gosh, what’s that? Which language do they speak? Gradually, I can manage to grasp something, but still not all of what is said.” Besides the difficulties with Swiss dialect, following the series of events in class was a challenge at first. The technical vocabulary posed a big, perhaps too big, challenge. Many technical terms cannot be found in a Mongolian or Chinese dictionary which makes things even more difficult. 5.2.2 Enhancing Meaning Curriculum Contents and Possibilities of Transferring the Acquired Skills: The European group was full of praise for the methodological preparation of the subject matter. According to their respective statements, all of them were able to profit a lot from the opportunities offered at the PHTG. The prospective teachers will go home with a wealth of ideas, learning materials and theoretical as well as practical inputs. As regards some modules, problems of conformity with their home university are mentioned, though in most cases with the addition that the lecturers adapted themselves individually to the specific situation and provided special papers or adjusted proofs of academic achievement. As far as this aspect is concerned, the language students from China and Mongolia face more difficulties, because in many cases they do not intend to become teachers and are mainly interested in broadening their command of the German or English language. With respect to these students, the newly acquired vocabulary seems to be too specific and it is doubtful whether they will ever make us of it at home. Intercultural Learning: Within the context of this investigation it is of particular interest which intercultural learning processes the incoming students went through themselves. The students from Luxembourg feel very comfortable in Switzerland because they have discovered many similarities and in many respects feel more at home than at the Belgian university at which they study. This reveals that they reflect on the observation of analogies from an intercultural point of view. Asian students report observations and draw comparisons. They compare instructional settings of their native countries with Swiss ones and comment on their observations. Some stories would actually make good anecdotes. For instance, when a Mongolian recalls what she thought when partitions made of wooden strips and thin walls were put up between the students for the written exams. On the

39

DORA LUGINBÜHL

whole, all students think about differences and commonalities, and develop a kind of sensitivity for cultural differences. However, it is only in passing that they describe situations in discussions or in class in which they were able to make a contribution related to their native culture. 5.2.3 Engendering Competence Requirements and Assessment: As far as requirements and assessments are concerned, some interesting pieces of information and statements were recorded. Four out of five ERASMUS students complain about the workload during their exchange, especially in combination with the requirements laid down by their home university. Particularly in the case of the three Luxembourgian students who study in Belgium it seems to be rather unclear which tasks need to be completed in Switzerland and how much can be caught up on at home in the remaining weeks of their final semester. That is why they criticize the general fact that the exchange takes place in the final semester of their study. With eleven to thirteen modules, the Asian students feel overtaxed as well. In this connection, the feeling of being overloaded results particularly from the considerable number of reading assignments (specialist literature) which take up a lot of time (see ‘Curriculum Contents and Possibilities of Transferring the Acquired Skills’ in Section 5.2.2). The requirements of the proofs of academic achievement are sometimes quite new to the incoming students and thus unfamiliar. At the beginning they are not understood for linguistic reasons either. The students from Luxembourg remark that they never had to write assignments before since in Belgium achievement is solely assessed by way of exams. The students from Asia state that they prefer oral exams to written exams. All things considered, the incoming students appreciate that proofs of academic achievement are individually adapted most of the time and that they ask for connections with exemplary cases of their native country. Furthermore, there are no complaints about the grading system. 5.2.4 Establishing Inclusion Social Support: All the incoming students are satisfied with the support they get of the person in charge of mobility (Head International Office). Especially the European students are thankful for friendly and competent advice and assistance which is regarded as being very important in the period of initiation. Only the Asian students mention their mentors (see Section 3.2). The mentorship was unimportant to one group of interviewees and they did not consider it to be too helpful. However, the Mongolians who currently study at the PHTG feel very much supported by their mentors. The local students meet the incoming students for lunch on a weekly basis and they talk about all kinds of questions concerning their study as well as everyday life in Switzerland in general. Both incoming students report that they were given many helpful tips for a lot of everyday situations.

40

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING

That local students and the staff offer support and get in contact with incoming students is generally conceived of as positive. In the time off university, however, some of the interviewees would appreciate if local students invited them to leisure activities a bit more often. In class many cooperative settings, mostly group work, take place. The incoming students like them because they offer the chance to speak in a small circle. However, two obstacles need to be overcome which sometimes arouse feelings of exclusion. Firstly, it can happen that the incoming student is left out and has to ‘offer himself or herself’ to one of the groups. Furthermore, the local students sometimes discuss in Swiss-German so that the incoming student is faced with the need to ask the members of the group to kindly speak High German. Both actions take a lot of courage, and lecturers’ support is therefore highly appreciated and welcome. Place of Residence: There are significant differences regarding the place of residence. The Chinese women share a flat, whereas all other students are accommodated in host families or reside with host mothers. All things considered, the second option is judged to be more helpful than the first and this with respect to language acquisition, social integration into academic life and into the local culture in general. Atmospheric dissonances at the place of residence can be emotionally distressing and hamper the incoming students in socially settling down. Initial Situation: In each of the ERASMUS reports the beginning of the stay abroad is described. It seems to go without problems in all the cases. The students mention how warm the welcome was. As far as initial communication difficulties are concerned, the Asian women give an impressive account of their strong feelings of helplessness, of being overstretched and even of their withdrawal into silence. In class too there are sometimes lessons in which they do not understand anything at all. Besides linguistic difficulties there are additional cultural novelties which pose a bigger challenge to them than to Europeans, for example the gastronomic culture. 6. FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING AT UNIVERSITIES OF TEACHER EDUCATION

Which inputs follow from theory, research and the survey carried out at our university as regards the further development of and reflection on internationalization and tuition of incoming students? In what follows, some basic points of action shall be formulated for each of the educational actors (institution, staff and fellow students). 6.1 Institutional Level In Swiss teacher education it is not the case that certain subjects are studied and afterwards supplemented by educational theory. Rather, educational theory and science have priority so that teacher students become professional all-rounders. It 41

DORA LUGINBÜHL

is for this reason that lecturers always act as a kind of role model and are judged by the students in regard to teaching style and methodological abilities (see Section 4). Therefore, it is not unimportant how intercultural questions are worked on if a university of teacher education intends to reach the targets set by COHEP and wants their prospective teachers to develop a way of respectfully and supportively coping with multiculturalism in their future classes as well. 6.1.1 Curriculum Contents and Teaching Conceptions On the level of the curriculum contents, exchange definitely yields a gain for European ERASMUS students. It follows from the final reports that an insight into a different educational system is enormously profitable with regard to one’s professional education. However, as regards curriculum contents, coordination could still be improved. Yet this particular focus of the education of prospective teachers is rather an obstacle than a chance for another type of incoming student. Especially Asian students study a specific subject at home and graduate in the German or English language. In this respect, there is need for action. However, all things considered, all the students feel adequately challenged by the curriculum and socially well-integrated so that the need for an ‘international class’ is not given from an educational and methodological point of view. It seems to be more effective if resources are invested in the development of additional English modules (open to all students), perhaps in German courses for incoming students and in an extension of individual assistance. Nevertheless it will remain a challenge to offer enough bilingual modules. Questions about the language in class, special training courses and the like need to be further evaluated and discussed on the institutional level. 6.1.2 Persons in Charge of Mobility and International Relations The existing range of structures to support incoming students is conceived of as being helpful and conductive. Central to this aspect is the person in charge of questions of mobility. He or she coordinates the allocation of modules, gives information on assessment and advises staff as well as students and host families whenever problems arise. For the incoming students he or she is a very important contact in case of small and bigger worries in every respect. He or she also organizes excursions and activities so that the incoming students get to know each other and their mentors. Many of these activities serve the purpose of international and intercultural communication. The tasks and the involvement of the person in charge of mobility promote all four learning domains (see Section 4), mostly on the level of structures (see Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995). 6.1.3 Place of Residence Integration in a family or a Swiss place of residence proves to be more helpful than flat-sharing with other incoming students. When it comes to choosing a place of residence, it is important that the environment allows as much contact with the host culture as possible. It is for this reason that sharing a flat is probably not the best solution. Nevertheless, since host families are not easy to find the minimal requirement when flats are shared is a 42

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING

good mixture of local and incoming students. This would further integration and local students could gain interesting intercultural experience. 6.1.4 Workload of the Staff The staff are institutionally supported by the policy that extra efforts (e.g. adaptation of proofs of academic achievement) are remunerated. This is intended to be a kind of incentive by the governing body of the school by means of which it expresses its earnestness and its recognition of the efforts made. 6.2 Level of Teaching and Staff The staff’s attitude and involvement form a crucial foundation stone of an ‘integrative’ concept of working with incoming students. It appears that individualization on the teaching and the requirement level is already practised as required by the theoretical guidelines. Individual agreements are made according to demand. In some modules there is a choice of assignment topics. In many cases, connections with the respective native culture are explicitly asked for. As far as support of social integration is concerned, improvements are still possible. Local students should continually be encouraged to use the standard language whenever they communicate with incoming students. The leadership and the responsibility lecturers take on in assisting their students in class need to be exercised with more deliberation (for example when it comes to the formation of study groups). As regards requirements and coordination, the person in charge of mobility is the contact for the staff. Concrete agreements are then made between the incoming student and the respective lecturer. If the staff approach incoming students and offer to assist them, say, to explain the proof of academic achievement once again, they manifest an attitude of openness and interest in learning processes. Perhaps the exchange of ideas and procedures among the staff could be promoted and intensified. Research shows that tips given by and conversations with lecturers provide the most effective support in study-related matters (see Section 3.2). 6.3 Students and Mentoring Programmes With the aim of a better integration of incoming students the mobility office organizes local students who are willing to act as mentors, i.e. to be the personal contacts of incoming students regarding different questions and matters of concern (see Jaritz, 2007, as well as Section 3.2). However, the function of and the idea behind a mentorship is not clear to all the incoming students. Moreover, it seems that the mentors interpret their role quite differently and perform their function with varying degrees of personal involvement. While some mentors are content with an initial contact and ask their mentees to get in touch with them in case of problems, others look after their guests even in their leisure time. As a consequence of the incoming students’ statements, ways of feasibly improving the concept in question need to be found. If too much is asked of 43

DORA LUGINBÜHL

mentors, nobody will volunteer. Nevertheless, the formation of intercultural competence has failed if local students are not aware of the fact that, should problems arise, the incoming student will hardly approach a person he or she does not know and has nothing to do with. The currently working cooperation between mentors and the two incoming students from Mongolia could provide first hints in the direction of a viable procedure. Having lunch together (two mentors and two mentees) is a structure which enables the incoming student to keep in touch with a particular person at university on a regular basis without having to ask for it. Funny and difficult situations of everyday life can be recounted and interpreted and solutions can be searched for. According to the research findings presented in Section 3.2, networks and connections with people of the host university are one of the best support systems. However, in which way incoming and local students can come into contact even in their leisure time is still an open question. 6.4 Conclusion An integrative teaching concept for incoming students challenges the entire institution and needs to be coherently planned and realized in an organized and proactive way. The price (pain) should not be underestimated, but the gain is clearly given: incoming students get an authentic impression of a Swiss university with all aspects of academic life. They are expected to do a lot, but they feel accepted and integrated. Not only a selected group of local students (members of an international class or mentors) get involved in intercultural or multilingual experiences but rather all students who include incoming students in seminar group work and discuss the subject matter with them in clear standard language and in a culturally mediating way (with currently five to ten incoming students and in various modules this means about fifty to a hundred local students per day). All local students who expose themselves to complex subject matter in a foreign language (about fifty students weekly) have the chance to make an experience which broadens their cultural horizons without mobility programme or as preparation for a stay abroad. Not forgetting the staff who deal with cultural heterogeneity week by week and thus give their students ideas and advice as regards coping with cultural diversity to follow in their professional life. NOTES 1

2

3

44

Swiss public school teachers are for the most part taught at universities of teacher education (see www.cohep.ch). The debate on the name of the subject and new discipline cannot be pursued in detail at this point. An updated discussion with regard to teacher education can be found in the documents of COHEP (see COHEP, 2007; Sieber & Bischoff, 2007). In this paper, the still most common term ‘culturally responsive teaching’ shall be used. The term ‘incoming student’ is here used as opposed to ‘exchange student’. While the former is a visitor at a foreign university, the latter goes abroad. According to the relevant literature, the term ‘international student’ can be used synonymously.

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING 4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

Approaches of culturally responsive teaching based on cultural anthropology propagated ‘encounter’ and ‘dialogue’ as means for intercultural understanding and learning. In the course of intercultural encounters the persons involved were supposed to learn to perceive cultural differences and to deal with this topic in an immediate dialogue with people from other cultures. Opposed to that there are sociologically oriented approaches which are concerned with institutional mechanisms of discrimination due to cultural origin. COHEP is the Swiss Conference of Rectors of Universities of Teacher Education. It supports the development of teacher education in the provinces of teaching, research and further education, and represents them to authorities and the public. In order to fulfil these tasks, it has a network of commissions, projects and professional groups at its disposal (see www.cohep.ch). COHEP (2007a) passed six recommendations concerning the realization of culturally responsive teaching at institutions of teacher education. In brief, the recommendations are as follows: (1) clarifying the tasks of the various actors in the educational sector; (2) promoting integrative conceptions; (3) establishing an overall conception of culturally responsive teaching; (4) fostering the competences of the staff; (5) striving for national and international opening; (6) converting the learning domains of culturally responsive teaching into concrete practice. Stadler (1999, p. 290 ff.) mentions five selection hurdles at three stages: Hurdle 1 refers to the monocultural stance of public schools, whereas Hurdle 2 points to the extraordinarily high weight put on the local language when it comes to the selection to institutions of higher education. Hurdle 3 is constituted by ethnocentric entrance procedures as practiced by the former teacher seminaries. Hurdle 4, analogously to Hurdle 1, is put up by monocultural professional training, and Hurdle 5 by the selection processes run by the local education authorities after professional training has been completed. The term ‘transcultural’ assumes pervasiveness and an overlap of cultures within the identity of today’s individuals. ‘Intercultural’, on the other hand, is still based on the idea of homogeneous and separable cultural communities which can get in touch with one another as unities. Today pupils of bi-national families come into contact with each other in an educational system marked by Swiss characteristics. It is often the case that three cultures are involved in the enculturation of these individuals, thus being constitutive of their identity, and they get in touch with further cultures in class. It is for this reason that the concept of transcultural growing-up seems to be increasingly more adequate than the concept of culturally responsive teaching. Until the beginning of the tertiarization process in teacher education in 2001, seminaries were the educational institutions where Swiss teacher education took place. Mentors are local students who look after incoming students. A mentor is a person to whom the incoming student can turn if there are any questions or insecurities. Usually, the concept of inclusion is mainly discussed in the context of education of students with special needs. The German-speaking debate on integration and inclusion shall not be looked at in this paper (but cf. Hinz, 2004; Liesen, 2004). Intercultural approaches of school development assume that a school has to promote the learning of everyone and that it should not restrict itself to special opportunities for fostering children with a migration background. The local children must be adequately supported as well. A school ‘for everyone’ (cf. the school development project QUIMS, 2009 and others) and intercultural competences for everyone are required in a globalized society. Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills: manifestation of language use in direct and personal verbal exchange. Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency: manipulation of language in de-contextualized ‘academic’ settings; written standard language.

45

DORA LUGINBÜHL

REFERENCES Allemann-Ghionda, C. (1995). Interkulturelle Bildung zwischen Universalität und Partikularität. Überlegungen im Rahmen eines europäischen Vergleichs. Journal für Internationale Bildungsforschung, 2, 96–112. Allemann-Ghionda, C. (2008). Intercultural education in schools. Brussels: European Parliament. Online available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/activities/committees/studies.do?language=e. Allemann-Ghionda, C., Perregaux, C., & Goumuens, C. (1999). Curriculum der Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung für die sprachlich-kulturelle Vielfalt. Aarau: Schweizerische Koordinationsstelle für Bildungsforschung. Altbach, Ph. G. (2004). Globalization and the university: Myths and realities in an unequal world. Tertiary Education and Management, 10(1), 3–25. Charlesworth, Z. M. (2007). Learning styles in international higher education: The influence of culture. Geneva: Dissertation written at the University of Geneva. COHEP [Swiss Conference of Rectors of Universities of Teacher Education (SCTE)] (Ed.). (2007). Empfehlungen zur interkulturellen Pädagogik an den Institutionen der Lehrerinnen und Lehrerbildung. Bern: COHEP. COHEP [Swiss Conference of Rectors of Universities of Teacher Education (SCTE)] (Ed.). (2007). Interkulturelle Pädagogik in der Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung der Schweiz. Grundlagenbericht. Bern: COHEP. Cummins, J. (1980). The construct of language proficiency in bilingual education. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Current issues in bilingual education (pp. 81–103). Washington: Georgetown University Press. Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In California Office of Bilingual Bicultural Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp. 3–50). Sacramento: California Department of Education. Dutke, S., Born, P., Kuhnert, K., & Frey, M. (2004). Welche Art von sozialer Unterstützung bevorzugen ausländische Studierende? Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 18(3/4), 249–254. EDK [Swiss Conference of Cantonal Ministers of Education]. (1999). Reglement über die Anerkennung von Hochschuldiplomen für Lehrkräfte der Vorschulstufe und der Primarstufe vom 10. Juni 1999 mit Änderungen vom 28. Oktober 2005. Bern: EDK. Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching. Theory, research & practice. New York: Teachers College Press. Gogolin, I., & Krüger-Potratz, M. (2006). Einführung in die Interkulturelle Pädagogik. Opladen: Budrich. Griesshaber, W. (2005). Relating to Cummins (1980): BICS vs. CALP. Online available at: http://spzwww.uni-muenster.de/~griesha/sla/cummins/eisberg.html#drei Hinz, A. (2004). Vom sonderpädagogischen Verständnis der Integration zum integrationspädagogischen Verständnis der Inklusion!? In I. Schnell & A. Sander (Eds.), Inklusive Pädagogik (pp. 41–74). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt. Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (1986). The manual of learning styles: Revised version. Maidenhead: Peter Honey. Isler, R. (2008). 175 Jahre Stabilität und Innovation. Die Thurgauer Lehrerbildung und ihre Gebäude. In U. Doerig & L. Zubler (Eds.), 175 Jahre Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung Thurgau (pp. 10–38). Zürich: Niggli. Jaritz, G. (2007). Konzept Mobilität und internationale Beziehungen. Interner Entwurf vom Januar 2007.Pädagogische Hochschule Thurgau, Kreuzlingen. Jou, Y. H., & Fukada, H. (1995). Effect of social support from various sources on the adjustment of Chinese students in Japan. Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 305–311. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experimental Learning: Experience as a source of learning and development. New York: Prentice Hall.

46

CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING Liesen, Ch., & Felder, F. (2004). Bemerkungen zur Inklusionsdebatte. Heilpädagogik online, 3(3), 3– 29. Online available at: http://www.heilpaedagogik-online.com Oser, F. (1994). Zu-Mutung. Eine basale pädagogische Handlungsstruktur. In N. Seibert & H. J. Serve (Eds.), Bildung und Erziehung an der Schwelle zum dritten Jahrtausend (pp. 773–800). Munich: PimS-Verlag. Pädagogische Hochschule Zürich (Ed.). (2007). Studieren an der PHZH. Praktische Informationen für Mobilitätsstudierende. Zürich: Pädagogische Hochschule Zürich. Online available at: http://international.phzh.ch/webautor-data/7/broschuere_studieren_an_der_phzh_d_klein.pdf Pixner, J., & Kolb, M. (2007). Anforderungen an international Studierende der Universität Freiburg. Arbeitsbericht Juli 2007. Freiburg: DAAD: Profis – Programm zur Förderung der Internationalisierung deutscher Hochschulen. Online available at: http://www.profis.uni-freiburg.de/ Projektinfos/bericht_anforderungsanalyse Poyrazli, S., Kavanaugh, P. R., Baker, A., & Al-Timini, N. (2004). Social support and demographic correlates of acculturative stress in international students. Journal of College Counseling, 7(1), 73– 82. QUIMS (2009). Qualität in multikulturellen Schulen. Online available at: http://www.quims.ch Rai, G. S. (2002). Meeting the educational needs of international students. A perspective from US schools. International Social Work, 45(1), 22–33. Sieber, P., & Bischoff, S. (2007). Untersuchung zum Ist-Zustand der Interkulturellen Pädagogik an Pädagogischen Hochschulen und universitären Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildungsinstitutionen der Schweiz. Bern: COHEP [Swiss Conference of Rectors of Universities of Teacher Education]. Stadler, P. (1999). Multikulturelle Schule und monokulturelle Lehrerschaft: ethnozentrische Selektion statt pluralistische Öffnung. Beiträge zur Lehrerbildung, 17(3), 285–296. Wahl, D. (2006). Lernumgebungen erfolgreich gestalten. Vom trägen Wissen zum kompetenten Handeln (2nd extended ed.). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt. Welsch, W. (1995). Transkulturalität. Zur veränderten Verfasstheit heutiger Kulturen. Zeitschrift für Kulturaustausch, 45(1), 39–44. Wlodkowski, R. L., & Ginsberg, M. B. (1995). Diversity & motivation. Culturally responsive teaching. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Wolfer, B. (2009). Interkulturelles Lernen in Rorschach. St. Galler Tagblatt, 12.03.09, 10.

Dora Luginbühl Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland

47

MATTI MERI

I WANTED TO GO TO SPAIN BUT I ENDED UP IN FINLAND – ANALYSIS OF AND CONCLUSIONS ABOUT STUDENT EXCHANGE

Finland has become more and more international over the years as the Bologna Process encourages institutes of higher education to expand their international outreach, especially with regards to the European dimension of higher education. Mobility is key, and central to the Bologna concept. Student exchange programmes give students a chance to go abroad via their home university to a foreign country in order to continue their studies at a new host university. As a result, choosing to spend at least a semester abroad has become a useful addition to students’ degrees, giving them a more well-rounded education. Moreover, the possibility to increase and improve cultural understanding and language learning while simultaneously receiving new experiences is highly valued among students. Malmberg (2000) argues that understanding of foreign cultures is a necessity for young people and an exchange is a great way to not only achieve that understanding but also to get to know oneself better. The most important reasons for choosing to study abroad are the desire to learn the language and culture of the exchange country and the opportunity for new experiences (Malmberg, 2003). It is the students themselves that are largely responsible for their success and enjoyment in the foreign country. A student’s interest in and openness to new things, as well as the whole attitude of a person, is crucial in surviving in a new environment. If one has a negative attitude towards new things, positive outcomes are almost impossible. This applies to both experiences abroad as well as life in general. Kaikkonen (1994) mentions that when the time one stays in a foreign country is not that long, the experiences are almost always positive. In a short period things like homesickness and dramatic changes are not likely to occur as much as if the exchange were to be longer, for instance, a year. These points should be considered when one is deciding how long to stay in the host country. However, Honkonen (1999) found that many students who stayed only one semester away would have wanted to continue their exchange period if given the option. It is, therefore, a very personal matter how long a period of time one might enjoy an exchange. The exchange period is very relevant not only for giving insight and direction when future studies are concerned, but also when it comes to providing unforgettable experiences. While it is true that the course of studies at a student’s home university can be delayed during the exchange for many reasons (e.g. new difficult language and organizational requirements), the journey can give important growth and experiences for students despite this delay (Garam, 2000). Honkonen T. Goetz et al. (Eds.), Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education, 49–57. © 2011 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

MATTI MERI

(1999) points out that usually students going abroad have motives other than simply studying in the host university. Furthermore, she found that most people see the exchange period as an opportunity to see the world outside their city or country. This travel experience allows a certain growth for young students and gives them more courage to take trips on their own even after the exchange time. These additional motives, however, are also the reason why studies can be delayed. Garam also points out that the opportunity to travel is often more motivating in the decision to go abroad as an exchange student than the opportunity to study or complete coursework abroad. On the other hand, the desire to take a vacation or a year off from one’s home country is near the end of students’ motives to study abroad. Students are motivated not from taking a vacation, but from studying and learning something new. Cultural standards are norms and values that adjust people’s behaviour and give the members of a society “understanding, regularity, similarity and predictability” when dealing with one another. Cultural standards make it possible for people to behave appropriately within a society without constantly thinking about their behaviour. People can be recognizable and seem as outsiders when they deviate from these cultural standards when making contact with a foreign culture. (Kaikkonen, 1994). As a consequence of this kind of recognition, students in a foreign culture can feel insecure about their presence and their language use. It is, therefore, important to understand the foreign culture and appreciate its differences in accordance with one’s own culture. If the new culture and people are found difficult to interpret, courage to use the new language may be hindered. Culture and language go firmly hand in hand and without understanding the culture, language learning can be difficult (Kaikkonen, 1994). However, not all cultural misunderstandings lead to an overall negative experience. Garam (2000) observes that student’s negative experiences are often remembered positively when students focus on the way they overcame their difficulties. One important factor that can either hinder or help motivation to study abroad is the stereotypes that students have about the people living in a country where a certain language is spoken. Stereotypes do not necessarily have a negative effect if they are malleable and after receiving new information about a certain culture, students are able to change their preconceived notions about that culture (Malmberg, 2003). Malmberg stresses the importance of not letting the stereotype images affect opinions about individuals because these images give only certain descriptions about possible groups of people in that culture, and not every individual within that culture. There are certain images that many people have when thinking about the Germans, for instance, that Germans are very hard working and diligent. (Kaikkonen, 1994). This does not, however, mean that every individual in Germany works any differently that some Finns do, for example. Saarikalle (2000) found out that the stereotypes some students have of their host country, and more specifically of the U.S., are superficial and affected by the media. Regardless of where people receive such ideas, Kaikkonen (1994) points out that the stereotype images often go away after one has spent some time in the

50

I WANTED SPAIN BUT I ENDED UP IN FINLAND

country in question or if one has already made contact with somebody from that culture. In terms of the motivation for student exchange in regards to the focus of this chapter, there is one preliminary question that must be addressed: how mobile are students of teacher education? According to recent OECD indicators (OECD, 2005a, Table C3.5), education students are less mobile than the average share of students from other disciplines. Within the EU-15, the highest share of students in the field of education studying abroad is noted in Sweden (7.3%), followed by the Netherlands (5.7%) and Austria (5.3%) Among the new EU-10 countries, the biggest share of foreign students can be found in Hungary (9.6%) and Poland (9.0%). These data also show that the share of foreign and/or mobile students of education and teacher education is proportionally lower than in most study areas and disciplines. Kelo, Teichler and Waechter (2006) give additional evidence to support this conclusion. In the Socrates-Erasmus Programmes 3.9% of students studying abroad in 1998/99 were education/teacher education students This percent went down to 3.4% in 2002/03. Education/teacher education was among one of only four study areas to show a decrease during this time. Krzaklewska et al. (2006) noted that participation in exchange programmes mostly happens in business studies/management sciences (20%) engineering/technology (19%), languages (11%), and social sciences (8%). Education/teacher education lies almost at the end of the scale with only 2.2% participating in exchange programmes. What could be accounting for these results? One possibility is that teaching is predominantly perceived as a profession deeply embedded within a national context, much like language of instruction, culture, traditions, history, identity, and citizenship. The content of teacher education programmes is often very nationally oriented. Arguably, it would be beneficial to have a more common orientation to teacher education across countries because the overall aims and targets of teacher education are quite similar. Nowadays, there is an increasing need to position future teachers within the European context, maybe even within a global context with a particular attention paid to histories, languages, multiculturalism, interculturalism, multiple identities and citizenship. The top motivations for students for going abroad were the following: 1. 2. 3. 4.

To practise a foreign language (60% for Erasmus / 41% for non Erasmus) To have new experiences (53% / 49%) To enhance future career prospects (41% / 40%) To learn about different cultures (32% / 33%)

While for ERASMUS students language motivation was indisputably the highest motivating factor, the career dimension and the opportunity to have new experiences were more important for non ERASMUS students. The chance to improve one’s academic knowledge, though not a top priority for any of the groups, was higher for non ERASMUS students (29% compared to 23%). Cultural motivation (the desire to learn about different cultures and to live abroad) was also quite high for both of the groups. 51

MATTI MERI

THE MOTIVES OF EXCHANGE STUDENTS

I conducted interviews with my ERASMUS students in 2007 and 2008. The primary research aims were to ascertain why students wanted to study in Finland and whether studying in Finland was their original intention. After lessons I asked students to reveal their motivations and intentions for studying in Helsinki. Altogether 104 interviews were conducted. Responses come from students of the following countries: Spain 33, Germany 26, Belgium 6, Netherlands 5, Portugal 5, Switzerland 4, Lithuania 4, Slovenia 4, Brazil 2, Luxemburg 2, Sweden 2, and Estonia, France, Greece, Island, Latvia, Norway, Austria, Russia, Slovakia, Taiwan, Czech Republic, each 1. “My choice to travel to Finland was rather incidental.” (Female, Belgium) “I wanted to go to Spain but I ended up in Finland.” (Male, Germany) Among all answers there were 5% who mentioned that Finland was their first choice, 11% rated it as their second choice, and 45% rated it as their third choice. One third of all students reported that Finland was not a very tempting or inviting choice. These students indicated there were no special reasons to travel to Finland, but that they came there simply to spend a year abroad somewhere. It seems that for these students the studies themselves were not a motive at all; new experiences and some kind of adventure served as an orientation of “choice”. Often, students’ home institution recommended Finland and had an exchange contract with Finland and it was therefore easy for these students to choose to study in Finland. In some cases Finland was geographically near and that influenced students’ choices even though it was not the most attractive holiday country. “Finland is the nearest country for me. A short trip from my home. The international coordinator recommended this possibility.” (Female, Estonia) “It was the only chance to study abroad at my department in the home university.” (Female, Germany) “I would like to collect experience from different countries, why not also from Finland.” (Male, Spain) Another question explored in the current study was, what factors influenced students’ decision to study abroad and spend six months to one year at a foreign university? The following table shows what students reported considering before and after choosing their host institution:

52

I WANTED SPAIN BUT I ENDED UP IN FINLAND

Table 1. Students’ Considerations Considerations Different exchange programmes Different exchange possibilities in Finland Finland as a country Helsinki as a city University of Helsinki Institute of teacher education Studies Travel costs Rent costs of an apartment Other living costs

Before ++ + + 0 0 0 + +++ ++ +

After + 0 +++ +++ ++ ++ ++ + +++ ++

0 = not at all interested + = a little interested ++ = somewhat interested +++ = very interested

Before selecting the host institution students familiarized themselves with the contents of the exchange programmes and the possible institutions where they could study. Extensive attention was paid to the travel costs and living costs. After choosing the host institution and country students were still interested in travel, accommodation and living costs, but also reported being interested in the history, geography and culture of the host country. Also, they were more eager to know different facts about the host institution. After choosing, students began to research the content and the organization of the studies at the host institution more extensively. These results imply that their studies are not as large a factor in their planning as the country they will visit and what life is like in that country. Motives and expectations given by students can be classified using the following three dimensions: 1. Personal development 2. Academic and professional development 3. Cultural understanding Additionally, the following benefits were mentioned by students: Understanding a foreign country, personal growth, meeting new friends, gaining new perspectives on one’s home country, learning English and the language of the host country (Finnish), career development, and academic development. Taajamo (1999), when researching the motives of exchange students, found students’ international experience was an empowerment process. This process increases a person’s autonomy and capacity to see different opportunities and to act independently. Confronting “something different”, becoming aware of different patterns of thinking and acting, creating new ways of thinking and acting, getting significant learning experience, and increasing self-confidence are also part of this process.

53

MATTI MERI

Table 2. Reasons for Student Exchange in Finland Reasons Percentage High education standards in Finland 18% Finland as a Pisa-Winner 10% “Research” universities 2% Possibilities to study in English 73% Good choice of lessons in English 25% Cultural differences between home country and Finland 58% Lifestyle in Finland 32% Politically stable country 4% Equality, female status 6% Academic tourism 37% Nature in Finland 24%

Some of the students mentioned that one reason to travel to Finland was its high education standards and the very good reputation of universities in Finland, which led to recommendations from others to attend a Finnish university. Additionally students’ friends approved of Finland as a choice for study abroad. In some cases, staff at the home university had advised students to choose Finland. It is not very easy to understand all the reasons behind the good reputation of Finnish university education. Success in international evaluations of school education likely contributed to this reputation. Education in Finland was valued very highly and the university degrees were seen to be of very high quality. Studies in Finland are inexpensive for students, which is another good reason to travel to Finland for studies. “It is the nearest country from mine. Good recommendation from the teachers of my University.” (Female, Estonia) Quite often, the recommendations of others and the university's reputation with regard to courses offered were a key reason students decided to study abroad in Finland. The fact that universities offered opportunities to study in English was also perceived as quite important. In addition, the exchange students found that the course offerings were interesting. For some students Finland provided a good opportunity to study courses which would not be available to them at home. On the other hand, another portion of the students were interested because of the similar contents of the courses offered. This similarity in course offerings would be perceived as especially positive if courses completed in Finland were recognized by students’ home university. “I decided to come to Finland to study after reading of a good education programme in the newspaper.” (Male, Portugal) “Because of an excellent choice of school pedagogy courses and recommendations of friends who had already been there.” (Female, Germany) “Lessons in English.” (Male, Spain / Female, Netherlands) 54

I WANTED SPAIN BUT I ENDED UP IN FINLAND

The possibility of becoming familiar with the culture, the people and way of life was another popular reason for going to Finland. These responses focused on the cultural, linguistic and geographical differences in relation to their home country. Many of the respondents talked about the possibility “to find” a new and not so well known culture. Finland was described with words like “exotic” and “strange”, as well as special, unique and interesting. But respondents also felt that Finland might be challenging because of its differences and obscurity. “Because it’s a country completely different than mine and because it was the only chance I had.” (Female, Brazil) “To discover a new mentality and culture.” (Male, Germany) “Finland has a completely different environment to study than in Nijmegen, e.g. weather, food, culture.” (Female, Netherlands) “Because it is a very interesting and highly developed country. Within the EU it is somehow still ‘exotic’, because of Nordic light, Lapland and snow […].” (Female, Greece) The exotic diversity that Finland provides was one reason it stood out as different in the group of exchange students. With their choice to go to Finland the respondents wanted to do something exceptional and to be different themselves. “Oh, Finland because Scandinavian countries are not popular destination for Spanish students, especially Finnish girls are so beautiful and charming.” (Male, Spain) “The most students want to go to South European countries like Italy or Spain. I wanted to go in a country where only a few people go.” (Female, Germany) “I wanted to choose something different than the usual norm.” (England, USA) “Get away for one term, far far away.” (Female, Taiwan) Some respondents chose Finland because of its beautiful nature. Many of the respondents pointed out the greenness of Finland and the appeal of Finnish forests and lake landscapes. Even Finland’s harsh winter conditions – snow, darkness and cold – were fascinating to respondents. Finland was described as a clean and healthy country. The respondents saw that people respected and cared for nature. Many respondents had some sort of stereotype images from their host country before travelling to Finland, but some had more precise ideas about the people or manners there. One stereotype answer was students believed that most people in Finland have green values. “Because a lot of people value environment, forest, and water. So I’m interested in Finnish life style.” (Male, Latvia) 55

MATTI MERI

“I wanted to study in a Nordic country because in Belgium they are known to have very good schools. I love nature and clean lakes.” (Female, Luxemburg) “Interested in life in EU-country. Looking for people in harmony with the nature. Not too far from home.” (Male, Russia) There were some interesting results depending on gender and home country of the exchange students: – Female students more often chose learning about different cultures, practicing a foreign language and enhancing future study opportunities as their motivation to go abroad. – More female than male ERASMUS students studied abroad in order to improve their academic knowledge. – Male students wanted to have fun and to meet new people more often than female students. – Students from Central and Eastern Europe wanted more often than others to improve their academic knowledge, to learn about different education systems, to live in a foreign country and to learn a foreign language, but at the same time they also wanted to have new experiences. CONCLUSIONS

According to the survey, the home institution is the most efficient channel for communicating information about exchange opportunities. Students’ decisionmaking, however, is usually relatively independent. Friends and fellow students have the strongest influence on a student’s final decision. The most important motives underlying students’ decision to study abroad were about self-development. The possibility to study in English and learn a foreign language were also important motivators. Students’ host country preferences also reflected the significance of having language training and the possibility to study in English. In addition, many students were drawn to study in Finland due to its different culture, language, climate and nature. However, rather often it was the combination of rigorous academics and exotic surroundings that made Finland an attractive choice for exchange students. The survey indicated that international exchange students have a very positive image of Finland. Modern equipment and studying facilities, the wide selection of courses available, well-organised services and the open atmosphere in higher education institutions were appreciated. Students also valued the tranquillity and greenness of Finland. Students had many expectations of their study period in Finland. Most often these expectations were related to course studies, career development, improvement in language skills, exploring the country, making new friends and self development. The motivation with regard to the learning of cultural diversity had grown for all of the respondents during their stay in Finland. Overall, there were no specific differences in the motivations of students from one country as compared to 56

I WANTED SPAIN BUT I ENDED UP IN FINLAND

another, indicating that the motivations for studying abroad are consistent across students from various countries. The results of the survey indicated that many factors affected respondents’ motivation, for instance, their language improvement. It was quite clear that when students felt that their language development had given them resources for more effective language learning, their motivation grew. In addition to this type of a direct factor, which the students themselves mentioned, there are also indirect implications for the factors that may affect motivation. To illustrate this, it is important to take a glance at the cultural issues that the students were asked to reflect on. None of the interviewees stated that the stereotype images affected them negatively, or that the different cultural matters had created difficulties that one could not overcome. In addition to this, the most memorable experiences have implications for the factors that affect motivation. It is quite reliable to assume that the participants went through negative experiences during their exchange, but the important insight is that they mostly remember the positive experiences, which definitely can add to motivation. This finding is consistent with Garam (2000) who stressed the overpowering influence of the positive experiences above and beyond the possible negative experiences students may have when studying abroad. REFERENCES Garam, I. (2000). Kansainvälisyyttä käytännössä: suomalaisten vaihto-opiskelijoiden kokemuksia ulkomailla opiskelusta. Helsinki: Opiskelijajärjestöjen tutkimussäätiö, Otus rs. 18/2000. Honkonen, N. (1999). Vaihto-opiskelijoiden kokemuksia maailmalta: palkitsevaa itsensä voittamista kaukana kotoa (Master’s thesis, University of Jyväskylä, Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, 1999). Retrieved from http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:jyu-1999814232 Kaikkonen, P. (1994). Kulttuuri ja vieraan kielen oppiminen. Juva: WSOY. Malmberg, R. (2003). Vaihto-oppilas ja vieraat kulttuurit. Helsinki: AFS Intercultural Programs Finland. Saarikalle, H. (2001). Vaihto-oppilaiden kielen oppiminen vieraassa kulttuurissa (Master’s thesis, University of Jyväskylä, Faculty of Education, 2001). Retrieved from http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:jyu2001860510 Kelo, M., Teichler, U., & Waechter, B. (Eds.) (2006). EURODATA: Student mobility in European higher education. Bonn: Lemmens. Krzaklewska, E., & Krupnik, S. (2006). Research report: The experience of studying abroad for exchange students in Europe. Erasmus Student Network Survey 2005, in partnership with Petrus Communications. Retrieved from http://www.petruscommunications.com/resources/documents/ ESN-Survey-report.pdf

Matti Meri University of Helsinki, Finland

57

BRUNO LEUTWYLER AND SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH

REFLECTION ON NORMALITY: THE BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

1. INTRODUCTION

Exchange programmes are becoming increasingly popular among students at universities of teacher education. A recent report on trends by the Swiss Conference of Rectors of Universities of Teacher Education (COHEP) shows that the number of students of teacher education who complete a guest semester or a teaching internship abroad has significantly increased since the founding of the universities of teacher education and that this number is expected to further increase in the following years (Plaschy, 2006). Thus, participation in exchange programmes is becoming more and more self-evident in teacher education. Participating in exchange programmes pursues two goals: From the institutional perspective, on the one hand, exchange programmes promise to provide an important contribution to the internationalization of the university environment in general and at universities of teacher education in particular. From the individual perspective on the other hand, exchange programmes also aim to contribute to the development of the individual participants. Thus, the COHEP-subgroup “exchange” claims: “By promoting exchange, universities offer their students, professors, and employees the chance to further their subject- and teachingspecific, intercultural and language competencies and to integrate these into their professional activities” (COHEP, 2008, p. 4). 2. CURRENT STATE OF RESEARCH

However, such goal setting takes on, at the most, a programmatic character in certain areas. Empirical results only exist in relation to general aspects when it comes to the actual effectiveness of exchange programmes, yet hardly in relation to specific aspects of the teaching profession. A review of the available research literature shows that the most apparent individual effects of exchange programmes can be identified in the areas of personal development, language skills, as well as the intercultural sensitivity of the participants (Kehm, 2005a, p. 21; Maiworm, Steube & Teichler, 1993, p. 110). In regard to personal development, a furtherance of independence and flexibility as well as an increase in self-esteem and sociability has been reported (Eichhorn, Feroiu, Marin & Ollinger, 2002, p. 40). Former participants attribute such bursts of development to exchange programmes even after considerable temporal distance: T. Goetz et al. (Eds.), Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education, 59–77. © 2011 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

BRUNO LEUTWYLER, SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH

Thomas (1999), for example, documents that former exchange students believe to have benefited in self-efficacy, self-confidence, persistence, and openness toward foreign attitudes and customs even 10 years after participating in exchange programmes. Even though the empirical basis of these findings is mainly based on – from a methodological point of view, not unproblematic – self-reports, the available studies suggest that exchange programmes have lasting effects on the personal development of the participants. Concerning language skills the findings also seem to be clear: the enhancement of foreign language competency is considered to be one of the most evident and definite effects of exchange programmes and has been empirically identified multiple times (e.g. Maiworm et al., 1993; Kehm, 2005b; Bracht et al., 2006; Vabø, 2007). The sustainability of this effect, however, is dependent on the chances of being able to carry on using the respective language after their return – this is still possible for more than one third (38%) of the participants four years after an ERASMUS study stay (Bracht et al., 2006, p. 73). With reference to intercultural sensitivity, available findings show a less consistent picture. Indeed, most studies point out the large potential that during the participation in an exchange programme, different aspects of intercultural sensitivity can develop, prejudices can be broken down, and fears to engage with foreign cultures can be reduced (for an overview see Pettigrew, 2004). Though, some empirical evidence suggests that not all students benefit to the same degree in this regard and that the fact of being in a foreign context does not automatically lead to a beneficial development (Hammer, 2005; Anderson, Lawton, Rexeisen & Hubbard, 2006; Popa, 2007). To sum up, the effectiveness of exchange programmes has been extensively researched in relation to general individual effects. Job-related effects are, in contrast, mentioned less or deal with economic aspects such as the duration of study and of the first job search, or the amount of the first salary after the studies (Jahr, Schomburg & Teichler, 2002; Messer & Wolter, 2007). In relation to teacher education, it may be argued that a personal development including more selfconfidence, increased openness for foreign attitudes, more flexibility, broadened foreign language skills, as well as a pronounced intercultural sensitivity are beneficial for the profession, too. The importance of these competencies and attitudes is indisputable for teachers – they are not, however, teaching-specific competencies or attitudes. The question whether future teachers can also specifically benefit for their profession is, however, relevant in two respects: on the one hand, the university teacher education is based on the strict separation of general education and teaching-specific training. Considering this background, the question must be raised what exchange stays during the studies contribute to the teaching-specific training. On the other hand, from the economic perspective, the organization of exchange programmes requires a substantial financial investment for the universities of teacher education, so that the question of financial accountability arises.

60

BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE

The question to what extent participating in a exchange programme actually changes teaching-specific attitudes and mentalities or even furthers corresponding competencies for teachers, is so far only partially empirically explained. A recent American study of 15 student teachers from the USA, who completed a four week internship in Italy, suggests a higher professional self-esteem and a greater appreciation of cultural heterogeneity in school classes (Pence & Macgillivray, 2008). As a conclusion to the students’ reports, the personal reflections of oneself as a teacher are pointed out: “I suspected I would learn a lot about the cultural differences between Italy and America, but I never thought I would learn so much about myself as a teacher” (ibid., p. 20). In terms of anecdotal evidence, Kambutu and Nganga (2008) also speak of an increased cultural appreciation of foreigners among US-American teachers who spent a few weeks in Kenyan schools. Rapoport (2008) phrases his findings in a teaching-specific manner from interviews with 35 Russian and US-American teachers who participated in different exchange programmes: he sees in these reports evidence that by participating in an exchange programme, the teachers showed more interest for the cultural background of their pupils. The American study from Wiggins, Follo, and Eberly (2007) shows that teaching in different cultural contexts can also be beneficial when dealing with children from cultural minorities. In this study, however, it is not clear how future teachers benefited from these situations. Chieffo and Griffiths (2004) mainly point out in this context that teachers show more patience with foreign-language speaking students after a stay abroad. Willard-Holt (2001) asserts that among 27 student teachers from the USA who spent one week in a Mexican school there was a partial reduction in prejudice about Mexican school classes. Furthermore, Willard-Holt indicates that many of these students integrated experiences from their Mexico stay into their teaching, that some had higher expectations of their own pupils (e.g. in handwriting) and that they felt more prepared to work with children from different backgrounds. She sums up her findings with a reference on a global dimension: “This represents a conceptual change toward a more global perspective in their teaching” (ibid., p. 515). The research situation concerning the teaching-specific effects of exchange programmes is therefore rather limited, yet a clear tendency emerges: teachers who spend time in a foreign culture and are thereby involved in occupational activities (either as a participant or as an observer) can enhance their professional selfefficacy and increase their interest in, their sensitivity for, or their patience with pupils from other cultures. An important aspect in these findings seems to be that teaching-specific effects are only reported when the participants had the opportunity to immerse themselves in the daily school routine of the host culture.

61

BRUNO LEUTWYLER, SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH

3. AIMS OF THE STUDY

In the summary of the findings it is clear that teaching-specific effects are reported, although sometimes very generally. What does it mean when one discovers a lot about oneself as a teacher? What does it mean when teaching children from cultural minorities has been positively influenced? The concrete benefits of participating in exchange programmes for future teachers have, so far, only partially been explained. The present study offers a contribution to close this gap in research. It analyses the benefits of exchange programmes from the specific perspective of teacher education and aims to establish a more concrete view of the learning and development processes that can be expected by participating in exchange programmes: which teaching-specific competencies and attitudes can be expected to change by participating in exchange programmes? The empirical basis that was used to answer this question will be described in the next section. Then, the results will be reported which show that the teachingspecific reflections in other cultures also effect the perception of one’s own school and teaching culture and can, thereby, also change the personal image of a “good school” or “good teaching”. A discussion of these findings, as well as suggestions for future research concludes this report. 4. METHODS

The results reported in this article are part of an extensive research project being carried out by the University of Teacher Education Central Switzerland (PHZ) in cooperation with the University of Stavanger (Norway) and Iaúi (Romania). The present report discusses the first analyses based on the Swiss sample, which will be combined in a later phase with the corresponding analysis of the other partners. For the present part of the project, 75 written reports of student teachers from the University of Teacher Education Central Switzerland who completed exchangestays at partner institutions are analysed. With 17 of those students, in-depth interviews were subsequently conducted. The document analysis of the written reports was able to consider all the students who have taken part in an exchange programme since the establishment of the PHZ institution in 2003. Since the academic year 2004/05, students have been given the opportunity to spend a guest semester at another institution of teacher education or a 4-week school internship in Australia, France, or Macedonia. In their compulsory final reports, the students are required to answer, among others, the following question: “What benefits did you gain from this stay in relation to your teaching profession in Switzerland?” From the 75 students whose final reports were analysed, 58 are from women and 17 are from men. During the exchange, 55 students were in the course of completing their education as teachers for secondary school, 19 were studying to be primary school teachers and one student was completing the education to be a Kindergarten /Elementary school teacher. 14 of the reports analysed are based on a 4-week school internship, and 61 on a semester stay at a partner institution. 62

BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE

In the first phase of the document analysis, no differentiation was made between the various types of exchange programmes. Rather more, typical teaching-specific experiences were extracted and abstracted from the individual cases using analytical induction (Glaser & Strauss, 2005). Using this procedure, teachingspecific learning and development processes were identified which should have been substantiated in the subsequent more in-depth interviews. The results of this document analysis form the basis for the development of the interview guidelines. The guidelines were designed so that the students interviewed could, on the one hand, freely report about their teaching-specific experiences during the exchange stays and, on the other hand, give specific information about which learning and development processes the corresponding experiences triggered in them. Besides the results of the document analysis, the comprehensive guideline from Willard-Holt (2001) also directed the central areas of the interviews. The utilised interview guideline focused on previous experiences (e.g. past stays abroad), on the setting of the exchange stay, on the teaching-specific experiences during the stay, on the subsequent handling of these experiences as well as on concrete changes in their personal professional practice after the stay. At the time of the interviews, the 17 students who were interviewed had returned between 4 weeks and 20 months ago. Two students from each of the 3 groups were interviewed about their 4-week internship in Australia, France, or Macedonia, and 11 were interviewed about their semester stay in Australia, Denmark, England, Finland, France, or Norway. Some of the interviews were carried out by telephone and some face-to-face. The interviews lasted between 30 and 45 minutes. In a first step of the analysis, categories were developed from the 17 transcribed interviews with an inductive approach and then structured into a category system in comparison with the few available research findings (see above). In a second step, the data was coded on this basis and firstly analysed on a case-to-case basis. In the ensuing “cross case analysis” (Miles & Huberman, 1994), case-orientated und variable-orientated strategies were combined and the individual cases were thereby condensed to typical patterns of learning and development processes. The pivotal results of this analysis will now be described in the following section. 5. RESULTS

The evaluation of the final reports and the interviews show that exchange stays of future teachers have the potential to further teaching-specific reflections on many different levels. Accordingly, the depiction of the results follows in four parts: The first part conveys statements that suggest a changed perception of one’s own school system. The second part summarises the statements which discuss one’s own teacher education. A third part shows, from the point of view of the future teachers, to what extent they believe the exchange stay will benefit their future profession. Finally, the fourth part shows which concrete changes are reported in their own teaching practice.

63

BRUNO LEUTWYLER, SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH

5.1 A More Reflected Perspective on the “Familiar” The reflections in other cultures which the exchange students interviewed report on are related to their perception of their own school system and the organization of the schools, to their perception of the teaching profession and the role of teachers, as well as to that of teaching cultures and good teaching. In relation to the school system, many exchange students report that their opinion of the education or school quality in Switzerland has changed. Thus, the perception of how schools function in other places can cause one to put one’s own views into perspective. This can be exemplified by a student who had studied at an English university for a semester: “I react more calmly now when people talk about bad quality here. I strongly put the increasing criticism of our schools into perspective. It is not that bad here” (Case 42). School equipment in other countries is repetitively mentioned and compared to the situation in Switzerland. In relation to the infrastructure, a student who completed an internship in France sums up her experiences as follows: “I am left with a feeling of being privileged here. We really have it good here at school” (Case 2). In a similar sense another student says: “I saw schools where pupils do not even have their own book, and the school books were merely copies. Since I was in Tetovo, I appreciate much more what we have here” (Case 8). Depending on the country, an exchange stay can lead not only to a higher appreciation of the personal conditions, but can also lead to the opposite relativization. Especially students who completed an exchange stay in a Scandinavian country are more likely to become more critical toward the Swiss school system. Thus, a student who spent a semester at a Norwegian university reports: “I am now able to differentiate better what a good school is for me: an open school. I have become more critical towards the structures we have here” (Case 38). Such statements show how the confrontation with other views also affects the perception of one’s own school system and how the knowledge of the “unfamiliar” differentiates one’s own view of the “familiar”. In relation to the school organization, many exchange students report on their return on the collaboration of the teachers, that they perceived differently than they were used to. Thus, one student who completed internships during a semester stay in Australia reports: “No one knew what the other teachers were doing in other subjects” (Case 56). On the contrary, one student reports about her experiences with an excellent cooperating team of teachers in Finland: “I was impressed by the way everyone was on the same wavelength so that contradictions were hardly apparent” (Case 52). Even in relation to the daily structure of schools, to the structural framework within the schools, to the function and role of the school administration, or to the inclusion of parents, exchange students report unfamiliar or uncustomary experiences. Thereby it is clearly shown how previous conceptions of normality can be reconsidered (“de-evidenced”): “I saw that it could also be different” (Case 56). In relation to the teaching profession, many exchange students report that they noticed a different social position of teachers in other countries. The social position is mostly compared with the situation in Switzerland through their salary: 64

BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE

“Teachers have a better reputation in Switzerland. One can also see this from the salary” (Case 11). Some exchange students, however, also include other factors in their statements about the status of the teaching profession. Thus, one student who studied for a semester and also completed regular internships in France says: “The status of teachers in France is lower; they are less accepted and less appreciated. Even parents lack trust in teachers” (Case 49). Some exchange students combine their perception of the social position with questions about the function or the role of teachers. Thus, one student who studied for a semester in France and completed internships while she was there said: “In France, teachers are only responsible for conveying the material. […] A teacher is, however, primarily a human being. A good relationship to the pupils should be a priority” (Case 51). Such a statement shows that students confronted with differently experienced roles begin to question their own role conceptions or consider it to be confirmed. In this sense, another student reports after her stay in England: “During my internship, I was impressed by the fact that the teacher taught more as a facilitator than in a demanding and disciplinary way. She primarily offered support. That convinced me to do it like that in the future, respectively to work towards doing it that way” (Case 64). This more reflected position about the aspired role as a teacher becomes clearer in the following statement: “There [in France] teachers are very hierarchical, here they are friendlier. This proved to me that I want it to be like it is here – just a friendly relationship” (Case 2). These statements show that exchange students, when confronted with differently experienced roles, begin to reconsider their own role conceptions and sometimes find their way to more conscious convictions of how they envisage their own role as future teachers. Even in relation to teaching, many exchange students report more conscious, more reflected or more differentiated conceptions of what they consider to be “good teaching”. Most students who have also done internships as part of their exchange stays describe to what extent they experienced teaching cultures or parts thereof in the host country differently than in their home country. Obviously, the assessment of these differences can be positive or negative. For the present research question, it is not important in which countries such differences are judged more negatively or positively. More significant is the consideration that confrontation with “different” teaching styles furthers the reflection of one’s own ideas of normal, of aspired or of good teaching. The statement of a student who spent a semester in France and regularly completed internships there exemplifies this: “What I saw in the classrooms there was sometimes shocking. Pupils were embarrassed in front of others; the lessons were all teacher-centred. […] That showed me that I want to address the pupils’ needs more. I was personally shaped by teacher-centred instruction. I did not notice that such a teaching style did not appeal to the children at all until I went there. My image of good teaching has changed” (Case 49). A student who completed internships during a semester stay in Finland describes the perceived differences as follows: “There, the main focus is on the pupils, they are very autonomous – already at primary level. I had never seen that before – here I notice much more passiveness” (Case 52). Another student who completed internships during her semester stay in Norway also derives 65

BRUNO LEUTWYLER, SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH

consequences for her own teaching from the perceived differences: “I was very impressed by the warm-hearted atmosphere between teachers and pupils. I will take that with me: I want to teach in more caring way” (Case 38). Later on, this same student adds: “I saw that it works when one uses more open methods. That gives me the courage to use more open methods myself.” Such statements make it clear that confrontation with different types of teaching encourages one to reflect on one’s own teaching conceptions and promotes the awareness of one’s personal beliefs which can lead to more reflected perceptions of “good teaching”. 5.2 Appreciation of One’s Own Teacher Education Those exchange students, who complete a semester stay at a partner-institution, are also confronted with another teacher education system during their stay. This confrontation with the “unfamiliar” also includes contrasting teacher education at one’s own institution with the partner’s. While some exchange students judge the perceived differences as a different quality of teacher education – in terms of better or worse in comparison to the home institution – others judge the differences as being either more or less congruent to their own approaches and customs. Most exchange students specifically name the strengths and weaknesses of the teacher education at their home institution upon return. One of the PHZ’s strengths mentioned by many returning exchange students is the combination of theory and practice: “I see now how theory and practice fit together at the PHZ” (Case 42). In another part, the same student concludes: “I put my criticisms of the PHZ into perspective now: I have the feeling that I am being exceptionally well prepared for my profession at the PHZ. I now tell my friends: Be glad that you can study here. I am happy that I am going to become a teacher in Switzerland.” Another student sums up similarly: “Afterwards, I really appreciated everything at the PHZ. We really have a good, profound, and practically oriented education. We have better possibilities to become a teacher here” (Case 2). In this regard, a large part of the interviewed students at the PHZ feel that they are well prepared for their teaching profession: “My study habits at the PHZ have not changed. However, the motivation to go to and study at the PHZ has increased because I appreciate this education more” (Case 49). When the weaknesses of the education at the home institution are discussed, the criticism is most frequently focused on the school-like instruction with strict requirements: “The PHZ is regimented and over-structured. I would rather have a bit more of a university style: work on things independently, read a whole book for once, and not just learn what the professor’s opinion is on the corresponding topic. […] In Vasa my self-management was optimized” (Case 40). Likewise, comparing to the experiences in Finland, another student says: “Today, I would prefer the education in Vasa because one is expected to be much more independent. Here, the minimalist attitude is very widespread; in Finland much more is demanded, although there are fewer guidelines” (Case 52). A student who studied in Australia for one semester made a similar comment: “There you can come and go whenever

66

BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE

you want. I miss that freedom; they are much more independent there. These restrictions here really bother me” (Case 56). Independent of whether the strengths or weaknesses of the home institution are perceived in contrast to the other kinds of teacher education, the statements of the returning exchange students indicate a differentiated view of their own form of teacher education. Also in relation to one’s own teacher education, confrontation with the “unfamiliar” leads to an increased overall awareness. The kinds of one’s own teacher education are reconsidered, “de-normalised” and “de-evidenced”. Specific aspects of one’s own teacher education are perceived consciously, newly interpreted, or differently evaluated: “Here, the focus is mostly on new teaching methods, while in Finland traditional methods are also acknowledged. This led to me to increasingly question the education at the PHZ. It is too one-sided here” (Case 52). 5.3 Valuation From the Exchange Students’ Point of View The results presented above indicate that during exchange stays teaching-specific reflections take place which can lead to a more differentiated view or a better reflected position. When directly asked about the career benefits of their stay, many exchange students also mention that broadening their horizon may put personal views into perspective. Thus, one student who completed an internship in France sums up her stay as follows: “I have learned not to think in black and white, but in grey. Broadening their own horizons helps them to think more discerningly. Obviously, this is not only due to the internship abroad, but also the many different views and situations contribute to thinking in a more differentiated way. That is also a clear professional benefit” (Case 2). Another student who studied in Finland for one semester answers to the question about career benefits as follows: “Being aware that one has one’s own attitude and recognising one’s own basis of interpretation” (Case 40). A student who spent a semester in France also emphasises this benefit: “I appreciate the profession much more now. […] There the school closes right after the last class. That is how one notices one’s own customs that were taken for granted before” (Case 49). A student who studied for a semester in Finland, phrases this broadening of horizon as follows: “I have gained a certain calmness in relation to daily events. I abstract from my own perspective, see contexts, and interpret them” (Case 40). Or in the words of another student: “With an outside perspective, one thinks about why things are the way they are here” (Case 36). A student who completed an internship in Australia believes: “It does not matter which country you do an internship in. The main thing is that you see something different” (Case 11). The following statement reveals that a confrontation with different customs can promote thinking in alternatives: “I think we have it good here, we are freer, we can organize better, and we can make decisions more independently. It could also be very different” (Case 56). Or: “I realized that it also works differently” (Case 14). Another student phrases such thinking in alternatives as an identification of possibilities: “This stay stimulated me to see how education is elsewhere. […] I experienced how history, from the 67

BRUNO LEUTWYLER, SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH

Stone Age to the oil production, is taught in Norway: outside of the classroom. This showed me that much more is possible than we think in everyday life” (Case 38). Besides thinking in alternatives and putting their own views into perspective, many students who completed an internship abroad also report increased confidence in their personal teaching skills and an increased motivation to teach. The following statement from a student who completed internships in France is prototypical for such teaching-specific self-efficacy beliefs: “I am really looking forward to teaching. I want to implement how I could do things better, and I believe I can do it better” (Case 14). Another student states: “I was reminded what is amazing about ‘being a teacher’. In this respect, my career choice was confirmed” (Case 11). Another student who studied for one semester in England links her increased motivation with her improved foreign language skills: “The biggest benefit of the stay was the English, and now I am greatly motivated to teach English here myself” (Case 42). Especially students who completed exchange stays in an English or French speaking country and are going to teach one of those foreign languages, emphasize their improved language skills and the accompanying increase in self-confidence in relation to language teaching as a direct career benefit. Some exchange students mention an increased intercultural sensitivity when dealing with intercultural classes as a direct career benefit of their stay: to experience being a foreigner first-hand, would lead to more understanding for people from other cultures. A student who studied in France for one semester states that his experience as a foreigner and as a foreign-language speaker would have furthered his understanding for immigrants in Switzerland and would have made him more sensitive to their problems (Case 46). Another student reports: “In dealing with foreigners and foreign things I became more open-minded. Before the internship, I had certain reservations about migrants. In Orléans, I saw their problems. They feel as if they are caught between two stools because they do not really belong anywhere. My point of view has changed due to that experience, and I can transpose it to Switzerland. That has an effect on the teaching practice” (Case 13). A student who completed an internship in Macedonia substantiates: “Maybe I have a bit more understanding for the parents because of the internship” (Case 8). She justifies this statement as follows: “School has a different value [in Tetovo]. Connections are more important than academic achievements.” Many exchange students realize the career benefits of the stays in the sense of a general personal development and emphasize that such developments are useful in relation to their future role as a teacher. They talk about benefiting from becoming more independent, more flexible, or more tolerant as a result of their stay. In some cases, the value of an exchange stay in relation to future job applications is also emphasised: “It is also important when applying for a job that one can distinguish oneself from the others by such an experience. It is something special that others don’t have” (Case 14).

68

BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE

5.4 New Impulses for One’s Own Teaching In the interviews, the students were not only asked how they evaluate the career benefits of their exchange stay. They also answered the question whether they have changed or have concrete intentions to change their own teaching due to their stay. This question can be interpreted as a pragmatic use of the question of career benefits and focuses less on attitudes and customs than towards concrete intentions to act. Some exchange students claim that they did not change anything in their teaching style, nor did they learn any new methods, or see any ways of trying new things in an externally structured internship: “I was not able to implement anything concrete during my internship. That was, however, mostly because we had to follow instructions very closely in the internships” (Case 2). However, the overall responses of returning exchange students show an impressive diversity in concrete changes or intentions to change which are directly brought into relation with their exchange stay. On the one hand, a larger focus on open and student activated teaching methods is discussed: “I focus more on the pupils’ independence. I pay more attention that the pupils can be active and that they can talk a lot, because I saw how unmotivated the pupils were when they are that passive” (Case 42). “I have increasingly implemented open ways of learning” (Case 38). “When preparing lessons, I now do things differently. I more consequently ask myself about different approaches from the perspective of the children. My increased awareness for the consequences of teacher-centred teaching is obvious in my preparations” (Case 49). “I am very interested in looking for a school where I can work in a more student-oriented manner. I want to challenge the pupils, even in relation to personal responsibility” (Case 52). “I want more internal differentiation; I saw there how important it is to cater for differences when they are not divided into different ability groups” (Case 56). On the other hand, returning exchange students also sometimes mention specific topics or contents that they learned about during their stay and that they want to incorporate into their own teaching: “The topic of multilingualism was also very impressive. I experienced how different languages can be built into the lessons. I read Spanish and Portuguese texts with French children. That was fascinating and impressive. I want to do that here as well” (Case 49). “I learned new types of sports that are unknown here and introduced these at school. The pupils reacted very positively” (Case 64).

69

BRUNO LEUTWYLER, SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH

“I saw there how many preparatory exercises (e.g. balance, coordination) are done before the equipment is used. That actually makes sense, and therefore, I do it like that here now too” (Case 64). “Later I want to do many things the way I saw them done there. For example, to call things by their right names. ‘Poetry’ still remains something abstract for me today, I got the impression that it was not something for me, too abstract. In France, however, they even familiarize small children without reservation. I also want to do it like that in the future” (Case 2). This list shows that many returning exchange students can specifically state how they benefited from an exchange stay for their future profession. The following section will now conclude these diverse statements and question the relevance of these results. 6. CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK

These results clearly show that future teachers can benefit on different levels for their aspired profession from exchange stays. On the one hand, the present study confirms existing findings that indicate how exchange stays contribute to general personal development (e.g. Maiworm et al., 1993; Thomas, 1999; Eichhorn, Feroiu, Marin & Ollinger, 2002). The furtherance of abilities such as flexibility, independence, openness, and tolerance were thereby addressed – abilities which are undoubtedly significant for the professionalism of teachers. On the other hand, the present study also confirms findings which are focused on teaching-specific benefits: in the present sample, clear evidence can also be found that an exchange stay can benefit teaching-specific self-confidence (Pence & Macgillivray, 2008), promote sensitivity for the pupils’ cultural backgrounds (Kambutu & Nganga, 2008; Rapoport, 2008), as well as offer concrete impulses for one’s own teaching (Willard-Holt, 2001). 6.1 Recognising a Difference: Reconsidering the “Familiar” Above all, however, the present study shows a further, very central benefit of exchange programmes – one which has so far hardly been discussed: the present data clearly shows the large potential to differentiate one’s own perspective of the “familiar” when confronted with the “unfamiliar”. The interviews with former exchange students clearly show, how in confrontation with the unfamiliar, previous conceptions of normality can be reconsidered and “de-evidenced”, how certain aspects of the familiar are perceived more consciously, newly interpreted, or differently evaluated. This raising awareness can occur on different levels: On the level of teaching, for example, the present data shows to some extent vast reflections on the possibilities of teaching design. Confrontation with a “differently” experienced style of teaching has the potential to benefit the reflection on personal conceptions of good teaching. Differently designed teaching can promote the reflection on personal conceptions of teaching and the awareness of 70

BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE

personal conceptions as well as lead to more reflected conceptions of “good teaching”. On the level of role conceptions, the present data shows how exchange students reflect on their own role conceptions and sometimes find more conscious beliefs of how they would like to live their own role as future teachers when confronted with differently experienced roles. In the present interview data, there are striking indicators of pronounced, accentuated positions in relation to the personal role conception. On the level of school culture and the school system, there are clear references to more conscious and more differentiated perceptions, whereby sometimes even an enlargement of the frame of reference (e.g. in relation to social or political factors) was reported. In confrontation with something unfamiliar, exchange students often engage in comparisons with the familiar and “de-normalize” their conceptions of how school functions. The relevance of these observations and reflections can barely be overestimated. Recognising differences can be interpreted as a pre-condition for a conscious perception of one’s own normality and represents in this respect a central task of teacher education (Sieber, 2007). Gregory Bateson (1988) impressively showed how awareness is fundamentally connected with the recognition of differences: “A ‚bit’ of information can be defined as a difference which makes a difference” (p. 408). Accordingly, the experience with and acknowledgment of differences sharpens one’s own perception schemata, both for the “familiar” and the “unfamiliar”. Against this background, exchange programmes have the large potential to discover and to question one’s own teaching-specific conceptions, beliefs, and perspectives. In Rogoff’s social-cognitive sense: “Awareness of a variety of approaches provides us with the chance to reflect on our own customary ways of thinking and doing things” (Rogoff, 2003, p. 362). The recognition of differences sharpens one’s own perception schemata and sensitises the awareness of how one’s own perspective is culturally bound: even if there are individual variations in teaching-specific subjective theories, many teaching-specific beliefs and attitudes are very similar in certain social backgrounds. Teaching-specific approaches, attitudes, and beliefs are anchored in historical, social, political, and ideological contexts (Sieber, 2007; Wormnaes, 2008). Recognising differences, made possible by exchange stays, sensitises the students for such contexts and thereby deepens their understanding of their own school system. 6.2 Levels of Normality Reflection However, it should be emphasised that not all exchange students in this study were able to develop their awareness of differences and of different normalities to the same extent. The data indicated a varying sensitivity for the perception of differences and different ways of dealing with such differences. In this respect, different levels of processing can be identified which refer to different levels of reflection on one’s own normality. The data of the study does not yet allow the 71

BRUNO LEUTWYLER, SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH

construction of an empirically saturated stage model. However, based on existing development theories in the field of intercultural competencies (e.g. Bennett, 1986; Kiel, 2001), a four-stage model of normality reflection can be postulated at this point: Stage 0 – No Processing of Differences: If students report perceived differences at this stage, no processing of these differences occurs. Students at this stage may report about different school systems or different school or teaching cultures they saw. However, they do not put these perceptions in any relation to other perceptions, to familiar or to personal positions at all. Perceived differences are not processed at this stage or corresponding processes do not become conscious or cannot be communicated. Differences may be seen at this stage, but seeing differences does not involve “recognition”, awareness or discovery. Students may find out that another school system functions “differently” than the familiar one, that teachers fulfil their roles “differently” than teachers in the familiar context or that instructional practices differ in other countries. At this stage, the students’ awareness for specific characteristics of their own school system may be raised. However, the awareness of differences remains scarcely elaborated. There is no awareness that one’s own perceptions are influenced by one’s own conceptions of normality. One’s own patterns of interpretation are perceived as universally valid. Stage 1 – Culture-Bound Processing of Differences: At this stage, differences are recognized and related to one’s own experiences and beliefs. Typically, students link their perception of differences to a judgement. Recognising that school functions differently in different contexts is processed within the familiar notion of one’s own normality: either one’s own or a foreign approach is judged as being better, more adequate, more productive or more appropriate. At this stage, students reflect on their own beliefs and values. They may, furthermore, accentuate their conception of a “good school”, “good teaching”, or a “good teacher”. Processing differences remains, however, embedded in one’s own cultural conceptions. Foreign ways of schooling are assessed primarily on the basis of one’s own values and beliefs. A change of perspective is not yet reached at this stage. One’s own patterns of interpretation are still perceived as universally valid. Stage 2 – Culture-Relative Processing of Differences: At this stage, differences are recognised, and dealing with differences is not bound to one’s own values and beliefs. Students at this stage have reached a certain degree of sensitivity to the cultural context in schooling and teaching. They recognize that different ways of schooling and teaching are expressions of different cultural practices. Students avoid comparative judgements of one’s own practices and of foreign ways of schooling and teaching because their awareness for different cultural backgrounds and influences does not permit them to develop generally valid assessment standards. At this stage, students’ awareness for specific characteristics of their own school system and of its contextual influences is raised. They are aware that their own conception of normality is culturally imbued and cannot claim universal validity. However, the awareness of how culture and context matter is still undifferentiated.

72

BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE

Stage 3 – Culture--Dynamic Processing of Differences: At this stage, students perceive differences and deal with them in a culture-relative way. Furthermore, they ask why schooling and teaching are differently established in different contexts; and they try to explain and to understand the differences. They become aware of their own values and beliefs and recognize their cultural imprint. Sophisticated conceptions of a “good school”, “good teaching”, or a “good teacher” are reached and may be justified. The development of these conceptions is understood and may be described. At this stage, students reach a deepened awareness that their own conceptions of normality are culturally imbued and may explain how culture and context influence one’s own perceptions and beliefs: an elaborated reflection of different normalities is gained. Just as Willard-Holt (2001) declared a reduction of prejudices about a host culture during exchange stays of future teachers, the data presented in this study also suggests a reduction of prejudices about one’s own school and teaching culture: exchange students recognize different forms of designing school and teaching and become sensitized to the dependency on context, so they put their prejudices of how school and teaching should take place into perspective and modify, if necessary, their image of a “good school” or “good teaching”. The statement “My image of good teaching has changed.” (Case 49) represents a prototypical assessment of an exchange student. 6.3 The Potential Is Not Automatically Put into Effect The fact that exchange stays have a large potential for valuable teaching-specific reflections became clear from the present data. It also became clear that this potential is not automatically put into effect. As the above stage model suggests, not all exchange students are able to benefit from their stay to the same extent. The question which pre-conditions must be fulfilled so that students can benefit from their exchange stay is, however, to a large extent unresolved. On the one hand, questions of individual pre-conditions such as openness for new things, interest in the unfamiliar or ambiguity tolerance are raised. A clear list of necessary preconditions is hardly definable because too many factors in different configurations can influence productive learning in cross-cultural encounters. Current research approaches focus, therefore, rather on inhibiting or obstructive factors which hinder productive developments (Pettigrew, 2004, p. 770). In this regard, it is not surprising that the question about the selection of the participants for exchange programmes is hardly discussed. On the other hand, the question of the design of the programme is raised, which can facilitate productive developments in exchange stays. Thereby, questions about the appropriate preparations, individual coaching, and teaching-specific debriefing after their return as well as the corresponding appreciation should be addressed at the home institution. Unguided, non-structured personal experiences during an exchange stay do not automatically materialize into differentiated perception patterns or specific abilities. In addition, questions about the ideal length and the adequate organization of the stay itself are also to be raised (Woolf, 2007). 73

BRUNO LEUTWYLER, SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH

In the present study, it would be of significance, concerning this matter, to what extent the teaching-specific benefits for exchange students who studied one semester at another university differs from that of those students who completed a four week internship in France, Macedonia, or Australia. Although, students from both types of exchange stays were taken into account in the present study, no clear differences can be established in this regard based on the present analyses. This could possibly be explained by the fact that all of the students interviewed who completed a semester stay also had observation or teaching possibilities in school classes during their stay and in this respect could also benefit from concrete insights in the everyday school life of a host country. The relevance of teaching practices such as teaching observation or one’s own teaching experience should be especially emphasised. It already becomes clear when reviewing the available literature that teaching-specific developments can be predominantly observed in internships – a finding which is also confirmed in the present data: when students who completed a semester stay talk about teachingspecific experiences, they refer to their observations in schools or to their own teaching activities. 6.4 Research Desiderata Even though the present study contributes to the teaching-specific research on exchange programmes, a range of questions still remain open. One of its limitations is related to its focus on the individual benefits of exchange programmes. The question of institutional effects is thereby not taken into account. It remains unclear to which extent home and host institutions can benefit from exchange students or to what extent these institutions at least try to make use of this potential. Therefore, the question to what extent returning exchange students can actually be bearers of an institutional internationalization, is to be asked on two levels. On the one hand, on the level of teacher education institutions, one must ask how individual experiences may be translated into an institutional benefit. It only seems clear that this does not occur automatically: “High levels of personal capacity and experiences with other cultures and languages apparently do not automatically provide faculty with the competence to carry out the intellectual process necessary to deliver interculturally sensitive/competent curricula” (Schuerholz-Lehr, 2007, p. 193). On the other hand, the question is asked on the level of the future employer, the schools, where the future teachers will later teach: to what extent do these schools make use of the special experiences and abilities? Which relevance is actually attributed to the teachers’ international experiences? In private companies, Teichler (2007) shows that a qualified stay abroad optimises the chances of future employment. The hope that an experience abroad also facilitates finding a teaching position has partially been shown in the present data. To what extent this notion is, however, also shared by employers cannot be answered at this point. For this purpose, additional studies are necessary. A whole array of questions also remains concerning the individual benefits of exchange programmes, on which the present study is focused. The question of the 74

BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE

quality and sustainability of changes in attitudes has not been addressed either. On the one hand, for example, a more articulated position in relation to “good teaching” is not automatically a better position. A more articulated position could indeed also mean a consolidation of unproductive attitudes. On the other hand, the aspect of sustainability also addresses the question of how long-lasting the influence of exchange experiences is. Although, it is to be assumed that this can differ according to the dimension. In addition, it would also be relevant if the teaching-specific exchange research covered the level of implementation better in the future and could put a stronger focus on the implementation of the acquired competencies in daily teaching. First glimpses are provided, for example, by Court and associates (2002). Finally, the form of the retrospective causal attribution is also unsatisfactory: in this study, former exchange students retrospectively attribute the reported effects to their experiences during their exchange stays, as is generally done in the available research literature on the topic. This method is, however, problematic when the diverse and complex interdependences of pre-conditions and process experiences are taken into account. To what extent, for example, the ability and willingness of reflection was developed before the exchange stay and to what extent these developed during the stay, is hardly reliably measurable by a retrospective subjective evaluation. The discrepancy between the subjectively experienced effectiveness (or the corresponding belief) on the one hand and the concrete, communicable benefit on the other hand are also not methodologically unproblematic. In order to cope with these methodological challenges, a quasiexperimental research design is needed with pre- and post-tests in an experimental and a control group. Only then can more robust causal attributions be expected. A joint research project which began in the spring of 2008 from the University of Teacher Education Central Switzerland, the University of Stavanger (Norway) and the University of Iaúi (Romania) is pursuing this goal. The results of this research project not available before early 2011, promise a substantial contribution in clarifying the relevance of exchange stays in teacher education. It is to be expected that neither a one-sided mystification with exorbitant expectations nor a simple trivialization will do justice to the actual relevance. REFERENCES Anderson, P. H., Lawton, L., Rexeisen, R. J., & Hubbard, A. C. (2006). Short-term study abroad and intercultural sensitivity: A pilot study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 457–469. Bateson, G. (1988). Ökologie des Geistes: Anthropologische, psychologische, biologische und epistemologische Perspektiven (2. Auflage). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Bennett, M. J. (1986). A developmental approach to training for intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(2), 179–196. Bracht, O., Engel, C., Janson, K., Over, A., Schomburg, H., & Teichler, U. (2006). The professional value of ERASMUS mobility. Kassel: International Centre for Higher Education Research (INCHERKassel). Chieffo, L., & Griffiths, L. (2004). Large-scale assessment of student attitudes after a short-term study abroad program. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 10, 165–177.

75

BRUNO LEUTWYLER, SAMANTHA LOTTENBACH COHEP [Schweizerische Konferenz der Rektorinnen und Rektoren der Pädagogischen Hochschulen] – Arbeitsgruppe Mobilität. (2008). Empfehlungen zur Förderung der nationalen und internationalen Mobilität. Bern: COHEP (Schweizerische Konferenz der Rektorinnen und Rektoren der Pädagogischen Hochschulen). Court, D., Cohen, L., Broyles, I., Spencer, L., & Michael, O. (2002). Crossing borders: Culture and transformation. World Studies in Education, 3(1–2), 39–53. Eichhorn, M., Feroiu, R., Marin, R., & Ollinger, J. (2002). Persönlicher und volkswirtschaftlicher Nutzen des ERP-Stipendiums. Trier: Universität Trier. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2005). Grounded theory: Strategien qualitativer Forschung (2., korr. Aufl.). Bern: Huber. Hammer, M. R. (2005). Assessment of the impact of the AFS study abroad experience. New York: AFS Intercultural Programs, Inc. Jahr, V., Schomburg, H., & Teichler, U. (2002). Internationale Mobilität von Absolventinnen und Absolventen europäischer Hochschulen. Kassel: Wissenschaftliches Zentrum für Berufs- und Hochschulforschung der Universität Kassel. Kambutu, J., & Nganga, L. W. (2008). In these uncertain times: Educators build cultural awareness through planned international experiences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(4), 939–951. Kehm, B. M. (2005a). The contribution of international student mobility to human development and global understanding. US-China Education Review, 2(1), 18–24. Kehm, B. M. (2005b). Mit SOKRATES II zum Europa des Wissens: Ergebnisse der Evaluation des Programms in Deutschland. Kassel: Wissenschaftliches Zentrum für Berufs- und Hochschulforschung der Universität Kassel. Kiel, E. (2001). Die Entwicklung interkultureller Kompetenz als ein zentrales Ziel globalen Lehrens und Lernens. forum – Zeitschrift der Deutschen UNESCO-Kommission, 2(1), 10–21. Maiworm, F., Steube, W., & Teichler, U. (1993). Experiences of Erasmus-students 1990/91. Kassel: Wissenschaftliches Zentrum für Berufs- und Hochschulforschung der Universität Kassel. Messer, D., & Wolter, S. C. (2007). Are student exchange programs worth it? Higher Education, 54(5), 647–663. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Pence, H. M., & Macgillivray, I. K. (2008). The impact of an international field experience on preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 14–25. Pettigrew, T. F. (2004). Intergroup contact. Theory, research, and new perspectives. In J. A. Banks & C. McGee Banks (Eds.) Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 770–781). San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Popa, N. (2007). Resources and development of intercultural competence: Influence of study abroad and intercultural training. Stavanger: Presentation given at University of Stavanger (Norway), March 2007. Rapoport, A. (2008). Exchange programs for educators: American and Russian perspectives. Intercultural Education, 19(1), 67–77. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford: Oxford University. Schuerholz-Lehr, S. (2007). Teaching for global literacy in higher education: How prepared are the educators? Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(2), 180–204. Sieber, P. (2007). Transnationalität und nationale Schulsysteme: Perspektiven für Forschung und Lehre. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Bildungswissenschaften, 29(3), 345–362. Teichler, U. (2007). Die Internationalisierung der Hochschulen: Neue Herausforderungen und Strategien. Frankfurt am Main: Campus. Thomas, A. (1999). Welche langfristigen Wirkungen haben internationale Schüleraustauschprogramme? In Internationaler Jugendaustausch- und Besucherdienst der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Eds.) Forum Jugendarbeit International – Südosteuropa (pp. 193–209). Münster: Votum.

76

BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE Vabø, A. (2007). Evaluation of the Leonardo da Vinci and SOCRATES programmes in Norway. Oslo: NIFU STEP Studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning (Studies in Innovation, Research and Education). Wiggins, R. A., Follo, E. J., & Eberly, M. B. (2007). The impact of a field immersion program on preservice teachers’ attitudes toward teaching in culturally diverse classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 653–663. Willard-Holt, C. (2001). The impact of a short-term international experience for preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(4), 505–517. Woolf, M. (2007). Impossible things before breakfast: Myths in education abroad. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11, 496–509. Wormnaes, S. (2008). Exploring the potential for facilitating reflection through cross-cultural collaboration in teacher education. In N. Popov, C. Wolhuter, B. Leutwyler, M. Kysilka & J. Ogunleye (Eds.) Comparative Education, Teacher Training, Education Policy and Social Inclusion (pp. 82–85). Sofia: Bureau for Educational Services.

Bruno Leutwyler University of Teacher Education Central Switzerland, Zug, Switzerland Samantha Lottenbach University of Teacher Education Central Switzerland, Zug, Switzerland

77

ARMAND HENRION

STAFF MOBILITY IN EUROPE: A TWELVE-YEAR-OLD PROGRAMME

The present article attempts to give an overall view of what staff mobility means for higher education in Europe, in which general context it is practised, how important it is relatively, and the major prospects ahead in terms of improvement and evaluation. Two more personalized aspects will also be developed: an informal survey of 10 years of staff mobility in the author’s home institution, and the description of a special event that might be an element of improvement for the future of staff mobility. Warning 1: While researching on staff mobility in Europe, I was surprised, then worried, … and eventually pacified by the fact that, even after so many years of pilgrimage all over the Old Continent, the poor staff pilgrims have not really been watched and examined by hordes of statisticians and report writers, as opposed to the generous scientific literature we now have at our disposal concerning student mobility. Final reports are sparse, global figures too rare, staff mobility is still partly a terra incognita! The present paper attempts to collect at least what could be found and order it in a hopefully coherent way … Why eventually pacified? Because there is one element to keep in mind, and that (only partially) helps to explain the difference of the size of information between student and staff mobility: whereas student mobility started in 1987, staff mobility has only existed since 1997. Warning 2: The paper you are going to read has deliberately been written in a style that one might call relaxed, friendly, casual, and certainly not pompously academic. A lot of the material evoked relates to the author’s personal opinion and experience of staff mobility. 1. DID YOU KNOW?

Did you know that Erasmus wrote a large part of his masterpiece Praise of Folly while on horseback, during his trip from Italy to England? Did you know that he was born in the Netherlands, that he studied in Paris, that he met Thomas More in England, travelled to Italy, came back to Holland and Belgium, and died in Basel in Switzerland? Did you know that he used to write more than 40 letters a day? That he spoke Dutch, French, German, English, Latin and Greek?

T. Goetz et al. (Eds.), Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education, 79–92. © 2011 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

ARMAND HENRION

There probably was no better herald for the fabulous programme of European mobility that was launched twenty-two years ago by the European Authorities. Desiderius Erasmus surely embodies the ideal travelling mind, the perfect teacher in mobility! (But we have been lucky … if he had kept his real name, it would not have sounded so noble: he was actually baptised Gerhard Gerhards!) Of course horse and coach have left the roads, and now it is much more trains, planes and jet lags. Of course pen and ink and the shaky rhythm of the rough roads are now replaced by the smooth glide of the laptop keyboards squeezed in the mini-space between your belly and the seat in front, where disruptive children are jumping and squealing and uselessly being told to be quiet. Of course letters also belong to an old world. We probably write more than 40 e-mails a day, but would we dare compare their quality and length to what Erasmus was writing in his time? One thing that might be constant is the ‘praise of folly’ that most of the staff on mobility practise dutifully by trying to bring together their work in the home institution (teaching, publishing, supervising, …) their work in the host institution (lecturing, meeting, feasting, …) and any other commitment they have to face here and there in their public and personal lives, all that compressed in hectic weeks of work and (dis)pleasure. I see Erasmus sitting in the coach, not knowing exactly what day or week he would reach Canterbury, not even knowing where the horses would stop for the night. I sometimes envy him! 2. BEST WISHES FROM LONDON!

In their London Communiqué dated 18 May 2007, the Ministers responsible for Higher Education in the countries participating in the Bologna Process insist on two things in their first paragraphs: they welcome the Republic of Montenegro as a member, and then develop a certain number of points of practical policy. Let me quote here the parts which deal more precisely with staff mobility. (Italics in the quotations are mine.) Mobility of staff, students and graduates is one of the core elements of the Bologna process, creating opportunities for personal growth, developing international cooperation between individuals and institutions, enhancing the quality of higher education and research, and giving substance to the European dimension. (London Communiqué, 2007, p. 2) Some progress has been made since 1999, but many challenges remain. Among the obstacles to mobility, issues relating to immigration, recognition, insufficient financial incentives and inflexible pension arrangements feature prominently. We recognize the responsibility of individual Governments to facilitate the delivery of visas, residence and work permits, as appropriate. Where these measures are outside our competence as Ministers for Higher Education, we undertake to work within our respective Governments for decisive progress in this area. At national level, we will work to implement fully the agreed recognition tools and procedures and consider ways of 80

STAFF MOBILITY IN EUROPE

further incentivising mobility for both staff and students. This includes encouraging a significant increase in the number of joint programmes and the creation of flexible curricula, as well as urging our institutions to take greater responsibility for staff and student mobility, more equally balanced between countries across the EHEA. (London Communiqué, 2007, p. 2) From the reading of the two paragraphs above, two thoughts come to my mind. The first text is a very interesting summary of the objectives of staff mobility, and I will use the items in italics as a guideline for the informal survey about my institution further on in the paper. The other thought is to me more an expression of surprise. In my experience of staff mobility, pension arrangements, work permits and restriction to mobility are not to be imagined, maybe because Belgium is still quite an affluent country, because the state provides for our pensions, because our authorities take mobility for granted, because our staff mobilities are too short to cause such heavy somersaults in an academic career, because … My feeling when reading such surprising items is that staff mobility may well cover very different realities depending on who the traveller is, in which country they teach, where they intend to go for lectures, … The last quotation is meant to feed the next meeting of the Ministers, in Belgium in 2009. In our national reports for 2009, we will report on action taken at national level to promote the mobility of students and staff, including measures for future evaluation. We will focus on the main national challenges […]. We also agree to set up a network of national experts to share information, and help to identify obstacles to the portability of grants and loans. (London Communiqué, 2007, p. 6) Let me insist here again on the fact that even a close reading of the paragraph above does not inform a lot on what could be considered typically ‘staff matters’. Probably ‘evaluation’ is part of it, ‘the sharing’ of ‘information’ too, but ‘the portability of grants and loans’ is clearly a student matter. We are not sure that the Ministers would communicate better if they separated the matters for students from those for staff, but it would certainly help the detailed comprehension of such important official texts. 3. HOW MUCH? (FACTS AND FIGURES)

All the figures and information developed in this part are extracts that can be found in the Overview of the National Agencies’ final reports 2005/2006. The 29-page document is “based on the final reports of the National Agencies of the 31 countries participating in ERASMUS. The financial reports contain the statistical and financial results of the ERASMUS mobility activities in 2005–2006 and a narrative report” (European Commission, 2007, p. 1). 81

ARMAND HENRION

Warning: One should be very careful with the relative importance of statistical conclusions in the report. To give a clear example, we can read on page 3: “All countries except Denmark and Liechtenstein experience a growth in outgoing teacher mobility. […] The annual increase was high in Turkey, Cyprus and the Slovak Republic.” (European Commission, 2007, p. 3) If we translate that reality in figures, we can see that, for 2005–2006, Denmark sent abroad 317 staff members for 325 the year before, and Liechtenstein 6 in 2005–2006 for 7 in 2004–2005!! On the one hand we can admit that in both cases, there is a decrease, but on the other hand the Liechtenstein academic who decided not to go to Italy that year cannot be held responsible for the negative point their country receives in a full line in a European report. Better make fun of that! Let us comment about the five points I could identify in the jungle of figures and percentages; figures as such are not important, but the reality they cover definitely is. 3.1 How Many Mobilities? The first figures we have, for 1997/1998, show 7 797 teachers moving. Not bad for a first year! It probably corresponded to a need in academic circles, and no long campaign of persuasion was necessary. In 2005/2006, there were 23 449 teachers on the roads (the population of a small town in Europe). So in nine years, the number of staff mobilities has been multiplied by three, with an annual growth rate of 12 to 15%. 3.2 From Which Countries? One mobile teacher out of five is either German or Spanish. In nearly all countries, the numbers have been growing recently. Denmark is an exception (–2.5%), and Turkey has by far the highest relative increase (71.4%!) followed by Cyprus and the Slovak Republic. Turkey only started sending teachers out in 2004/2005, and it doubled its number in one single year. 3.3 What Proportion of the Complete Staff? Mobile teachers represent 2.1% of their colleagues in higher education. Only? Not exactly! The proportion of staff on mobility is 3 times higher than the proportion of students (0.76%). This fact is very interesting. It goes against the tendency of European observers to more or less neglect the analysis of staff mobility and privilege by far student mobility. In proportional terms, there should be three times more papers and figures and surveys on staff mobility than on student mobility. This is far from the reality. There is a feeling, largely undeclared, that student mobility comes first and should have top priority in policies and strategies and financing, maybe because it is a bet on the future, maybe because we owe it to the 82

STAFF MOBILITY IN EUROPE

students, maybe because they are the weaker side of the group which should be helped at all costs, maybe because students have the bulk number for them anyway 154 421 students compared to 23 449 teachers. Another more qualitative point should be raised here: the relationship between teacher and student mobility. The 2008 report reads as follows: “The relationship between teacher and student mobility does not appear to be simple […] the result is a variety of relationships. The majority of the countries have an increase both in SM and TS (some have a considerably higher growth rate in TS, others in SM).” (European Commission, 2008, p. 19) It would be interesting to measure, at the level of the institutions themselves, the relationship between TS and SM, and also to know if the figures are a clear result of the policies at work in the institutions. There is however one point I am quite convinced of: in a higher education institution, there must be some effect of mutual stimulation between student and staff mobility. I cannot imagine a group of teachers who would never go abroad but would eagerly encourage their students to apply for ERASMUS stays in other countries. Neither would it be realistic to imagine staff members being away all the time and the students not wanting to go and see for themselves over the borders. And from our own experience, teachers meeting their students abroad while on mobility have always found the experience interesting, have seen their student in a new light, and have created a new perspective in the way they see their job and the benefits everybody gains in the deal. Another very encouraging situation is found in the new reality of the drafting of young teachers in higher education. More and more of them were ERASMUS students somewhere in their initial training. Hearing of mobility in their new job is considered a natural thing, and even something that should absolutely be tried by a maximum of students. 3.4 Which Subject Areas Travel Most? It is not a surprise to see Languages and Philological Studies in the top three, together with Engineering/Technology and Business. Language teachers and learners quite probably go abroad to improve their mastery of a language they are learning or teaching. In their case, content and form are united in the same enterprise. It is quite worrying on the other hand to find Education and Teacher training in the last but one rank. That means school teachers in Europe (and their trainers) are not really tempted by ERASMUS adventures; when they have a fundamental role to play in the vision pupils have of Europe as a place to visit and explore, a vision they cannot enrich through personal experience. In my institution, language teachers are by far the most mobile group, and language trainees are also very often abroad. It is much less true with the other members of staff. This raises a key question: is the fact of being able to speak a foreign language a very important asset in the capacity to decide of travelling? The answer is in the question. Improvements in this field will only come from a higher part of the curriculum in any subject area being devoted to learning foreign languages, and 83

ARMAND HENRION

even better, from students being taught their subjects – at least for a part of them – directly in a foreign language. 3.5 What Money for What Duration? The average grant per teacher is around 600 €. But this does not prevent important differences between the countries, ranging from more than 1 200 € in Iceland down to about 220 € in the Czech Republic! And the average duration of teaching assignments is between 6 and 7 days. If I had to summarize staff mobility in a few lines, I would say: staff travel more every year, they represent their corporation three times more than students do, and business, engineering and language teachers seem to be the largest travelling corporations. Teachers stay away one short week. 4. OBSTACLES TO STAFF MOBILITY

The Overview complains that “the narrative reports do not often provide much information on reasons behind trends in teacher mobility”. (European Commission, 2008, p. 21) They make a list of three most frequently mentioned obstacles to staff mobility. I react to each statement by describing what happens in our institution. It might be the right moment to describe it in a few words: the Haute Ecole Blaise Pascal is located in the south of Belgium. It is fairly small-sized: 1 500 students only. We train teachers, engineers, electro-mechanics, accountants and secretaries. Most of our students graduate as bachelors. I myself teach languages and language didactics. A lot of personal examples listed in the next pages have to do with my career as a language teaching trainer. 4.1 “An ERASMUS Assignment is not Valued by University or Government as Part of the Career Development of the Teacher” We have never met the problem because to us the problem does not exist, since staff mobility is not expected to help career development. Mobility is one of the many tasks higher education staff are encouraged to do apart from actual teaching, at the same level as in-service, research, tutoring final papers by students, … It is by law and by common acceptance considered as something that higher education teachers should do, a part of the definition of the job. The teachers who go abroad are supposed to organize their agenda so that the courses they cannot give while they are on mobility are taught to the students either before or after travelling. Apart from the university level, teachers in Belgium have a particularly ‘flat’ perspective of career development, even in training colleges, and mobility is certainly not an activity that academic authorities or teacher unions would easily propose or accept as a criterion of career development. Which does not mean that it could not one day be one of a range of criteria that would improve the dynamics of the career.

84

STAFF MOBILITY IN EUROPE

4.2 “There Is a Lack of Complementary Funding” The budget for international affairs in every department of our Haute Ecole is built so that, on top of the annual subsidies the ERASMUS programme grants for staff mobility, the extra costs are covered by the department. We require a lot from staff on mobility (like teaching their courses at home anticipatively), we do not promise any career development, but we do not accept that a teacher on mobility would have to pay any euro from their pocket to represent our institution in European partner colleges or universities. 4.3 “Home and Host Academic Calendars Are Incompatible” This disadvantage is one we are faced with regularly. The calendars often do not correspond perfectly in terms of semesters, but also, more finely, in terms of teaching practice placements, evaluation periods, holiday periods. So what? If international partners really want to work together, exchange students and teachers, there is always a solution to be found. Of course, if one institution does not want to adapt to anything in the outside world, if another absolutely wants their students to have the same courses as at home, and not change anything in their home organization, if they think it is never the right time for home teachers to go abroad, or to welcome colleagues from another country even in difficult circumstances, then the incompatibility of calendars is an obstacle that cannot be vanquished. It is in my mind a mere question of mutual respect and goodwill, and also a question of keeping a cool head on one’s shoulders. 5. HOW GOOD?

The London Communiqué lists the major gains that can be harvested from both student and staff mobility. They are quoted in italics in the first paragraph of the start quotation of Section 2 “Best wishes from London”. 5.1 Personal Growth I lived my ten years of staff mobility mainly as a great opportunity of opening perspectives for my own teaching and for the general management of my institution, since for a certain period (2000–2003) I was also the principal of the College of Education. When visiting other places where teachers were being trained, I generally had, in a positive sense, mixed feelings of being at the same time modest and proud. When you work in a small College in rural Belgium, you are easily the victim of a complex of inferiority: others probably do better, we cannot be the best, what can we bring to the others, how could we be interesting, … ? A part of what you see abroad could reinforce that negative feeling, mainly if it has to do with elements of size: a much bigger student library, ten times as many students going out on ERASMUS programmes, bilateral agreements all over Europe and links with institutions all over the world, huge 85

ARMAND HENRION

lecture halls with the high tech equipment. But when you sit back and think it over you realize that proportionally your place sends a higher percentage of their students and staff abroad and has quite a good network of partners. And some of your students are really much better than the average students in the large classes you are presently lecturing. Of course we have to remain modest, but at the same time there is a feeling of pride and comfort, and the motto ‘Small is beautiful’ plays a fresh music in your ears. The regular visits to my colleagues all over Europe encouraged me to urge my own workmates at home to travel more, to believe more in the scientific value of what they were doing, to publish more papers. Which was – if only partly – successful, when you keep in mind the fact that in our institution 90% of the professional time has to be devoted to teaching! Which is a clear disadvantage of being small. I am a lucky man. Thanks to staff mobility I now have a very large network of international colleagues who have also become good friends. We know each other’s wives and husbands, we go to the mountain or the woods together, we ask about our newborns, our grandchildren, the new daughter-in-law, we also show sympathy in difficult moments. It all starts with one teacher allowing a totally unknown colleague from far away to come and teach in their classroom, accepting what is then considered a certain amount of time lost in the curriculum. In many cases the time lost turns out to be time blessed, since a sound scientific cooperation is born, and most often, on top of it a real friendship. 5.2 Cooperation between Individuals Staff mobility can foster cooperation between individual teachers from different countries, but there is no guarantee it will work that way. The first condition for that to happen is a form of continuity in exchanges. Our best results in that field have been with our Department of French as a foreign language. Over the years, our team has woven very close links with three institutions based in Slovakia, Romania and Poland. The Belgian teachers have gone there every year, their teachers have come over as regularly, and there has been a constant exchange of students since 2000, foreign students staying for 3 or 4 months to improve their command of French and learn new teaching techniques, the Belgian students going abroad to test their ability to teach French as a foreign language in totally nonFrench environments. The new teachers in the departments are encouraged to travel to the partners and join the band. In other fields, like pedagogy or math or science, we have not been able to keep collaborations going in the long run. Teachers come and go without a real partnership developing from that, and the experience remains largely individual and lacks continuity in time. However, great prospects for better cooperation can be found in a relatively new formula of ERASMUS meetings: the Intensive Programmes (IP). The European authorities define it as such: 86

STAFF MOBILITY IN EUROPE

In addition to staff mobility, you may also participate in ERASMUS Intensive Programmes as a teacher if your home institution is involved in one of the more than 250 intensive programmes that take place yearly throughout Europe. These short study programmes, between two and six weeks, are organised by at least three higher institutions in different countries. An intensive programme can offer you first-hand experience in teaching abroad. (European Commission, 2009, p. 1) To us Intensive Programmes are a relatively new thing. Thanks to a visit to our Austrian partner last year, I could attend the meetings that were preparing the first phase of the three-year Intensive Programme called BEAM that gathers to start with Danish, Norwegian and Finnish students and staff with the Austrian host. In steps 2 and 3, there will be more countries involved: Latvia, Hungary, Ireland and Belgium. We have already selected the type of students who will attend: a group of 5 to 10 students specialising in the teaching of History, Geography and Social Sciences. They will gain ECTS credits in the adventure; their teachers are already preparing teaching programmes and strategies to involve them in the preparation of phase 2 in spring 2010. We send one member of staff as an observer of phase 1 in May 2009. Intensive Programmes are to a certain extent opposites of classical student mobility, in that IPs are short and collective when student mobilities are individual and relatively long. The last sentence of the quotation above sounds quite surprising to me: I would not have mentioned ‘teaching abroad’ as a top fact of experience in IPs, but rather the capacity of cooperating together with foreign staff and with foreign groups of students, but around the same topic. It is what comes out of a large number of feedbacks I have had from European teachers taking part in those Intensive Programmes, which are actually parallel to the Comenius programmes organised for secondary schools, where the same reflection prevails. 5.3 Cooperation between Institutions It is not easy to imagine cooperation between institutions without having first cooperation between the individuals who work for and represent their respective institutions abroad. And it is quite clear that there is no good cooperation between institutions if there is no friendly atmosphere among the people cooperating. So cooperation is mainly a question of individuals before being a matter of institutions. Or, as Ulrich Teichler (2008) writes it from a historical perspective: After a while, when ERASMUS activities had existed for some time and had grown in size, questions arose as to whether one has to move from a pioneering stage to a stage of normalization and routinization. The pioneers got tired or retired. The activities needed continuity and could not be left at the mercy of the coincidental strengths and weaknesses of the pioneers. However, individuals come and go, and what they have built remains (or should remain). This is the reality test that gives evidence of the fact that institutions have 87

ARMAND HENRION

taken over and written in the duration what individuals have created on the grounds of their intuition, their enthusiasm and their capacity of sharing their dreams. If I had to make a professional wish here, it would be that the event I helped create for my institution at the international level could survive the active part of my life and become a normal event in the course of the academic year. What is it about? It is the event called “The International Week”, which brings together partners of every European area for a Conference on an educational topic. I will develop the point in more detail in Section 7. 5.4 Higher Quality in Education If I had to give two personal gains I have reaped from my many stays with colleagues in partner institutions, one would be called ‘Writing as a process’. Under that enigmatic title lies what some might consider a matter-of-fact element of language teaching: not to see writing in a foreign language as a product that has to be assessed once and for all, but rather as a process into which the teacher’s role is very important as a help, a prompter and a companion. I had always paid lip service to the theoreticians and practitioners of the writing skill who claimed that writing a text is not easy, and should be coached through successive steps in a refined procedure. My policy consisted for a long time in marking the first draught of a written production as a final product, without any chance for the writer to learn from my constructive criticism and language advice. Then I visited our Norwegian partner, and the moment when the revelation occurred was not even one of the official moments when I was supposed to give an official lecture that was listed officially as something official for European records. I had an afternoon off in the middle of the week, and one of the colleagues of the language department gently proposed that I could attend her session of writing counsel, or any other name she called it, which I do not remember. I sat for a couple of hours in a small room on the campus, listening to the teacher commenting to – and receiving the comments of – her students who were supposed to hand in a very important paper on cultural matters by the end of that month. And I was mesmerized by the quality of her comments, by the clever hints she was providing, by the positive feedback she was giving most of the students, and eventually by the feeling she was making obvious that the students were actually writing for someone who was an attentive and positive reader of their prose. That attitude completely changed my vision of writing in a foreign language and the procedure I adopted thereafter. Another personal gain in terms of higher quality in education is simply called ‘mentoring’. Before my first visit to our Romanian partner in Cluj-Napoca I had never heard the word itself. Now it is a daily reference to me. Here again the meeting that brought about that new concept in my life was not a central moment of the teacher mobility. My Romanian colleague from the English department invited me to pay a short visit to the local British Council offices. The manager there kindly offered me two or three documents relating to a conference on the theme of mentoring that had just taken place in Cluj. When leafing through the 88

STAFF MOBILITY IN EUROPE

documents on the plane back home, I realised that the same book was being constantly referred to: Angi Malderez and Caroline Bodóczky’s Mentor Courses (Malderez & Bodóczky, 1999). A few years later, not only has Mentoring been the main theme of our third International Week, but I have recently translated the very book in French, which has been published by De Boeck (Malderez & Bodóczky, 2009). What is striking in both cases is that the gains were made possible not by the central programme of the mobility but rather by meetings and opportunities at the periphery of the programme. It means that a mobility is not a straight line but a circle, a mosaic in which every little stone works for the whole composition. If I had not been to Norway or Romania, I would probably have missed such important opportunities of professional development. 5.5 Higher Quality in Research Our institution being a Teacher Training College training future teachers in a threeyear-long curriculum we have no tradition in research as such, our way of seeing research being closely linked to the work done in the classes, on which we can have a critical look and learn from. This explains why I will not develop that point. 6. EVALUATION

The lines here are written one week before the Ministers responsible for Higher Education in the countries participating in the Bologna Process meet again, after Bergen 2005 and London 2007, this time in my country (Leuven / Louvain-laNeuve) at the end of April 2009. The London Communiqué had promised the following: “In our national reports for 2009, we will report on action taken at national level to promote the mobility of students and staff, including measures for future evaluation” (London Communiqué, 2007, p. 6). So we must wait and see. But it is true that the vast number of documents and reports that a member of staff has to fill in before, during and after their mobility deserve a better treatment than the mere feeding of the statistics machine of the European Authorities. A sound qualitative analysis would be a precious tool to allow those who organize and perform staff mobilities to feel backed up by their institutions and the European stakeholders and/or to orientate their strategies in a more efficient direction. 7. THE INTERNATIONAL WEEK

As indicated at the beginning of this chapter and in Section 5.3, here follows a comprehensive description of an international event we have already organised three times in our institution: The International Week. But before I start on that description, I would like to explain which solution the International Week brought to which problem.

89

ARMAND HENRION

7.1 The Loneliness of the Mobile Teacher In my first years as the manager of International Relations, I remember spending long hours welcoming a colleague from France or Portugal, booking a room in a hotel, offering dinner in the name of the Institution, preparing the planning of the communications, keeping him or her company, showing the interesting things in town, driving him or her here and there, introducing the foreign colleague to the targeted colleagues of our staff. A lot of tasks that I had to repeat every time a new partner decided to visit us. That would not have been the whole of the problem if most of our guests had felt satisfied. But despite my efforts, I could often guess in the partner’s attitude some sort of loneliness, a slight element of frustration, sometimes boredom. After two years of such bad treatment, I decided that it was time to change things. Our Portuguese partner gave me the idea: to organize an International Week where all the foreign partners would be invited together around the same central theme. It is interesting to point out that, after the start of our first International Week in March 2005, and without any element of prohibition on our part, we hardly had any individual staff mobility from outside to handle, everyone knowing that there would be a new International Week in our place every other year, where both scientific communications and communications around a common theme were possible within the same week. 7.2 The International Week Concept The International Week concept was the instant solution to the two problems pointed out above: excess of repeated welcoming work on one side, feeling of loneliness on the other. The International Week: During five days at the end of March every two years, the representatives of ten to fifteen partner institutions in as many European countries get together to debate and confront national policies on the following themes: 2005 Teacher training / 2007 Teaching practice / 2009 Mentoring and teacher development. There are three kinds of participants: ERASMUS partners who can benefit from ERASMUS funding, other international partners who have to provide for their own funding, and local Belgian partners. There is an average of forty communications in one week: Lectures and workshops on the main topic, communications to students and staff in the scientific fields of the mobile teacher, and zero-lessons in ‘rare’ languages, like in 2009 Lithuanian or Norwegian. The last day of the week is usually devoted to a cultural visit of a town or area of interest. The three events we have organised so far have known an increasing success among our partners. Most of them send members of staff every time, and more and more partners are welcomed over the years. They all appreciate the great 90

STAFF MOBILITY IN EUROPE

conviviality, the professional management and the fun of working and exchanging with professional colleagues. No feelings of solitude or boredom here, only the regret of seeing the end of the week and the moment of leaving. And for the team who organize, the great joy of having spent lots of hours to set up and run an event that was worthwhile, instead of the lassitude of repeated hospitality for individual visitors who feel lost or nearly. Another interesting consequence of events such as the International Week is contained in the following anecdote. Last year I called a Norwegian colleague, but his secretary told me that he was absent for ten days since he was in Slovakia. I asked where in Slovakia, and I learned that he was visiting a common ERASMUS partner he had come to know thanks to the International Week in our College. I realised later that such collaborations had multiplied over the years. So one more virtue of an International Week is that it brings people together. Some readers might ask why something so successful is organised only every two years. The reason is simple. It takes nearly another year to gather the finalized papers of all the communications and publish them in a journal that is sent to all the participants and also put on the academic market (Haute Ecole Blaise Pascal, 2008). This is another way of giving visibility to our event and our institution. In short, the gains of an International Week are simple but powerful: working together, meeting old and new partners, publishing, and building new connections with new knowledge. 8. CONCLUSION

Even if it is a normal thing to see much more literature about student mobility than staff mobility, for all the good reasons evoked in this chapter, the European authorities should not leave staff mobility in its dark corner, since a prosperous staff mobility can be a direct help and asset for more and better student mobility. And a proper evaluation of staff mobility, together with a better sharing of good practices, would guarantee that staff mobility is being maintained and developed in the right direction, with the best possible results for the educational community of all the higher education institutions in Europe. REFERENCES [European Commission – Directorate-General for Education and Culture.] (2007). ERASMUS student and teacher mobility 2005/2006: Overview of the national agencies’ final reports 2005/2006 (Version 21.11.2007; LLP-002-008 Annexe-1). Retrieved from http://www.programkontoret.se/ Global/material/statistik/erasmus/eus_erasmusstatistik_mobilitet_200506.pdf European Commission – Directorate-General for Education and Culture. (2008). Socrates II programme – ERASMUS programme 2006/2007: Overview of the national agencies’ final reports 2006/2007 (Version 08.07.2008; LLP/NA/ERA/19/08rev). Retrieved from http://www. britishcouncil.org/llp_na_era_19_08_rev.doc

91

ARMAND HENRION Haute Ecole Blaise Pascal : Catégorie pédagogique. (2008). L’innovation de pratiques pédagogiques: Partage d’expériences européennes. Proximités – Didactiques. Cortil-Wodon (Fernelmont): Éditions Modulaires Européennes. London-Communiqué: Towards the European higher education area: Responding to challenges in a globalised world. (2007, May 18). [London: Conference of European Ministers responsible for Higher Education.] Malderez, A., & Bodóczky, C. (1999). Mentor courses: A resource book for trainer-trainers. New York: Cambridge University Press. Malderez, A., & Bodóczky, C. (2009). Comment pratiquer un tutorat de qualité?: Formateurs, enseignants-tuteurs (A. Henrion, Trans.). Bruxelles : De Boeck. (Original work published 1999) Teichler, U. (2008). Definitions and driving forces for internationalisation. In Gaebel, M., Purser, L., Wächter, B, & Wilson, L. (Eds.), Internationalisation of European higher education (p. 17). Berlin: Raabe.

Armand Henrion Haute Ecole Blaise Pascal, Bastogne, Belgium

92

GERIT JARITZ, THOMAS GOETZ AND FRITZ OSER

CONCLUSION

Despite clear strategies and various efforts to internationalize higher education all across Europe, teacher education programmes seem to remain at the periphery of this development in many countries. In most countries teacher education is treated separately from other academic programmes and therefore remains a somewhat sheltered national business. This is primarily due to the fact that the school systems differ considerably between countries, mainly in their political and cultural dimensions. Consequently, teacher education programmes vary just as much from country to country and have partially incompatible educational contents. These differences often represent an insurmountable obstacle to student and staff mobility and are at the root of education students’ frequent lack of sufficient international experience, which can translate into lacking skills in work with immigrant children or the teaching of global issues in their future profession. Even if more and more people seem to understand that prospective teachers “need to take off their own country’s glasses and look at the world from multiple perspectives” (Wilson, 1993, p. 1), not all consider the mobility of teachers and students in teacher education programmes to be a key factor for the promotion of intercultural and global understanding in schools. The legitimacy of mobility is therefore bound to remain fragile as long as there are some policymakers and even teacher educators who keep questioning its gain. It is often seen as counterproductive to send student teachers abroad where they learn about a school system and cultural environment so different from the one teacher education universities are supposed to prepare them for (Benert & Hélot, 2006, p. 4). For this very reason, mobility and internationalization in teacher education have been looked at from different perspectives in the five chapters of this book. All authors recognize the need for an international dimension in teacher education and strongly agree that the mobility of student teachers and teacher educators is an important tool in the effort to graduate teachers with cross-cultural experience and an understanding of today’s interconnected world. Each chapter has outlined and analysed current practices in this field, named desirable developments and raised interesting research questions for the future. The key issues and results of the five chapters of this book may be summarised by outlining further steps that should be taken with regard to the development of the three essential areas of international mobility in teacher education: student mobility, staff mobility and internationalization at home.

T. Goetz et al. (Eds.), Pains and Gains of International Mobility in Teacher Education, 93–96. © 2011 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

GERIT JARITZ, THOMAS GOETZ, FRITZ OSER

1. Student Mobility: Ways Forward There will be more gains for both students and sending institutions if … – the home institution, as the main channel for communicating exchange opportunities and encouraging mobility, prepares students thoroughly for their exchange (see Chapter 3 by Matti Meri). – the exchange is recognised after the students’ return. This needs to happen in terms of credit points, but also in terms of ensuring the transfer of newly acquired knowledge. Institutions need to give students the opportunity to reflect upon their experience and demonstrate that it is of value to them (see Chapter 1 by Gerit Jaritz). – changed perceptions and the awareness of different normalities after the careful reflection on participation in an exchange programme occurs (see Chapter 4 by Bruno Leutwyler and Samantha Lottenbach). – universities of teacher education regularly assess the effectiveness of their exchange programmes aiming also for the acquisition of teaching-specific competencies as opposed to only individual effects in regard to personal development (see Chapter 1 by Gerit Jaritz). 2. Staff Mobility: More Attention for “Travelling Minds” (see Chapter 5 by Armand Henrion). – The mobility of teaching staff generally receives less attention than student mobility even though it can be an important catalyst for the latter. – Staff mobility provides an excellent opportunity for teacher educators to develop their own expertise and dispositions to help their students develop into more “globally competent teachers” (Quezada, 2010, p. 3). – Common “pains” like non-matching calendars, insufficient foreign language competence and the lack of interest by the host institution are usually outweighed by the gain of being an ambassador, multiplicator and “knowledge tourist”. – Faculty members need to be well prepared and informed about the exact goals of the exchange and the particularities of the host institution. Again, the potential for teaching-specific effects does not seem to be fully exploited. Paperwork for the sake of bureaucracy seems to overrule a thorough reflection and recognition of the professional gain of such exchanges. 3. Internationalization at Home: The Contribution of Mobility – Internationalization at home can be understood as “any internationally related activity with the exception of outbound student and staff mobility” (Crowther et al., 2000, p. 6). Both student and staff mobility contribute to the efforts of higher education institutions to add an international dimension to their education and training.

94

CONCLUSION

– The intake of international students demands an integrative teaching concept for incoming students which takes into account different cultural backgrounds and learning styles as well as language difficulties (see Chapter 2 of this book by Dora Luginbühl). – Staff members need to be supported and guided by a clear institutional policy in their efforts to integrate and guide international students if an institution is serious about its role as a host to international students. – A course offering in English is desirable as long as these courses are not isolated and exclusively designed for international students. Intercultural learning can only take place for both non-mobile local and incoming students if they are taught in mixed groups, either in the institution’s language of instruction or in an English immersion setting. – The same is true for visiting teacher educators from partner institutions. They too should be given the opportunity to have an authentic impression of the host university by interacting as much as possible with local colleagues and students. – Staff visits should be announced well in advance to the entire institution and made visible (see Armand Henrion’s International Week concept in Chapter 5 of this book). Only then will they bring a little of the international world to the home campus and contribute to internationalization at home. All chapters thus clearly outline ways to better reap the benefits of mobility in teacher education and how to increase its gains. These are supported by mostly small empirical studies on the international mobility of (prospective) teachers showing mainly the efforts of individual institutions. These studies are good examples of what would be desirable on a much larger scale, namely research on the benefits of mobility programmes from the specific perspective of teacher education. All authors agree on the importance and necessity of more extensive studies on how effective existing programmes are in training “intercultural teachers in an era of globalization” (Quezada, 2001, p. 1) who are both ready and able to teach their students to “take their places as global citizens” (Quezada, 2001, p. 2). The study presented by Bruno Leutwyler and Samantha Lottenbach in Chapter 3 is a promising contribution towards closing this gap. Research on more general aspects of mobility programmes, however, does exist as the authors note. Common findings on the positive effects of student exchange programmes in terms of selfdevelopment, the acquisition of intercultural competencies and improved language skills are unanimously recognised as relevant for the teaching profession. But how much attention does the topic deserve? Much more than it is given at present, we think. Whether our view is shared or not partly depends on whether mobility is seen as a “nice-to-have” or a “must-have” for teacher education. The insights given in this book into specific aspects of mobility programmes in place at different universities of teacher education in Switzerland and Europe give rise to the hope that the latter attitude will prevail. This does, however, not necessarily guarantee a steep rise in the number of mobile student teachers and teacher educators. Too manifold are the pains and obstacles which still hinder mobility 95

GERIT JARITZ, THOMAS GOETZ, FRITZ OSER

within the field of education. As long as teacher education programmes remain predominantly nationally orientated and are subject to restrictive national regulations and recognition policies in many places, the number of students and teachers given the opportunity to extensively experience another culture, language and education system is likely to remain limited. On the other hand, our hope is that publications like this will eventually encourage more teacher education institutions to think of mobility as a concept integral to their study programmes with clearly defined and sustainable goals and regular assessment of current practices. REFERENCES Benert B., & Hélot, C. (2006). Comment penser la notion d’interculturel dans la formation des enseignants du premier degré en France ? Analyse de trois notions: L’étranger, la rencontre, l’autre. Formation et pratiques d’enseignement en question, revue des HEP de Suisse romande et du Tessin, 4, 77–102. Crowther, P., Joris, M., Otten, M., Nilsson, B., Teekens, H., & Wächter, B. (2000). Internationalization at home: A position paper. Amsterdam: EAIE. Quezada, R. L. (2010). Internationalization of teacher education: Creating global competent teachers and teacher educators for the twenty-first century. Teaching Education, 21(1), 1–5. Wilson, A. (1993). Conversation partners: Helping students gain a global perspective through crosscultural experiences. Theory into Practice, 32(1), 21–26.

Gerit Jaritz Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland Thomas Goetz University of Konstanz, Germany, and Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland Fritz Oser Université de Fribourg, Switzerland

96

AUTHORS

Prof. Dr. Thomas Goetz University of Konstanz, Germany, Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland [email protected] MA Armand Henrion Haute Ecole Blaise Pascal, Bastogne, Belgium [email protected] MA Gerit Jaritz Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland [email protected] Prof. Dr. Bruno Leutwyler University of Teacher Education Central Switzerland, Zug, Switzerland [email protected] MA Samantha Lottenbach University of Teacher Education Central Switzerland, Zug, Switzerland [email protected] Prof. Dora Luginbühl Thurgau University of Teacher Education, Kreuzlingen, Switzerland [email protected] Prof. Dr. Matti Meri University of Helsinki, Finland [email protected] Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Fritz Oser Université de Fribourg, Switzerland [email protected]

97