target="_blank" rel="nofollow" href="#u162cd666-4608-5669-9dd6-d09393697640">chapter 3 (page 56). All the Fs have a deeper cultural context, so make sure students dip below that waterline to reach more nuanced understandings of the places and people they connect with.
Why do people in a given place hold the perspectives they do? Who do we want to communicate our ideas to, and how might we act to improve conditions?
PERSPECTIVES ON THE Fs OF GLOBAL EDUCATION: HOMA SABET TAVANGAR
Author of Growing Up Global and The Global Education Toolkit for Elementary Learners
I have a love-hate relationship with the notorious Fs—food, fun, and festivals. On the one hand, I rush to their defense when I hear them scoffed at. I have seen numerous instances where an international night, day, or week filled with the Fs brings school communities together, helps engage teachers who otherwise would not feel confident enough to incorporate various cultures or global perspectives, and draws in families from diverse backgrounds to showcase their experiences with pride. I’ve seen it build empathy among populations of recent immigrants and longtime locals, and serve as a springboard for deeper global learning, when teachers or school leaders noticed how engaged and creative their students and families could be, thanks to the Fs.
On the other hand, food, fun, and festivals might get one more F—freak show—tacked on, usually unconsciously, when cultures go on display in isolation from human experience, empathy, and humble learning; so these Fs can backfire. In isolation, a display of foreign food, fun, and festivals might create a single story, out of context and often distorted, and result in a great disservice to a complex culture, issue, or the experience of our neighbors. Rather than destroy prejudices, they could reinforce them. So, similar to the experience of technology use and social media, these Fs are not inherently good or bad. It’s how we present them and utilize them in the process of facilitating learning. Whether it’s a student-driven, personalized learning environment or a more traditional one, the role of teachers and school leaders can powerfully set the tone and facilitate authentic, empathy-building experiences—or not.
Source: Adapted from H. S. Tavangar, personal communication, April 30, 2016.
How Much Time Can I Put Into Crafting This Partnership?
This is an important question for any overworked educator. Realistically speaking, if you don’t have the time to communicate consistently and craft something meaningful for all classrooms involved, you’re better off going with an existing program, such as those explored in chapter 4 (page 73). Many are successful and provide excellent, ready-made projects with partners already in place. Because most existing programs have a set curriculum and standardized systems, they can lack the flexibility some teachers prefer, but as you make connections to partner teachers through existing programs, you can often develop your own innovations. If you’re willing and able to put in more work to craft something from scratch, you can build a learning partnership that flexes to the curricular needs of all teachers. Chapter 5 (page 93) explains the process of finding a classroom or teacher partner for a from-scratch pairing. Neither approach necessarily comes with a better guarantee of success; partnerships succeed and fail in established programs as much as they do in homegrown projects. Which method you choose is really a question of the kind of educator you are; if you prefer established systems and programs, or have limited time to invest, go that route. And if you tend to struggle with existing structures, build something of your own. See the reproducible “Global Partnership Checklist” at go.SolutionTree.com/21stcenturyskills for all the steps addressed in this book, both to help you be realistic about what you can take on and to help you stay organized as you progress.
I strongly recommend that teachers trying their first global partnership have at least a few of their regular duties assigned to another teacher in the first year, such as removing a few lunch, homeroom, or advisory duties, to provide more dedicated time for communication and collaboration with their partner teacher. Some school administrators even build global work into teachers’ contracts and provide them with additional professional development and other support designed to help ensure success. Australian thought leader Julie Lindsay (2016) emphasizes the importance of a supportive administration, writing that the best global education leaders she’s worked with are people who “instead of crushing new ideas, provided support through time release from the classroom, who provided funds for digital resources, and who listened with some understanding to my vision of the way things could be” (p. 72). While time release can be challenging, particularly in underfunded school environments, shifting even small responsibilities can make a big difference. Schools that have time delineated for collaborative teamwork can create a team for emerging partnerships, which builds in not just time but also community collaboration around addressing global partnership challenges. Regardless of whether you craft from scratch or join an existing program, you’ll need time—and the support of your leadership—to make a new partnership work. Chapters 8 (page 143) and 10 (page 177) discuss more about the importance of administrative support.
With What Country or Region Do I Want to Connect?
Do you hope to connect with a different hemisphere, native language, or culture? Are there specific countries that connect to your current curriculum, or are you seeking to better understand topics that exist across multiple countries? While finding a partner without a specific country or community in mind can be much easier than searching with too many specific expectations, it’s best to go in with a few ideas—and a lot of flexibility, should you find a committed partner in a country you hadn’t considered. If a specific country is key to the curricular connections you want to make, however, then it’s good to identify that from the start. For example, a language arts teacher studying Art Spiegelman’s graphic novel Maus might prefer to partner with a school in Poland because of the book’s focus and the insights Polish students can offer, whereas a language arts teacher interested in having students share their original poetry could partner with any country. On the other hand, if the teacher wants students to have equal footing as learners and experts, he or she might want two classrooms that are not in Poland to read Maus. It all depends on the kind of learning experience you want to create.
For world language teachers, this topic is all the more complex. Language classrooms have an intrinsic reason to connect with native speakers, and language teachers use a variety of approaches to partner native speakers with nonnative speakers. In some cases, two classes study each other’s language, and this can work well because both classrooms bring an expertise and an area for growth. I’ve seen this approach fail, however, when teachers didn’t see their students’ growth process the same way. (See chapter 9, page 155, for an example.) In other cases, teachers choose to partner based on the language being studied, so both classrooms are working toward mastery in the same target language. This removes the opportunity to hear authentic accents and fluent native speakers, but it can engender more risk-taking. In my mixed-level Spanish classes, for example, I found that non-native speakers were far more likely to practice and take risks with their Spanish when there wasn’t a native speaker in the conversation. In fact, if students don’t share a common language other than the one being studied, the partnership may create even more language fluency, as students will be motivated to use the new common language out of authentic necessity. Visit University of Minnesota’s The Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition (http://carla.umn.edu/index.html) to learn more about instructional strategies for building motivation and risk-taking during world language acquisition, and the research behind those approaches.
Language classrooms have an intrinsic reason to
