SLS-8a2 - Second Round - Explicit Teaching Leads to improvement in Global Citizenship

What we learned from the first cycle of the action research project was like a wake up call. We thought if we work hard to develop a challenging project with real beneficial impact for a community in a foreign country, the students will learn to be a better global citizen, with better cross-cultural skills, more interested in engaging with the world, and be more willing to take up the responsibility to address global issues.  It turns out that learning does not follow automatically from exposure, not even if the exposure is immersive.  We learned that we have to teach much more explicitly, and purposefully.    Often we have to explain to the students what we are trying to teach them, why that is important, and how what they are being asked to do contribute to their learning.  Armed with the lessons learned, some unpleasantly, we got to work.  

The subject leaders involved designed a number of “interventions” driven by the lessons, and making reference to international best practices identified from the relevant literature.  Teachers of different subjects took different actions as they consider appropriate for their own subject.  The interventions undertaken included lectures on the concept of global citizenship and intercultural effectiveness; lessons on human geography, cultural and historical background of the local community; many weeks of global classroom (3-hour each) to enhance collaboration between students from Hong Kong, Cambodia, and the United States; nightly-written reflections to address the themes of global citizenship and intercultural effectiveness; visits to local attractions, museums and cultural heritage sites; local city hunts; home visit with local families; etc.

The interventions were adopted in the teaching on the next cohort in the following year.  Subsequently, in the quantitative study on the following cohort, statistically significant increases were found in the students’ overall score on the Global Citizenship Scale, as well as their scores on the Social Responsibility sub-scale and the Global Competence sub-scale. There was a statistically significant increase in the score on the Intercultural Effectiveness Scale as well.  Evidently, the interventions were having some positive impact on changing the attitude of the students as well as their skills. 

Both cohorts showed increases in their Social Responsibility sub-scale scores between their pre- and post-experience scores.   But the second cohort exhibit a larger increase that is statistically significant.  On the other hand, no statistically significant differences were found between the two cohorts in their respective pre-post changes in Global Competence sub-scale, Global Civic Engagement sub-scale, overall Global Citizenship Scale, and Intercultural Effectiveness Scale scores.  The data seems to indicate that improving attitudes significantly remain a big challenge.  This is hardly surprising given how difficult it is to change deep-seated attitudes.  The qualitative results corroborate the quantitative findings. More students from the second cohort reported gains in their intercultural effectiveness, global competence, and social responsibility; and many of them commented on the usefulness of the intentional intervention introduced by the subject teachers in helping them learn from the international service-learning experience.  

After the explicit teaching of the concept of global citizenship during lectures and discussions in debriefings, students became more aware of the concept and why is it important to be a global citizen. A student, for example, stated that he had a realization with respect to the interdependence and interconnectedness of people, with implications on equality and social responsibility.  He realised that everyone lives in the same globe and now believed that everyone should be treated the same way, and then those who live in a rich country have a responsibility to help those who live in a poor one. Students reported that they were inspired by the teachers’ sharing. For example, they could always make some differences in other people’s lives with practical actions while actualizing their dreams.  One recalled that his teacher said that service-learning does not teach that one has to give up your job/career to be engaged in community service full time.  Instead, one has to remember that many people need our help while we pursue our own career.  Another student explained how nightly reflection could help him frequently reflect on intercultural competence and global citizenship.  They were asked to write down their thoughts in a notebook. Not only what they did, but also how they got along and communicate with people from different cultures, background, and how they could help the community.  Through frequent reflection, they learned hat it is their responsibility to help different people, even those of different races.

The study supports the belief that international service-learning can have strong positive impacts on students’ learning outcomes. After the improvement actions, strong positive impacts were demonstrated in students’ intercultural effectiveness and global citizenship development. The study reaffirms that action research serves as an effective strategy for teachers to monitor and improve the impacts of their own international service-learning projects on students’ learning and development. However, it is important to note that not all intervention actions work well. For example, one teacher team member devised an improvement action in which her students would bring local school children to a local history museum. However, the museum was very crowded on the day of their visit, and logistical and operational challenges meant that they did not have sufficient time at the venue. This also suggests that any improvement actions have to be well planned in advance with sufficient peer support.  This, in itself, is no surprise.  

\