Through the Crossroads:
Short-term Study Abroad
Promoting Educational Leaders’
Global Perspectives and
Self-Authorship Capacity
C.M. Ferrari
J.B. Fine
Purpose
1) To measure and describe changes that occurred during a two week study abroad
educational leadership course in Rome, Italy over three consecutive summers, 2010, 2011, and
2012 as measured by the Global Perspectives Inventory (GPI) and a qualitative follow-up
survey exploring self-authorship capacity.
2) To discuss how P-12 educational leaders and student affairs professionals build a locus of
decision-making that stems from their own values, beliefs, and internal voice which affects the
cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal dimensions of their development.
3) To display the parallel expectations for graduate preparation programs in both P-12
educational settings and higher education regarding the knowledge, skills, and dispositions
expected of educational professionals, as delineated in respective professional competencies
and standards.
4) To argue, based on the results, that short-term education abroad is an effective educational
experience for educational leaders to develop a global perspective and promote selfauthorship thereby meeting the required competencies of the respective professions.
P-12 Administrators &
Student Affairs Professionals
• Defined as Educational Leaders
• Similar commitments to social responsibility and being globally
aware
• Required to be self-aware and act authentically when making
decisions
• Limited research and opportunities for short-term study
abroad programs exist for graduate students
Aligned Competencies & Standards
Professional Competency Areas for
P-12 Educational Administrator Standards
Student Affairs Practitioners
Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC), 2008
Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education (NASPA) & College Student
& Educational Leadership Constituents Council (ELCC), 2011
Educators International (ACPA), 2010
Personal Foundations:

Articulate awareness and understanding of one’s attitudes, values, beliefs, ISLLC Standard 5, Function A:
assumptions, biases, and identity as it affects one’s work with others; take
responsibility to develop personal cultural skills by participating in

Model principles of self-awareness, reflective practice, transparency, and
activities that challenge one’s belief
ethical behavior

Refashion personal beliefs and commitments in a way that is true to one’s
own self while recognizing the contributions of important others (e.g. self,
peers, family, or one or more larger communities)
Ethical Professional Practice:

Articulate one’s personal code of ethics for student affairs practice, which ISLCC Standard 5:
reflects the ethical statements of professional student affairs associations
and their foundational ethical principles

An educational leader promotes the success of every student by acting

Demonstrate an understanding of the role of beliefs and values in personal
with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner
integrity and professional ethical principles
Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion:

Analyze the interconnectedness of societies worldwide and how these
global perspectives affect institutional learning

Articulate a foundational understanding of social justice and the role of
higher education, the institution, the department, the unit, and the
individual in furthering its goals
ELCC Standard 5.3:

Candidates can understand and can safeguard the values of democracy,
equity, and diversity.
ELCC Standard 5.5:

Candidates understand and can promote social justice within a school
culture that individual students needs inform all aspects of schooling
So what?
• P-12 and higher education have similar goals and its professionals
require similar abilities and skills
• Currently, there exists little research on the effects of short term
study abroad programs, particularly for graduate students
• This presentation offers insight into the developmental effects of
study-abroad on education graduate students regarding their global
perspectives and capacity for self-authorship
Global Perspectives Inventory
• The purpose of the GPI is to measure students’ capacity for a global
perspective at the cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal levels.
• Consists of 40 items utilizing a five point Lickert scale.
• Administered as a pre-test prior to the study abroad experience, and
as a post-test administered at the conclusion of the study abroad
experience.
• Administered in study abroad programs (American undergraduate
students in mostly semester abroad programs).
What is a “global perspective”?

A global perspective is the capacity for a person to
think with complexity taking into account multiple
perspectives, to form a unique sense of self that is
value based and authentic, and to relate to others
with respect and openness especially with those
who are not like her.

A global perspective includes both a domestic focus
on multicultural education and diversity and an
internationalization focus that includes global trends
and relationships among nations.
The Need For Global Perspectives
“ [An] essential learning and developmental goal—
which we call global perspective—can be enhanced
if it is further interpreted within the context of
educating students to be citizens of a global
society.”
Source: Art Chickering and Larry Braskamp
(Peer Review, 2009, p. 27.)
What is the GPI?
Cognitive Dimension Scales
 Knowing. Degree of complexity of one’s view on the
importance of cultural context in judging what is
important to know and value.
 In different settings what is right and wrong is simple to determine.
 Cultural differences make me question what is really true.
 Knowledge. Degree of understanding and awareness of
various cultures and their impact on our global society
and level of proficiency in more than one language.
 I am informed of current issues that impact international relations.
 I know how to analyze the basic characteristics of a culture.
Intrapersonal Dimension Scales
 Identity. Level of awareness of one’s unique identity and
degree of acceptance of one’s ethnic, racial, and gender
dimensions of one’s identity.
 I have a definite purpose in life.
 I can explain my personal values to people who are different from me.
 Affect. Level of respect for and acceptance of cultural
perspectives different from one’s own and degree of
emotional confidence when living in complex situations,
which reflects an “emotional intelligence” that is important in
one’s processing encounters with other cultures.
 I often get out of my comfort zone to better understand myself.
 I see myself as a global citizen.
Interpersonal Dimension Scales
 Social Responsibility. Level of interdependence and
social concern for others.
 I work for the rights of others.
 I consciously behave in terms of making a difference.
 Social Interactions. Degree of engagement with others
who are different from oneself and degree of cultural
sensitivity in living in pluralistic settings
 Most of my friends are from my own ethnic background.
 I am open to people who strive to live lives very differently from my own
life style.
Loyola University Chicago:
School of Education
Summer Rome Program
The course:
• 2-week summer class at the John Felice Rome Center in Rome, Italy
• Highly experiential with site visits and co-curricular experiences infused
into the content
• Course title:
“Instructional Leadership: Cultural Context for Informed Decision Making”
Course Connection to GPI
• Learning outcomes were intentionally designed to develop the
cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal competencies as
measured by the GPI
• This study abroad experience integrated Curricular, Co-curricular,
and Community domains of learning and development
• Short-term intercultural immersion in Rome became students’
“learning laboratory” and served as the immediate cultural context
MEANS
Cognitive
1.
2.
ENDS
3.
4.
5.
6.
Discover, become aware of, and better
understand diverse perspectives,
worldviews, social interactions, values,
and cultural practices.
Understand one’s own cultural
background when compared to another.
Increase awareness of self and “other”
and boundaries of tolerance. Examine
education’s response to fundamental
difference.
Understand national destiny and historical
honesty. Be aware of how the school
curriculum treats expressions of historical
tragedy, and healing and forgiveness.
Examine how perceptions about “the
other” are constructed, particularly in the
school setting.
Examine the repercussions of constructed
perceptions of “the other”, particularly in
the school setting—better understand
education’s role in identifying who will be
in positions of influence over the wellbeing of society.
Curriculum
Co-Curriculum
Site-based Intergroup
Dialogue at:
Cultural immersion:
-Teach-us Sessions
-Daily travel
-Daily bus travel
-Restaurants
-Site-based activities
-Weekend travels
-Faculty walks
-Vatican Museum
-Coliseum
-Jewish Ghetto
-St. Peter’s Basilica
Capitoline Hill
-Piazza Minerva
-Pantheon
Community
Curriculum
MEANS
Intrapersonal
1.
ENDS
2.
3.
Through study of new and different
interactions with American peers,
and Italian citizens, become
conscious of, analyze, and gain a
new perspective on one’s own
world views.
Increase self-confidence in
negotiating cultural difference.
Construct and trust in one’s selfidentity through comparisons with
diverse others.
Curriculum
Course activities:
-Journaling
-Debates
-Teach-us Sessions
-Site-based discussions
at Vatican Museum,
Coliseum, Roman
Forum, Jewish Ghetto,
Piazza Minerva, etc.
Co-Curriculum
-Intergroup
Dialogue
-Meetings with
local students,
educators
-Weekend travel
Community
Community within:
-Picnic
-Opening lunch
-final dinner
-Faculty walks
-Papal audience
Co-curriculum
MEANS
Interpersonal
1.
ENDS 2.
3.
4.
Increase ability and comfort in
interacting with persons from different
cultural backgrounds, especially in
one’s role as a school leader.
Ability to assist others in adapting to
various situations representing cultural
difference, especially in one’s role as
a school leader..
Develop acceptance, tolerance, and
respect of others with perspectives,
values, worldviews, and social and
cultural practices different from one’s
own.
Assist others to develop acceptance,
tolerance and respect of others with
perspectives, values, worldviews, and
social and cultural practices different
from one’s own, especially in one’s
role as a school leader.
Curriculum
-Debates
-Teach-us Sessions
Co-Curriculum
-Site-Based
Intergroup
Dialogue
-Meetings with
local students,
educators
-Weekend travel
Community
-Interactions with
local Italians, and
fellow students
-Decision making for
school/district
Community
GPI Strongest Areas of Growth
GPI Scale
Loyola University Chicago
School of Education Summer Rome
Graduate Program
2010, 2011, 2012:
Pre-test
Post-test
Difference
Intrapersonal: Identity
4.12
4.34
0.22
Intrapersonal: Affect
3.72
4.11
0.39
Interpersonal: Social
Responsibility
4.03
4.13
0.10
Compare to Norms*
*Norms consisted of 42,138 undergraduate students who have completed the GPI from 2008
until 2012 (Braskamp, Braskamp, & Merrill, 2013)
Rome Graduate Program
Differences 2010-2012:
Global Perspectives
Inventory
Normed Differences
2008-2012:
Intrapersonal: Identity
0.22
.15
Intrapersonal: Affect
0.39
.10
Interpersonal: Social
Responsibility
0.10
.06
GPI Scale
Average Responses
GPI Scale
Rome Graduate Program
2010-2012 Average
Responses (out of 5):
Global Perspectives
Inventory 2012-2013
Average Responses
(out of 5):
Intrapersonal: Identity
4.34
4.09
Intrapersonal: Affect
4.11
3.79
Interpersonal: Social
Responsibility
4.13
3.69
Conclusions from GPI
• Rome study abroad participants exhibited the
highest growth in the Identity, Affect, and
Social Responsibility scales.
• The differences for these scales were
significantly higher than the normed
differences.
Developmental Pathways Toward Self-authorship
Solely External
Crossroads
Solely Internal (Self-Authoring)
Trusting External Authority (Ea)
Questioning External
Authority (EI)
Trusting the Internal Voice (Ia)
Tensions Trusting External
Authority (Eb)
Constructing the Internal
Voice (E-I)
Building an Internal Foundation (Ib)
Recognizing Shortcomings of
Trusting External Authority (Ec)
Listening to Internal Voice
(I-E)
Securing Internal Commitments (Ic)
Cultivating the Internal
Voice [I(E)]
Global Perspectives Inventory
Self-authorship Theory
Cognitive:
Understand the importance of cultural
context in judging what is important to
know and value
Cognitive dimension:
Develop an internal belief system via
constructing, evaluating, and
interpreting judgments in light of
available frames of reference
Intrapersonal:
Level of awareness of one’s unique
identity and degree of acceptance of
one’s identity
Intrapersonal dimension:
Choose own values and identity in
crafting an internally generated sense
of self that regulates interpretation of
experience and choices
Interpersonal:
Level of interdependence and social
concern for others. Degree of
engagement with others who are
different from oneself and degree of
cultural sensitivity in living in pluralistic
settings.
Interpersonal dimension: Capacity to
engage in authentic, interdependent
relationships with diverse others in
which self is not overshadowed by a
need for others’ approval, mutually
negotiating needs, and genuinely
taking others’ perspectives into
account without being consumed by
them
Follow-up Survey Design
How educational leaders made decisions
(Cognitive) based on individually defined values
and beliefs (Intrapersonal) that promoted social
responsibility (Interpersonal)
How the Rome study abroad experience
influenced this process and promoted educational
leaders’ self-authorship capacity.
Follow-up Survey Design
• Online, qualitative survey with six open-ended
questions sent to all Rome 2010, 2011, and 2012
participants in February 2013
• Received a response rate of 38% (n=15)
• Responses were then coded using self-authorship
theory as the interpretive framework
Results from Survey
NA
22.8%
Crossroads
29.7%
Internal Meaning-Making
47.5%
External
Meaning-making
0.0%
Selected Responses
• Question 1: Since you returned from your LUC School of Education
Rome experience, please describe a situation where you solved an
issue using multiple perspectives
•
Response A (Red)
•
Connection to Self-Authorship: Understanding the needs and
viewpoints of constituents and how they might be affected by the
decisions is crucial, especially regarding policy decisions.
Selected Responses
• Question 2: Was there anything in your Rome study abroad
experience that influenced the way you solved this issue?
• Response B (Blue)
• Connection to Self-authorship:
By looking critically at past situations in which affective decisions were
made that resulted in helpful or harmful circumstances for others, this
individual was able to enter into personal and professional situations
with a more reflective outlook.
Selected Responses
• Question 3: Since you returned from your Rome study abroad experience, please
describe a situation where you decided to stand up for the rights of others by
taking action regarding a social, ethical, or civic challenge.
• Response C (Green)
• Connection to self-authorship: By confronting colleagues and acting from a place
rooted in core values are suggestive of self-authorship because the individual is
trusting their internal voice sufficiently in order to “craft commitments into a
philosophy of life to guide how to react to external sources” (Baxter Magolda,
King, Taylor & Wakefield, 2012).
Selected Responses
• Question 4: Was there anything specific in the Rome study abroad
experience that influenced why you took action in this situation?
• Response D (Orange)
• Connection to Self-Authorship: Exposing themselves to new cultures and
exploring how injustices from various points of history relate to their
personal and professional circumstances allowed these individuals to form
connections to their role as educational leaders and advocates for social
justice and to consider an alternative worldview that students or parents
may be experiencing.
Selected Responses
• Question 5: In the situation in which you took action, how did you decide to listen
to your internal voice, which may have been at odds with outside influences?
• Response E (Purple)
• Connection to Self-Authorship: By drawing out the lessons learned in Rome and
building on a commitment to speak up for others, this response suggests that the
experience in Rome not only had an impact, but it helped this broaden this
individual’s perspective. The crossroads phase of one’s self-authorship journey
often is sparked by a dissonant experience such as feeling “otherized,”
particularly if a person has not had that experience before. This individual went
abroad and when immersed in foreign culture the challenges of not belonging
became apparent. Connections to marginalized populations in the education
system suggest a consideration for multiple perspectives and a reconfiguration of
values or internal beliefs.
Selected Responses
• Question 6: In what ways, if any, did the Rome study abroad
experience increase your ability to trust your internal voice in
everyday decision making?
• Response F (Brown)
• Connection to Self-Authorship: The site visits to significant
historical, cultural, and religious sites as catalysts for reflection
and the ways in which different groups have oppressed
different populations and the role in which institutional
authorities play in either promoting or discouraging such
behaviors and practices.
Conclusions
• Educational leaders in the P-12 sector and higher education require selfauthorship meaning making processes.
“The heart of education is enabling and encouraging young people to apply
the knowledge and skills they are developing—not merely for their own
success an satisfaction, but to serve the common good” (Blankstein &
Houston, 2011, p.125).
“Unless we can envision more effective change processes for faculty and
administrators––that is, support their own learning and development––the
best prediction we can make about students becoming cognitively mature and
secure in their identities and relationships is that they will have to continue
working it out largely on their own. In a sense, the shape and pace of
[students’] development is dependent on the shape and pace of our
development.” (Bekken, B. M. & M. J. Meszaros, 2007, p. 16)
Conclusions
Study-abroad programs that are intentionally
designed with high-impact learning practices
become a vehicle for development, using
multiple frameworks (GPI and self-authorship)
What does this mean for our
profession?
Discussion Questions
• How can we help expose students to multiple
perspectives on an issue or topic?
• How can we help students develop more complex
views of themselves, identify their values, and foster
their internal voice?
• How can we assist students to develop a commitment
toward the common good, social responsibility, and
living a life of integrity and service to others?
Further Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
Explore short-term study abroad
Explore graduate students abroad
Connection between GPI and self-authorship
What effects occur from intentionally designed,
high-impact practices that are grounded in
theory and an assessment framework?
Thank you!
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ACPA & NASPA (2010). Professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners.
Chickering, A.W., Braskamp, L. A. (Fall 2009). Developing a global perspective for personal and social responsibility.
Peer Review. Vol. 11, No. 4
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2008). Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium: Standards for
School Leaders. Washington, DC: Author.
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student development in college: Theory,
research, and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Braskamp, L. A., Braskamp D. C. & Merrill K. C., Engberg, M. E. (2012). Global Perspective Inventory. Chicago:
Global Perspective Institute. http://gpi.central.edu.
Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2008). Three elements of self-authorship. Journal of College Student Development, 49(4),
269-284.
Baxter Magolda, M.B., & King, P.M. (2012). Assessing meaning-making: Theory, research, and application. ASHE
Higher Education Report, 38 (3).
Baxter Magolda, M. B., & King P. M. (2004). Learning partnerships: Theory and models of practice to educate for
self-authorship. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Blankstein, A.M. & Houston, P.D. (Eds), (2011). Leadership for social justice and democracy in our schools.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (2008). Retrieved from www.ccsso.org.