International Mindedness - International Literacy - Global Competency

The three concepts to be discussed in this blog post are International Mindedness (IM),  International Literacy (IL), and Global Competency (GC), as well as their interaction within each other. So what are these concepts and how do they connect? Let’s start with some broad definitions. 

International Mindedness - emphasises knowledge of the interconnectedness of local and global relationships. IM is specifically taught in IB schools and it seeks to help make people global citizens that seek a better humanity for all (Heyward, 2002). 

International Literacy - focuses on the skills or competencies of an individual to “read” a culture by being sensitive, empathetic and be able to practically engage in day to day situations (Sriprakash, 2014). 

Global Competency - focuses on not only the knowledge of global issues related to economics or climate change, but to advocate and act on these global issues in a significant way (Mansilla, 2012). 

While these three concepts are related in many ways, the most obvious similarity is that they deal with global issues, cultures and the ability to understand perspectives beyond one’s personal background or context. And in that understanding, one can also note that the differences between them are not drastic in a sense but that the outworking or way to assess if one has met these standards. For example, IM and IL both have an emphasis on knowledge and empathy of cultural perspectives, a skill of awareness and an ability to “fit in” within different cultures. However, the engagement is mainly focused on the individual and not on the engagement of making a difference within a culture or on a global issue, as does the GC focus. While the knowledge and awareness of IM and IL are a prerequisite, GC larger concept to take action, to make a difference with an informed and holistic understanding and approach. It seems in my evaluation, IM is a disposition, an attitude, whereas IL is a skill that must learned through practice or immersion, and GC is a larger systemic approach to taking specific actions for the whole, not as much as the parts. While a linear approach or a cause and effect concept as to what comes first and what is the result between the three might seem logical, it seems to miss the dynamic nature of these concepts. Almost as a spiral, and depending on the international or cross-cultural setting a student would be placed within, might very well change the starting point for such a diagram or spiral. Someone coming from a mono-cultural background as opposed to someone growing up in a very diverse mix of cultures, their foundational ability might be different, and the cultural skills would be caught, rather than would be taught (as the IB model attempts with the IM concepts). Another analogy to use in this discussion would be that of three dimensions. Starting with IM, as a first dimension of learning, knowledge and engagement, a second dimension provides greater perspective, but only through real life experiences and being forced to “read” a culture through collaboration and or immersion in more than the culture of the individual. This would then expand to a third dimension of GC, allowing someone to expand into a “3D” version of global citizen that truly apply and takes action beyond the 1st and 2nd dimension of knowing and interpreting, but to then apply. And as the spiral loops around, they engage in taking action, learning from mistakes then help reinforce and reteach gaps or misunderstandings regarding the knowledge or the empathetic nature of a culture. These concepts are also a difficult thing to break down or understand because cultures are living and breathing systems that are constantly adapting to internal forces such as deeply ingrained religious beliefs, limitations of language, and also external factors such as global economic policies as well as access to media and information to broaden understanding or to influence. Being able to teach or expose students to these concepts are things that I think also support what 21st century skills are also trying to do; to be collaborative and adaptable. Now more than ever the world is changing and adapting, interacting with people different than you, and a need to understand, engage and seek solutions or compromises to allow the flourishing of our world. These are the concepts and skills that should help students grow as lifelong learners, seeking and understanding  their small or big role in the whole system of our world. 

Sources

Heyward, M. (2002). From international to intercultural: Redefining the international school for a globalized world. Journal of Research in International Education, 1(1), 9-32. doi:10.1177/1475240902001001266

Mansilla, Veronica & Jackson, Anthony. (2012). Educating for Global Competence, Preparing our Youth to Engage the World. doi:10.13140/2.1.3845.1529. 

Sriprakash, A., Singh, M., & Qi, J. (2014). A Comparative Study of International Mindedness in the IB Diploma Programme in Australia, China and India. http://www.ibo.org/globalassets/publications/ib-research/dp/international-mindedness-final-report.pdf