Study abroad and the quest for global citizenship
Introduction
Over the last decade the field of International Education has been increasingly pushing study abroad as the principle means of shaping their students into “global citizens”. However, many critics are adamantly opposed to the idea of global citizenship, believing that it weakens or replaces national citizenship or that, like globalization, it simply cannot exist as a tangible entity. There are still others who believe that global citizenship does not downplay national citizenship but rather increases it by promoting civic engagement at the national political level. Jackson (2010) argues that globalization has led, over the last decade, to the formation of new national identities and that it “offers opportunities to develop a social identity as a full-fledged member of a global community” (p. 8). Rick Steves (2012), travel writer, host and producer, states that, “globalization is like the weather: Regardless of what you think about it, you have to live with it.” The question that remains open to discussion then, is what differentiates national and global citizenship?
This paper will argue that study abroad promotes national citizenship just as much as it promotes global citizenship. The argument will be addressed from the perspective that study abroad negates differentiating national and global citizenship at all, and concurrently promotes both of them through civic engagement at the local, national and global levels. These arguments thus support the idea that study abroad is vital to the nation. For the benefit of these arguments, the concepts of global citizenship and globalization are going to be approached as equally relevant to study abroad and the push to internationalize higher education. Regardless of the ongoing debates surrounding these concepts, “the focus is now on the consequences [of globalization and global citizenship] rather than whether or not [they] exist” (Davies & Pike, 2009, p. 62).
The last few decades have witnessed an unprecedented spread of technology, communication, and exchange of cultures and peoples. This concept of “globalization” is the fundamental driving force that has led to the rapid increase in rates of study abroad participation and attempts to internationalize higher education. There are many different definitions of what exactly globalization is but the general idea that it involves the interchange of worldviews, ideas, and products is widely accepted. It also deals with the exchange of peoples and their cultures. Nonetheless, even with the lack of a well agreed-upon definition, globalization is an important driving force of the recent trends in promoting increased study abroad participation and, as a by-product, the internationalization of higher education.
Proponents of international education are constantly seeking ways to improve the rates of study abroad participation and international student exchange in order to increase cultural awareness and competency amongst their students. They have come to refer to the idea of having said cultural traits as “global citizenship”. Many, however, as previously stated, argue that globalization and the idea of global citizenship are precarious to national identity and tradition.
Whether for or against the idea of internationalizing higher education and promoting global citizenship, it is important to incorporate study abroad trends into any discussion of the topic. Study abroad is a huge factor in the recent push to internationalize higher education and promote the idea of global citizenship in universities across the country. This report will briefly examine recent study abroad trends and then explore how study abroad is affecting both global and national citizenship. In this regard, the research presented here will attempt to explore the differences and similarities between national and global citizenship and strive to demonstrate that study abroad concurrently promotes them both.
Study Abroad
Study abroad is vital to the development of students’ sense of global citizenship and to any efforts toward internationalizing higher education. The Lincoln Commission (2005) affirms that study abroad greatly improves the education of all Americans by encouraging students to engage more fully with the world. “As both Senator Fulbright and Senator Simon understood, it helps ‘transcend traditional national and cultural boundaries’ and breaks down the ‘psychological, political, and spiritual’ isolation of peoples” (p.31).
The Open Doors 2013 report defines study abroad as “U.S. citizens and permanent residents receiving credit from their home institutions for study abroad”. The most recent Open Doors data on U.S. study abroad shows that study abroad participation has been steadily increasing over the last decade. It is reported that 283,332 U.S. higher education students received academic credit for study abroad during academic year 2011/2012. This is a 3.4% increase over the previous year (Open Doors 2013).
Many professionals in the field of international education are struggling to come up with ways to ameliorate certain study abroad statistics. Lack of variety in study abroad destinations and low minority participation are two of the more troubling trends highlighted annually by Open Doors. A large majority of U.S. students who study abroad choose Europe as their study destination and only China comes close, having received more than 14,000 of our students last year (Open Doors 2013). In fact, 53% of U.S. study abroad participants look no further than Europe, followed by 16% going to Latin America and the Caribbean, and 12% to Asia (Open Doors 2013). Picard, Bernardino & Ehigiator (2009) address this concern by stating that, “[t]here is a genuine need to put more regions, countries, and cultures in play in the quest for true global citizenship” (p. 339).
Low diversity amongst participants has also been a long-standing issue in study abroad and the latest Open Doors (2013) data confirms the steady recurrence of these trends. According to the 2011/2012 data, 64% of all U.S. study abroad students were female and minority participation was at a low 24%. These percentages are even more dismal when breaking down the “minority” grouping into specific ethnic groups.
Open Doors (2013) asserts that “targeted outreach, recruitment and funding can substantially increase minority participation in study abroad”. Picard et al. (2009) also address the current trends of low diversity by affirming, “the study abroad population has to look more like the general national population” (p. 342). They recommend more socioeconomic representation; sharp increases in minority student participation; and greater gender balance (p. 342). The Lincoln Commission (2005) echoes these sentiments by recommending that the demographics of the U.S. undergraduate students abroad should be similar to those of the overall population and that efforts should be made to expand programs in nontraditional countries.
Study abroad is widely accepted as a means of increasing students’ cultural awareness, enhancing personal development, and broadening perspectives (Picard et al., 2009). Considering all the confirmed benefits of study abroad, it is understandable why professionals in the field of international education are desperately trying to find more and more ways to promote it at their institutions. Beyond all the obvious and previously researched benefits of study abroad, however, still more research needs to be conducted to explore its relationship with national citizenship and increased local civic engagement. There is a large amount of extant literature and research that demonstrates study abroad’s effect on global citizenship but comparatively little about its effect on national citizenship. But what differentiates the two? Can it be deduced that if one self-identifies as a global citizen, they are just as likely to self-identify with their local home community and nation as well?
Citizenship of any kind often correlates with a sense of belonging. After all, if one self-identifies with a group, surely they feel that they belong to it. The old phrase claiming, “you can’t have one without the other” doesn’t necessarily hold true in this case, however. A person can surely feel that they belong to a nation and have national citizenship while knowing nothing of, or caring about, global citizenship. On the other hand it is harder to believe that one could self-identify as a global citizen while concomitantly claiming to feel no sense of belonging at all to their nation or local community.
Considering the extant literature on this topic, it can indeed be argued that study abroad does promote feelings of global citizenship amongst participants. It is also widely observed that individuals who have participated in study abroad and self-identify as global citizens tend to have an increased likelihood of volunteering and being involved with their local community upon their return home. It is clear that instilling participating students with global competence, self-awareness, and empathy toward the “other”, should be one of the major goals of professionals in the field of international education. It should likewise be the principle goal of any educator in today’s increasingly globalized society.
Dwyer (2004) shows that regardless of the length of time spent abroad, study abroad participants overwhelmingly state that their experience not only had a lasting impact on worldview (95%), but also caused them to change or refine political and social views (84%), and continues to influence political and social awareness (88%), participation in community organizations (66%), and even choices made in family life (73%) (p. 160). Assuming, then, that study abroad promotes global citizenship and that global citizenship and a sense of belonging promote increased civic engagement at the local and national levels; it can be deduced that study abroad does indeed promote national citizenship.
Global Citizenship
Most definitions of “citizenship” mention its physical and tangible aspects- such as having a national passport or being an active member of society- in regard to a specific nation-state. Such limited definitions of citizenship are the reason why there are so many criticisms of the idea of global citizenship as being inconceivable. Lewin (2009) says that, “Global citizenship is a controversial term, with many people insisting that it cannot exist because it [citizenship] is intimately connected to the nation-state, and others contending that the deployment of global citizenship undermines newer states’ long and hard-fought road to achieving citizenship for its own citizens” (p. xviii).
The vast majority of criticisms seem to come from what Davies & Pike (2009) describe as two main camps: the ideological and the pragmatic. The ideological camp argues against global citizenship believing that it “undermines the development of patriotism and the importance of ensuring that future generations have a sound understanding of their own nation’s history and culture” while the pragmatic opposition argues that “citizenship [can only be] supported at the national level by a complex and sophisticated set of policies, laws, and institutions” (p. 66).
What both camps fail to realize, however, is that, unlike national citizenship, the concept of global citizenship is not meant to be tangible or encompass its own official rules and stipulations. It is more of an abstract concept or a state of mind. Schattle (2009) envisions it as involving “self-awareness as well as outward awareness of one’s surroundings and the world” (p. 10). Hovey & Weinberg agree and explain it as a process of “developing the awareness and knowledge to be a globally aware and responsible citizen within overlapping and interconnected communities” (Hovey & Weinberg, 2009, p. 46).
Most scholars in any field dealing with globalization, global education, or global citizenship agree that these concepts are all abstract and principally involve knowledge and awareness, both of the self and home culture, as well as the “other” and their culture. Schattle (2009) discusses how self-awareness is generally the first step toward global citizenship, “providing a lens through which further experiences and insights are perceived” (p. 10). Such a global identity requires being aware of not only one’s home community but also the global community and changing their habits and behavior accordingly (Schattle, 2009).
When considering that global citizenship is a state of mind that undoubtedly benefits humanity as a whole; it is hard to agree with, or even understand, the prevalent criticisms of it. Those who feel that it threatens national citizenship are likely to be individuals who are nationalistic, ethnocentric, and afraid of the unknown. They irrationally fear that by promoting students to acquire global citizenship, they will have to relinquish their national citizenship. National citizenship, however, is quite distinct from global citizenship in that being a citizenship of a nation-state usually implies being an official member of the state, having an active role in its society, and being protected by it. It comes with rules and regulations in the form of laws that one is expected to abide by. Global citizenship, meanwhile, deals with how an individual feels and thinks in regard to the global community and how they understand their place within it. There is no “global passport” or global citizenship laws. Global citizenship exists within, and is created by, the individual.
Jackson (2010) refers to global citizens as being “globally competent” (p. 38), describing them as those who have knowledge of world events, cultures, foreign languages and having intercultural skills.” She also discusses “intercultural sensitivity” (p. 40) in relation to global citizenship and competence as “personal growth and the development of an intercultural mind – a mindset capable of understanding from within and from without one’s own culture and other cultures”.
It is clear that the majority of scholars think of global citizenship in a way that allows it to be held simultaneously with national citizenship. In no way do any of these professionals argue that global citizenship would demean an individual’s sense of belonging to their home community or nation. Rather, their many ideas of what it means to be a global citizen deal largely with knowledge, empathy and awareness. These conclusions indeed support the notion that global citizenship actually encourages local and national civic engagement, and therefore, an increased sense of belonging to an individual’s local community.
Disagreeing with the criticisms that global citizenship would destroy or replace national citizenship, Davies & Pike (2009) argue that “individuals have allegiances and responsibilities to community, region, continent, and planet as well as to a nation” (p. 67). They claim that all of us are naturally “multiple citizens” who have “plural and parallel” identities (p. 67). Going one step further, they dispute the critics’ allegations that global citizenship damages national citizenship by claiming, “a greater focus on global citizenship may be, in fact, one of the best antidotes to the decline in youth participation at the national political level” (p. 68).
National Citizenship & Civic Engagement
Considering what we have discussed so far, and in accordance with extant literature, it is evident that 1) Globalization is resulting in an increased interest in study abroad and is driving internationalization of higher education, and 2) Study abroad participation promotes feelings of global citizenship and intercultural competence. Building from these two certainties, it is possible to argue that study abroad participation, by way of promoting global citizenship and global awareness, increases and reinforces local civic engagement and, therefore, benefits the nation-states of participants.
Cushner (2009) describes the results of the study abroad experience as including: 1) development of intercultural sensitivity; 2) intercultural communications competence; 3) global perspective and world-mindedness; and 4) increased intercultural and cross-cultural awareness (p. 159). “Participants also learn a lot about their own culture, developing a greater appreciation of home, examining home country from new and different points of view” (Cushner, 2009, 160). Here, Cushner explains how increased intercultural and cross-cultural awareness enable us to reexamine our local communities and redefine how we identify ourselves. These new ways of thinking can promote individuals to become more engaged with their community and better understand how their personal contributions to social and political matters can affect, not just themselves and their family, but humanity as a whole.
Deardorff (2009) attempts to assess aspects of study abroad that deal with civic engagement and social responsibility by stating specific goals and observing outcomes. The outcomes that she reports with regard to study abroad’s effect on civic engagement are that: 1) students acquire a heightened sense of global interconnections and interdependencies; 2) students can describe a social problem requiring collective remedies that transcend national boundaries; and 3) students are more likely to believe their individual intervention in a global social problem is both possible and consequential” (p. 361). All of these outcomes, but especially the third, surely drive students to participate more at the national political level. Understanding their place in the world with respect to other, distant peoples will empower them to not just sit idly by but rather to take advantage of their rights as national citizens to vote and have a say in matters that affect the far corners of the globe.
When one considers that citizenship can take many forms and have as many different meanings as there are individuals, the question of what differentiates global and national citizenship becomes practically obsolete. The differences between the two are no longer important when acknowledging that they both benefit individuals in distinct, yet complementary and fulfilling ways. All of us want to feel that we belong and whether that is to a community, a nation or the entire globe, hardly seems to matter.
Over the last few decades, and concurrent with the rise of globalization, more and more scholars and politicians have been adamantly promoting various methods of internationalizing higher education in the United States. It is increasingly obvious that the need to prepare our students for jobs in international markets and with global impacts is vital to the nation. The more globally educated our students are and the more aware and engaged they become as a result; the more competitive the nation will be.
Kolb (2009) points out that “the future success of our economy, national security, and our diplomatic relations will be determined by our success in changing American culture in a manner that is significantly more outward-oriented than it has ever been before” (p. 59). Global citizenship needs to be an accessible and encouraged concept for the nation’s students. Promoting study abroad and making it more feasible for all students will best achieve this aim. Students who adapt to global citizenry by participating in study abroad come to understand citizenship participation in and belonging to, not only their traditional, but global community as well. “They are able to identify with the possibility of multiple and overlapping citizenships” (Hovey & Weinberg, 2009, p. 44).
Hovey & Weinberg (2009) discuss in detail the benefits of study abroad’s promotion of both global and national citizenships. “In many national territories the view that individuals and communities can have multiple cultural and civic identities is gaining social and political acceptance” (p. 43). These multiple cultural and civic identities are an inherent aspect of global citizenship. They also provide “powerful transformative opportunities to explore one’s own identity, lifelong commitments and allegiances” (Hovey & Weinberg, 2009, p. 43). In exploring their own identity, they begin to see a bigger picture of the world and better understand their place within it. This self-awareness encourages civic engagement and exercising of national rights.
Study Abroad is Vital for the Nation
There is overwhelming evidence that suggests not only that study abroad affects national citizenship by promoting increased civic engagement at home but, also, that this effect is a positive one. The effects of study abroad are positive for the individual participant, the nation, and the world. “Americans who want our next generation to be hands-on with the world — grappling constructively with international partners against daunting challenges that ignore political borders, working competitively in a globalized economy, and having enthusiasm rather than anxiety about other cultures and approaches to persistent problems — can get on board with the movement to help our students get a globalized education” (Steves, 2012).
What is the difference between national and global citizenship then? For the sake of this essay, the answer is found within the concept of citizenship itself. Study abroad does not just build upon global citizenship; rather it builds upon the concept of citizenship in general, regardless of the type. Participants learn to assume responsibility for their own citizen commitments while at the same time appreciating and developing the ability to respectfully represent differences of other nations and communities (Hovey & Weinberg, 2009). These participants not only feel that they belong to the whole world but exercise this newfound sense of belonging by way of political activism. This has been shown repeatedly in not only the extant literature on the topic, but also by our own experiences with study abroad and thousands of participant testimonies.
The amount of scholarly evidence that supports this paper’s argument that study abroad promotes national citizenship just as much as it promotes global citizenship is overwhelming. The concept of global citizenship is an important one, even as scholars and professionals continue to debate what exactly it means. Based on the extant evidence, however, the field of international education should perhaps begin to place more emphasis on “citizenship” itself rather than differentiating what it means to be global rather than national. “In essence, [global citizenship and education abroad] encompasses an understanding of the interrelations among the local, national, and global, and a commitment to action within these interconnected spheres” (Duplaga & Lantis, 2010, p.14). Study abroad, then, encourages global and national citizenship simultaneously.
Many scholars currently researching global citizenship are so concerned with overcoming the parochialism and ethnocentricity that is so traditionally present in American students’ worldviews that they don’t leave much room for exploring its impacts on national citizenship. There is much more research to be done to examine to what extent study abroad experiences and global citizenship increase both civic engagement at home and participant’s sense of belonging to the nation. A good place to start would be to conduct more qualitative studies interviewing large samples of former study abroad participants about their feelings of belonging and commitment to both the nation and the globe.
Conclusion
The U.S. government clearly supports the argument that study abroad and global citizenship are good for civic engagement and national citizenship. Indeed, the U.S. Congress has put forth its desire for one million American students to study abroad annually by 2017 (Lewin, xiii; Duplaga & Lantis, 2010). The Lincoln Commission (2005) agrees by noting that it is vital to the nation’s well being to engage more American undergraduates with the world around them. The commission (2005) highlights that increasing study abroad participation is vital to continued economic competitiveness, national security, and future leadership.
Kolb (2009) argues that, “America’s continued global leadership will depend on our students’ abilities to interact with the world community both inside and outside our borders” (p. 49). The U.S. government’s stance on the issue is summed up best by former secretary of state Colin Powell (2004):
The more we know about each other, the more we learn about each other, the more we engage in our differences that we have between our societies and between our social systems and between our political points of view, the better off we are. The more dialogue we have at every level and especially at the academic level, where opinion-makers are located . . . the better off we are. The more we . . . understand each other, the more effective we will be in creating a world of global citizens, and the better our chances of achieving peace in our increasingly interdependent world (as cited in Duplaga & Lantis, 2010, p. 15).
Study abroad negates differentiating national and global citizenship and concurrently promotes both of them through civic engagement at the local, national, and global levels. Study abroad must, therefore, be an increasingly integral component of higher education not only for the sake of individual participants and their local communities, but also the nation and the entire world.
Continued research into these matters, showcasing the benefits of increased rates of study abroad participation for the nation, will lead to increased attention on, and funding for, study abroad; much to the delight of international education professionals everywhere. “It promises something else, also: It offers to help the United States develop a citizenry that is internationally competent, comfortable, and confident- competent in international affairs, comfortable with international diversity, and confident of its ability to make its way amidst the uncertainties of a new age” (Lincoln Commission, 2005, p. 19).
By Paul Joseph Downey
[accordion_tab title=”Editor in Chief: Paul Joseph Downey”]
Currently based in South Korea and acquainting himself with the many cultures of the Asian continent, encountering, and learning about, different cultures is something Paul has pursued in both his 
academic and professional endeavors. Travelling abroad for the first time to South America as part of a study abroad program, he became completely enthralled with the local customs and cultures in every region and country he visited. This experience, in fact, changed his life, as it served as the catalyst for his sense of wanderlust and curiosity for different parts of the world. He later lived in both Spain and France, teaching English and studying both French and Spanish. During his time living in these two countries, he traveled to over 20 other countries in the region, from Morocco to Turkey and everywhere in between. He does not believe there is any more fulfilling experience than to travel and surround oneself with a completely different culture, language, and people. Cultural differences come in many forms, from greetings and relationship-building styles, to family structure and education. One must be willing to make a few mistakes when in a foreign culture in order to learn what is, and is not, acceptable. However, he has found that most people the world over are more than understanding and forgiving when an outsider makes a “cultural slip,” provided a positive, friendly, and apologetic demeanor coupled with a willingness and openness to learn.
Paul Joseph Downey is a graduate of The Ohio State University with bachelor degrees in Spanish and International Studies, and Florida International University with a Master of Science in International and Intercultural Education. Born in Columbus, Ohio, and currently residing in South Korea, he also considers Miami, Madrid, Paris, and Buenos Aires all very dear to his heart.[/accordion_tab]
List of references available upon request.
