Action 3: Wrangle Resources
Schools need money, materials, and time to see real changes to teaching practices (Hatch, 2001; Stringfield, Datnow, Ross, & Snively, 1998). Money can secure classroom supplies and additional staff to support implementation (e.g., instructional coaches). Time is essential for training school personnel in new ways of teaching, creating new lessons and units, and securing a place in the schedule for new initiatives to be taught. Though the availability of resources may be beyond the control of many school leaders (e.g., statewide funding streams, union-negotiated hours that schools can require teachers to attend, district-mandated schedule time blocks), leaders can, with a bit of foresight, effectively manage factors beyond their control (Hatch, 2001; Tichnor-Wagner et al., 2018). Therefore, globally competent school leaders work with what they have to figure out creative ways to dedicate time, money, and materials to global learning.
Action 4: Create Capacity
You can purchase the best curricular materials and newest technologies, but if teachers don't know how to use them, then it's wasted money. As multiple studies have concluded, teachers are the key component of the success of any effort aimed at fundamental school change (Desimone, 2002; McLaughlin, 1990). As such, investing in staff knowledge and skill-building around instructional reforms is imperative.
Teachers need opportunities for deeper learning on reforms that require changes to instructional practice. Without it, they might make unintended or marginal changes to practice—or not change their practice at all (Cohen & Hill, 2001; Spillane et al., 2002). Therefore, globally competent school leaders build capacity by providing ongoing professional learning opportunities for staff and join them and students on a schoolwide global learning journey.
Acting on all four of these domains will improve the likelihood that globally competent teaching and learning will take root and bloom. For example, if teachers have the will to implement but lack the capacity or resources, then implementation might not be possible. Alternatively, if teachers have the training but don't see how it aligns to competing programs the school is currently implementing or to high-stakes state tests, then implementation may be variable (Stringfield et al., 1998).
In addition, these four actions collectively reflect a top-and-bottom approach to implementation (Tichnor-Wagner et al., 2018), wherein school leaders adapt new programs and practices to fit their local contexts and needs of implementers on the ground. For example, school leaders look to see how global competence aligns with top-down policy initiatives and are able to clearly articulate that alignment while simultaneously building will among district leaders and policymakers who can champion—and fund—the cause from their positions of power. They can reallocate resources over which they have control toward global learning experiences. They also support globally competent teaching and learning from the bottom up, demonstrating an ability to align as they incorporate the needs and desires of teachers and students as they plan for global initiatives and an ability to build capacity as they allow teachers and students to design their own global learning experiences. An adaptive approach to leading instructional reforms is particularly salient to globally competent teaching and learning, an instructional reform that by design is meant to be adapted to the unique interests, needs, and location of each classroom and school.
Overview of the Book
This book describes the attributes that globally competent school leaders possess and how to leverage those attributes via the four effective implementation actions described above to systemically and sustainably support globally competent teaching and learning. Because the word global is interpreted by different people to mean vastly different things (Dolby & Rahman, 2008; Kirkwood, 2001), it is important to clarify how I use this term throughout this book. Globally competent teaching, global initiatives, and global programs all emphasize educational practices and structures that intentionally incorporate diverse perspectives into curriculum, instruction, and the culture of a school and that help reinforce the complexities of local, regional, national, and global identities, conditions, and connections. At the heart of global education is recognizing and valuing—rather than ignoring or rebuffing—the interconnectedness of our communities and selves to different people and places.
This book does not focus on understanding other countries through the lens of international or comparative education, which narrows the scope to studying policies, practices, and particularities within nation states (Dolby & Rahman, 2008). Although knowledge of different countries is an important component of global competence, as is knowledge sharing about educational practices in different parts of the world, it is but one piece contributing to a broader understanding of how we are all interconnected. At the same time, bringing global competence to a school is not a political act of preaching one-world government or encouraging students to trade in their national identities to become citizens of the world. To the contrary, global competence celebrates the local and national affiliations we have alongside our connection to a common humanity and gives students the tools to make their own informed decisions about the beliefs they ascribe to and the actions they take in local, national, and global arenas.
Chapter 2 presents seven tenets of globally competent educational leadership developed by ASCD and the Longview Foundation for the whitepaper Globally Competent Educational Leadership: A Framework for Leading Schools in a Diverse, Interconnected World (Tichnor-Wagner & Manise, 2019). These tenets were the result of a four-phase research project in which we analyzed pilot interviews of globally committed school leaders, conducted focus groups with 67 elementary and secondary school administrators from the United States and abroad, and enlisted expert reviews from 39 individuals across the K–20 pipeline who have supported the implementation of global initiatives in schools—including school administrators, teachers, university professors, education association representatives, and individuals working in NGOs and state and federal government programs. These tenets are an aspirational set of skills for leaders to work toward, can be adapted to different contexts in different ways, and are aligned to general best educational practices. In short, they are a skillset that leaders can draw upon as they work toward implementing global initiatives.
Chapters 3–6 provide an in-depth examination of implementation actions you can take to lead schools in becoming globally relevant. Those actions are based on the four domains of alignment, will, resources, and capacity (illustrated in Figure 1.3 on page 21). Each of these chapters addresses barriers to implementation, solutions to overcoming those barriers, and examples of how school leaders have applied globally competent leadership tenets to these implementation actions. Chapter 3 examines how to align global initiatives with current policy trends and problems of practice that schools commonly contend with by building bridges between the local and global. Chapter 4 explores how to overcome political pushback to global teaching by building will among stakeholders who may be reticent to change because of policy incompatibility or antiglobal attitudes. Chapter 5 focuses on how to find the time and funding to spearhead global initiatives amid shrinking budgets and initiative overload. Chapter 6 examines how you can build capacity within yourself and your staff to implement global initiatives, even if you feel underqualified or ill prepared to lead such efforts.
The many examples of school leaders applying these tenets and taking actions toward leading global schools come from a compilation of interviews, observations, focus groups, and conversations I have conducted with a wide range of school and district administrators and teacher leaders