On January 10, 1995, eleven individuals met informally to consider international trends in U.S. independent education and to discuss the relevance of global developments which might have long-term influences and effects on our educational system. To what extent were persons responsible for national independent education identifying and assessing these developments? To what extent were strategic plans addressing the transformation and evolution of our present educational ethos being developed? Who or what body of independent educators were thinking about the positive and powerful uses of technology in the teaching and learning of tomorrow? And where and among whom ought solutions to such matters as the ethics and economics of international admissions be found?

These are not easy questions nor are there easy answers, and certainly for a day's deliberations few resolutions were anticipated. In fact, while some specific suggestions were made by the group, more questions were raised than answers provided.

The efficacy of the days' meeting was partly the luxury of being able to share but also to reflect and comment on issues which we think about some, talk about some-what but which are nevertheless, of vital importance to the intellectual, emotional, and cultural development of those for whom our schools are responsible: the students.

No specific agenda was set but a list of possible topics was provided to stimulate thinking. These touched on areas ranging from the potential for global leadership in independent education to issues of student mobility: the needs and the costs and the importance of national and international resources for professional development, curriculum planning and strategic forecasting.

At the end of the meeting a working list of some ten topics had emerged. Each had been cited on more than one occasion during the day's deliberations and each provided a catalyst for further conversations and related issues.

Although it was not initially planned several of the participants will meet in March as part of a more public forum to continue the dialogue and to share and involve others in their discussions. And in May, by design, there will be a continuum of those conversations. At the end of this informal process, it is anticipated that a small, working committee will emerge and will set about drafting an outline for consideration by all independent schools that wish to examine their role(s) in the future of global education.

As one participant noted, there was a discernible shift in the discussions: initially we spoke about international students coming to us but during the course of our discussions it became apparent that we reversed ourselves and increasingly spoke about sending our students (and staff) out. It also became clear that what one school might achieve was limiting relative to the nearly limitless horizons and objectives which collaboration and coordination among many schools could achieve.

A chronological summary of the conversations might be as follows:

There is the emergence of an international Middle Class. It is a mobile as well as affluent society with a broad and somewhat complicated world vision. It is interested in education and wants quality assurances, for which it is prepared to pay.

But there are moral obligations felt to provide for different class societies and for those without the financial means to attend independent, U.S. schools. It is the students from these societies that usually have the greatest impact and effect on our students.

But if we talk about "multiculturalism" aren't students from the Bronx our own "international students"? And aren't there issues and debates regarding the ethics and economics of recruiting international students and the financing of aid to non-Americans?

What is the proper balance of payments? What are the priorities? Who (and for what reasons) determines the distribution of resources?

And if we are to be concerned about how and to whom our financial aid is given, shouldn't we also be mindful of the considerable sums of money we spend annually (and individually) on the recruitment of international students? Shouldn't we be asking ourselves how we may be more cooperative and collaborative in presenting information to parents, students and counselors residing overseas? To utilizing existing technologies and networks to facilitate information, provide testing and ease placements? Could such collaborative efforts provide a savings which might then be applied to furthering assistance to both deserving U.S. and international students?

To address these and other related issues, we need to involve all of our communities, not merely trustees and heads but faculty, staff, and students as well as alumni and parents.

Above all there needs to be a set of international education objectives -- for our schools individually and for the independent school field generally.

We are indeed the land of opportunity and this is a blessing, but it can also create concerns. Students we educate from abroad and place in U.S. higher education sometimes do not return home. This may be our gain, but it is also another country's loss. We need to be better trained in how to address such issues. Simultaneously, we need to see more clearly international students as resources within our schools and, subsequently, within the fabric of their own societies and cultures. The current and continuing contributions by international students to our schools are such that our recognition ought to cause them to say "we want to thank you for making us part of the vocabulary of the school". We need to assimilate, not integrate.

Therefore, we must look at the intentions and continuum of our education, at our purposes and expectations.

Do our students go from "here" to "there"? At some international schools all students must spend a term overseas. And if we go from "here" to "there", can we communicate once we have arrived? We are a nation which travels and is extraordinarily mobile domestically; however, we also display the naivete and parochialism of the large and powerful.

Perhaps it is the ethos of U.S. education compared to that of Europe, the Far East and elsewhere. Perhaps issues of pedagogy need to be addressed and domestic vision and creativity expanded; perhaps it is an issue of values -- national, regional, parental -- that needs to be highlighted and discussed. Whatever, we need to find the means by which we can effect more global "town and gown" relations in the international education marketplace.

Exchanges may provide us with one way to achieve this.

There are difficulties: faculty exchanges today encounter working couples, host families are less easy to identify and involve, and there are always the concerns of timing, energy, and costs. However, the immediacy and efficacy of exchanges can have a disproportionately large and positive impact on schools wishing to further their international horizons internally and externally. Having ones students domiciled in another country for a designated period may provide not only insight and under-standing to the individual but also a cultural jolt to the domestic community upon his or her return.

And it is jolts which are needed; it is the need to rethink and perhaps remodel the day and boarding school concepts, the curriculum and the calendar. It may be the time to deconstruct and put schools back into the hands of the teacher and to reaffirm its teacher and student centeredness.

Concurrently, the establishment of school-to-school partnerships for purposes of exchanges may be a means to an end, just as the formation of a committee of heads of independent schools and associations worldwide might create a catalyst to and forum through which global issues concerning independent education could be discussed.

There needs to be a center for the collection of such data and information. And teachers need to know how and what is being taught in their subjects in other countries. This is not a time for chauvinism; it is a time for sharing.

Participants:
Richard H. Baker - Head, Noble and Greenough School, which is also the host campus and one of the funding schools for the recently established Kokrobitey School, Ghana, West Africa
Anthony J. deV. Hill - Head, St. Mark's School and immediate past Head of the Melbourne Grammar School, Australia
Britta S. McNemar - former Coordinator of International Student Services, Phillips Academy, Andover, MA
Donald W. McNemar - former Head of Phillips Academy, Andover, MA and current Trustee of Northfield Mount Hermon
Lance R. Odden - Head, The Taft School
Peter D. Pelham - Director, Pelham Associates
Peter G. Pelham - Executive Director, Federation of American and International Schools (FAIS)
John Ratté - Head, Loomis Chaffee School and Trustee of Robert College, Istanbul, Turkey
Richard D. Schubart - Acting Director of The Association of Boarding Schools and former Director of Admissions, Phillips Exeter Academy
Jacqueline Smethurst - Head, Northfield Mount Hermon School
Benjamin D. Williams - Chair, Board of Trustees of Dynamy, Inc., former President of Robert College, Istanbul, Turkey, and Head of Worcester Academy and Lawrence Academy

Forum organized and Summary prepared by Peter D. Pelham, Director, Pelham Associates.

Back to Top