![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Abstract
Many educational systems worldwide are making substantial efforts to integrate an international dimension into local schools, fostering significant changes in the processes of instruction and learning as well as transformations at pedagogical and organisational levels. In this paper, we analyse data collected in four schools in Israel that the local press and educational authorities have acknowledged as schools that prominently and comprehensively incorporated international, global and intercultural dimensions. We employ a case-study approach based on interviews with principals and teachers; analysis of schools' websites and documents; and on-site observations, in order to analyse the expression of internationalisation, understand who is involved in the implementation process, and stimulate thinking about the broader impact of this process. We find that ideological and pragmatic reasons underlie schools' motivations to internationalise; their population and status comprise major factors in the decision regarding how, where, why, and when to integrate international and intercultural dimensions. The stakeholders interviewed perceive of internationalisation as offering both cosmopolitan capital to the students and a distinctive feature to the school. The schools demonstrate diverse internationalisation patterns that are neither monitored nor guided by any regulatory agency. These findings contribute to the identification of the factors promoting or delaying the internalisation process and to the understanding of the impact of this process on schools.
Notes
1. We apply the term ‘internationalisation’ in this context to refer to the integration of global, international and intercultural dimensions into the aims, functions and delivery of education (as per Knight Citation2004, 26). The academic discourse on internationalisation is complex and fragmented, involving several under-defined and sometimes conflicting terms (Yemini, Bar-Nissan, and Yardeni Citation2014; Yemini, Nissan, and Shavit Citation2014), such as ‘internationalisation’ itself (Yemini Citation2012), ‘globalisation in education’ (Stromquist Citation2013), ‘cosmopolitan capital’ (Weenink Citation2008), ‘intercultural competence’ (Deardorff Citation2006), ‘international mindedness’ (Bunnell Citation2011) and ‘global citizenship’ (Hansen Citation2010, Citation2014). The current study will focus on the term ‘internationalisation’ (or alternately, ‘the international dimension in education’). Notably, neither establishing the superiority of any given one of the various definitions for these terms nor explaining the boundaries and relevance of each of these terms falls within the scope of this study.
2. Notably, about 20% of the Israeli population is Arab Palestinians, considered a distinct ethnic group (Addi-Raccah and Gavish Citation2010). The public Israeli education system provides Arab Palestinian children with instruction in separate schools, in Arabic, by Arab teachers, and offers unique learning programmes for this population (Gibton Citation2011). Notably, the Arab population has suffered from discriminatory government policies resulting in deprivation in almost all domains, including the education system (Arar Citation2012).
3. Three of the schools in the present study that were selected for their activities in the field of internationalisation are magnet schools.
4. Sustainable development requires a rise in intergenerational equity and in equity between nations, a reduction in population growth and conservation and enhancement of the global resource base (Wright Citation2009).