Internationalizing Education through Maintenance of …...Internationalizing Education through Maintenance of Teacher Learning Communities Shane Carter University of California, Berkeley

Internationalizing Education through Maintenance of Teacher Learning Communities

Shane Carter University of California, Berkeley

Rebecca Carter

(interactive data visualizations) Gusto

Paper prepared for presentation at the 2020 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA, USA. This material is based on work supported by Federal Title VI grant funding over a period of 20 years. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the US Department of Education.

Maintenance of Teacher Learning Communities

2

Introduction The Office of Resources for International and Area Studies (ORIAS) was founded in 1994 to conduct educational outreach on behalf of the Title VI-funded Area Studies Centers and Institutes at UC Berkeley1. Along with promoting research in world areas, Title VI grant recipients, known as National Resource Centers (NRCs), are required to work to internationalize K-12 and community college education. UC Berkeley has hosted between six and eight NRCs during each four-year grant cycle throughout the period from 1994 to 2020. By 1994, these Berkeley-based NRCs had collectively delegated some of their K-12 outreach activity to a graduate-student Program Coordinator who initiated the activities and relationships that would evolve into ORIAS programs. In 1998, ORIAS began maintaining a database to track its activities and information about participation in each of its programs. Concurrent with the creation of the database, the office also constructed a website to publicize programmatic information, share links to teaching resources, and host lesson materials generated through ORIAS programs2. Also in 1998, ORIAS began the consistent practice of surveying participants about their experiences of ORIAS events and the office is currently working with an independent evaluator. The database, the website, and the surveys each addressed needs at the Centers and Institutes, Title VI reporting requirements and – most importantly – operational needs for ORIAS itself. Cumulatively, this repository of information makes it possible to ask longitudinal questions about internationalizing education. Grant recipients are expected to track and evaluate the effects of these educational outreach efforts within the framework of each 4-year grant cycle, though in practice ORIAS has offered outreach activities and fostered a learning community without interruption since 1998. By contrast to reporting in a short-term grant cycle, this paper focuses on the characteristics of the community of educators associated with ORIAS programs over periods of years, rather than the effects of any particular programmatic intervention. It outlines the ways in which ORIAS programming generated an ongoing professional learning community and seeks to describe models of long-term participation in this learning community through which teachers internationalize their own and others’ curricula.

Conceptual Framework Internationalizing education requires more than simply providing educators with new lesson plans focused on other world regions. It requires a change of teacher mindset, ongoing acquisition of significant amounts of new knowledge, integration of this new knowledge through modifications to pedagogy, and reinforced practice. (Finkelstein et al., 2013; Knight,

1 Center for African Studies, Center for Latin American Studies, Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Institute for East Asian Studies, Institute of European Studies, Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies, and Institute for South Asia Studies. 2 ORIAS created a new website in 2015, but the previous site remains on file at ORIAS.


3

2004; Lalor & Abawi, 2016; Poole & Russell, 2015; Sanderson, 2008 & 2011; Woodruff et al., 2015). Evaluations of programs focused on the effects of a particular intervention can identify discrete changes in how teachers modify and deliver curricula in a particular year. However, a shift in focus away from actions (i.e. delivery of specific content) and toward the actors (i.e. the teachers) suggests longitudinal questions about the role and effects of professional learning over the course of teachers’ careers. Participants in ORIAS programming are theorized to be members of a community of practice or professional learning community. Communities of practice bring together educators who often work in isolation and provide them with a space to share expertise, problem-solve and build collective knowledge (Battersby & Verdi, 2015; Moodley, 2019; Whitford & Wood, 2010). Teacher communities of practice can also be an effective way of supporting educator’s well-being while helping transform their efficacy beliefs and practices (Owen, 2016; Takahashi, 2011). The ORIAS professional learning community comprises interrelated sub-groups with slowly shifting membership. It is actively co-fostered by the ORIAS Program Coordinator and repeat participants. Long-term continuity of leadership and membership facilitates consistency in both programming and group cultural norms. According to Mercieca (p 3), “Communities of practice are voluntary groups of people who, sharing a common concern or passion, come together to explore these concerns and ideas and share and grow their practice” (Mercieca, 2017). Barab et al. (p.495) assert that the idea of a community of practice is closely linked to work-based learning, and can be defined as a “persistent, sustaining, social network of individuals who share and develop an overlapping knowledge base, set of beliefs, values, history, and experiences focused on a common practice and/or mutual enterprise” (Barab et al, 2002). Both these descriptions suggest the voluntary pursuit of common goals over an extended period of time and within a social framework. Communities of practice or professional learning communities are by their very definition social in nature. Such communities provide networks of peers learning together in a social network, taking a bottom-up approach to acquisition of individual skills, knowledge, and thus professional development (De Laat, 2012: De Laat et al., 2017). This is in contrast to a top-down approach commonly found in seminars and conferences where there are a large number of attendees (Mercieca, 2017). The very act of coming together to jointly craft lesson plans, for example, enhances the act of changing teachers’ perception of self and their pedagogy (Sanderson, 2008; Woodruff et al., 2015). Lave and Wenger (1991) argue that success in a community of practice depends on five factors: the existence and sharing by the community of a common goal; the existence and use of knowledge to achieve that goal; the nature and importance of relationships formed among community members; the relationships between the community and those outside it; and the relationship between the work of the community and the value of the activity.” (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Here, the role of the ORIAS office in a community of practice for educators is indicated. Without undermining the agency of participants, the office can devise structure to


4

support interactions, provide access to disciplinary knowledge, reinforce community norms across time, and publicly value the work and contributions of participants. Development of faculty learning communities that are designed to change teaching practices has shown positive impact on improved student learning outcomes. For example, Lalor and Abawi conducted a study of the International School in Vietnam’s creation of a professional learning community. The community was designed to provide an arena for the sharing of academic expertise and the development of a peer support network. They found “a refocusing on student achievement as being central to teachers’ core business; an understanding of the importance of teacher leadership developed; teachers felt more valued because personal professionalism was acknowledged; and, a culture of sharing collaboration and general support emerged” (Lalor & Abawi, 2014, p. 76). This paper does not consider changes to student outcomes as a result of participation in an ORIAS-based professional learning community, but positive correlations between teacher-engagement in learning communities and student performance suggest that intentionally fostering a professional learning community may be a useful endeavor for programs seeking to internationalize education.

Methods In order to identify the characteristics of its ongoing professional learning community and describe models of long-term participation in this community, this paper relied on extensive records about ORIAS activities and participants collected from 1997 to present. This includes a digital database maintained continuously since 1998, electronic archives of the vast majority of the original ORIAS website (1997 – 2015), the current ORIAS website (2015 – present), communications between the Program Coordinator and NRCs on campus about programmatic decisions, and survey responses for many programs (including survey responses from participants at all Summer Institutes for K-12 Teachers 1998 – 2019). First, ORIAS used its extensive database, website, and office communications to develop a profile of its programs over the period from 1996 – 2019. The profile is based on: when each program took place, duration of each program, type of program, and its content focus (Table 1). Further, this database of information helps clearly identify those sites where most community interactions took place. Thus, for purposes of this paper, the ORIAS learning community can be defined as the group of people who engaged in face-to-face interactions with one another and various subject-matter experts at ORIAS events. An initial review of records suggested that ORIAS programs engaged partially overlapping communities of teachers from a wide range of schools and districts who spent remarkable amounts of time together engaged in professional learning. Teacher comments on surveys indicate that ORIAS programs promoted a culture of lifelong learning within this community and fostered ongoing curricular revision and improvement. Second, in order to ascertain whether ORIAS program participants can be considered a learning community, ORIAS queried the database to generate descriptions of each member of the ORIAS


5

learning community and their relationships to one another. These queries addressed the extent to which each participant was experienced with ORIAS activities and each other:

• How much ORIAS programming have participants attended?

• How long have participants remained engaged in the ORIAS learning community?

• Are participants who attend multiple activities likely to attend different types of

programs, rather than just one type?

• Were certain types of events more likely than others to lead to long-term participation

in ORIAS programs?

• At any given event, how many hours had each participant spent engaged in previous

ORIAS programming? • How much time did members of the ORIAS learning community spend with one another,

and in which programs? In combination, the following tables and interactive infographics describe the contours and interactivity of the ongoing ORIAS learning community. They strongly suggest that participants in ORIAS activities constitute a “persistent, sustaining, social network of individuals who share and develop an overlapping knowledge base, set of beliefs, values, history, and experiences focused on a common practice and/or mutual enterprise,” to reprise the passage (Barab et al, 2002, p. 495). To establish the extent to which the Program Coordinator sought teacher input in directing ORIAS programs, ORIAS reviewed survey questions plus comments by the Program Coordinator (as recorded in memos to UC Berkeley NRCs). Assessing whether or not teachers’ perceptions matched the Program Coordinator’s intent is beyond the scope of the current work. However, it is possible to identify multiple specific instances when teachers, through their input, co-directed their learning experiences in both content matter and in format. Finally, to describe models of long-term participation in this learning community, ORIAS used the database queries and infographics to identify three individuals with markedly different, long-term engagements in ORIAS programming. Their histories of attendance at different events are combined here with information from the ORIAS website(s) and their own survey responses to generate narratives of their long-term participation in the ORIAS learning community.


6

ORIAS as a Learning Community

Origins of ORIAS Programs In mid-1997 ORIAS transitioned from having a graduate student Program Coordinator to a staff Program Coordinator3. This new role was to include outreach programming, along with construction and maintenance of a participant database and an office website. Building on a network already established by the graduate student Coordinator, the new Program Coordinator proceeded to build relationships in the local education community in order to synthesize the stated desires of local teachers and the goals of the University’s NRCs. Early programming also incorporated the mission (and funds) of a technology-focused UC Berkeley initiative called the Interactive University Project (IUP). The IUP is worth particular notice because it situates the development of ORIAS at exactly that moment when K-12 teachers first began using the internet in their classrooms. Established in 1996, the mission of the IUP was “to open UC Berkeley’s resources and people to California’s K-12 schools and citizens. Our goal is to use technology for the improvement of teaching and learning while making accessible the knowledge in universities, museums and libraries” (Research IT, n.d.). ORIAS received funding from IUP over a period of several years, enabling the office to build and maintain a website while also working with teachers and students to build web-based resources. In Fall of 1997 ORIAS was able to establish a menu of outreach activities that addressed the goals of teachers, the NRCs and the IUP (M. Delattre, memo, Fall 1997):

• providing expert speakers and resources on international topics,

• organizing educator workshops and in-service sessions,

• creating and distributing resource packets and curriculum units,

• maintaining a drop-in library of resources for teachers,

• publishing a (print) newsletter,

• developing and maintaining a website, and

• providing orientation to online resources. ORIAS has continued to undertake most of these activities without interruption since the office’s inception. Changes to programming have largely reflected advances in digital technologies. For example: the office now produces only an electronic newsletter rather than a print edition, access to digital resources has largely replaced lending of physical resources, and the website platform and design have been updated. The particular focus of this paper is the set of programs initially described as “educator workshops,” in which participants interacted directly with one another, ORIAS staff, and academic experts.

3 Program Coordinators: Michele Delattre 8/97 – 7/00; Barbara Voytek 8/00 – 7/01; Michelle Delattre 8/01 – 7/15; Shane Carter 7/15 – present.


7

ORIAS Programs Between July 1998 and July 2019 ORIAS offered 1520 hours of programming. The 1063 unique individuals who participated in these events collectively experienced 32,356 person-hours of interaction within the ORIAS learning community. Table 1 provides a chronological list of all programs recorded in the ORIAS database and their characteristics. According to information maintained on the ORIAS website and in paper records, the vast majority of these programs combined new content acquisition (e.g. pre-reading, film-viewing, presentations by researchers and professional experts) with participant discussion. All ORIAS programs aim to facilitate the process by which teachers transform new knowledge into component pieces for use in lessons. This means providing participants with opportunities to learn new content, then facilitating discussions in which they break down new information and connect it to their particular curricular goals. Summer Institutes and some Working Groups have also included dedicated time for lesson-building, either for use by individual participants or for inclusion on the ORIAS website. However, records indicate that the consistent mission of ORIAS programs has been to help teachers engage in this process of acquisition, analysis, deconstruction, then reorganization of knowledge. The vast majority of ORIAS programs have taken place on evenings, weekends, or during summer months. Although ORIAS has consistently supported participants’ efforts to count ORIAS programs toward fulfilling official requirements for ongoing professional development, none of the programs recorded in the database took place within districts during mandated professional learning time. In other words, ORIAS programs have all been gatherings of “voluntary groups of people” who came together to meet professional, intellectual, and interpersonal needs (Mercieca, 2017, p. 3). ORIAS records from academic years 1998-99 to 2018-19 (AY99-AY19) show that these programs fall into five different types4: Summer Institutes for K-12 Teachers Hours of engagement: 18 – 30 hours annually Annually since 1998, ORIAS has offered an intensive, multi-day Summer Institute for K-12 Teachers. These Institutes are built around a theme and feature speakers and activities representing each of the campus NRCs. Institutes have hosted from 17 to 73 people (median=35) representing diverse grade levels and subject areas. Summer Institutes shifted from 5-day to 3-day programs in 2012, due to a significant decrease in Title VI funding. The shortening of the program meant decreased time for teachers to engage in lesson-building activity during the program itself, although this practice persists for a self-selecting subset of participants.

4 For the purpose of some questions these program types are further divided into sub-types, as explained below.


8

Working Groups Hours of engagement: 12 – 30 hours annually ORIAS has maintained one to three Working Groups each year since 1998. These Working Groups meet between three and eight times per academic year to combine pedagogical discussion with content acquisition around a theme. The longest-running of these were Groups focused on different types of literature from around the world, Humanities West5 programing, and world history. Members often returned to their Groups several years in a row, developing long-term relationships with other returning group members. Between 1998 and 2012 Working Groups often produced and shared lesson resources (via the ORIAS website). This practice waned from AY13 to AY19, but a new Working Group (the Online World History Cohort) is once again engaged in producing a teaching resource. Summer Institutes for Community College Instructors Hours of engagement: 12 - 18 hours annually In 2011, ORIAS began offering programming specifically for community college instructors focused on effective teaching of world history and articulation of community college world history courses with UC programs. The first three years of this programming included significant work on the construction of syllabi that extended into the academic year, straddling the line between a Summer Institute and a Working Group in terms of participant experiences. After 2013 this program came to more closely resemble the Summer Institute for K-12 Teachers in its schedule and activities. District Collaborations Hours of engagement: unknown (limited records) Though a less common feature of its activities, ORIAS does engage in work with groups of teachers in their districts, organized through administrative channels6. As with Working Groups, ORIAS served as facilitator in these contexts to provide teachers with academic expertise to support them in the creation of new lessons. Workshops Hours of engagement: usually 2 - 3 hours per event ORIAS offers periodic short workshops, often in collaboration with other campus units or other local education providers (e.g. museums). In this context, ORIAS takes advantage of serendipitous confluences of resources to offer learning opportunities to teachers. There is seldom any time allocated specifically for lesson-building during workshops, although there is usually discussion about pedagogy and options for integration of new information into existing curricula.

5 Humanities West is a San Francisco-based public Humanities program that offers several thematic two-day programs each year featuring historians, art historians, musicians, and other academic experts. 2019-2020 programs include: Mexico’s Artistic Revolution, Etruscan Italy: Life and Afterlife, and Artistic Responses to Napoleon: Beethoven, Goya, and Goethe. 6 Memos indicate that unlike other programs, events that took place in districts were seldom recorded in the ORIAS database. This suggests that participants who first encountered ORIAS in their districts may have had more engagement with ORIAS than is recorded.


9

ORIAS Participants and Participant Network In order to ascertain whether ORIAS program participants can be considered a learning community, ORIAS queried the database to generate descriptions of each member of the ORIAS learning community and their relationships to one another. These queries addressed the extent to which each participant was experienced with ORIAS activities and each other. How much ORIAS programming have participants attended? The community of 1063 unique educators who have participated in ORIAS events can be divided into two broad categories: a majority, who attended a single program and a minority, who became repeat participants. The simple median and average participation rates demonstrate this. Keeping in mind the general length of programs described above, these median attendance numbers reveal a large group of participants who spent a handful of hours with other educators at one or perhaps two programs. Those who attended programs as part of a Working Group over a period of a year had the opportunity to build relationships, but the majority of educators whose participation fell below the median experienced a taste of the culture of ORIAS events without being integrated into the learning community. Table 2: Participant engagement by number of hours and number of programs

average median

# hours of participation 30.44 17

# programs attended 2.16 1

A further breakdown by program participation reveals this divide more clearly. Chart 1 shows that 752 individuals (70.74% of all participants) each only attended a single ORIAS event, while Chart 2 shows that 846 individuals (79.59% of all participants) each attended 30 hours or less of ORIAS programming. This latter cut-off at 30 hours captures every person who, for example, attended a single Summer Institute up through 2011, or a Summer Institute plus a handful of workshops after that. By contrast, educators who attended 60+ hours of programming might have attended two or (after 2012) three Summer Institutes, several Working Groups and Workshops, or some combination thereof.


10

Chart 1: Distribution of program participation by number of programs (n=1063 participants)

Chart 2: Distribution of program participation by hours of programming (n=1063 participants)

How long have participants remained engaged in the ORIAS learning community? As noted earlier, the longevity of ORIAS records affords the opportunity to trace both individual professional learning and collegial interactions across a period of 20 years. Chart 3 shows the length of time elapsed between a participant’s first attendance at an ORIAS program and their last. Here, the outlines of a continuous learning community become visible. Over 100 educators, or approximately 10% of all participants, remained engaged with ORIAS activities for at least five years of their teaching careers with 43 individuals participating in programming over periods of more than a decade. This suggests that ORIAS programs became integrated into their professional practice and indicates a strong likelihood that subsets of ORIAS participants encountered one another at multiple events.

3.20%

26.06%

70.74%

How many ORIAS programs did participants attend?

11+

2 - 10

only 1


11

The ORIAS Program Coordinator actively encourages participants who are new to ORIAS to return to attend additional programs, including drawing their attention to different types of programs and working to introduce them to other educators within the learning community. If this participant retention occurs moving forward, it would represent a continuation of the overall trend for the office, in which cultural reproduction of the ORIAS learning community has been carried forward across two decades by a core group of 250 to 300 educators in collaboration with the ORIAS Program Coordinator. Chart 3: Distribution by number of years associated with ORIAS (n=1063 participants)

Are participants who attend multiple activities likely to attend different types of programs, rather than just one type? In the course of this analysis, ORIAS also sought to understand whether each ORIAS program developed its own independent sub-community of participants and the extent to which there is meaningful crossover between programs. For the purpose of the question, programs were subdivided from the list above into smaller groupings:

1. Community College Summer Institutes 2. K-12 Summer Institutes 3. Humanities West Working Groups 4. Reading Group Working Groups 5. All other Working Groups 6. Workshops in collaboration with the Hearst Museum and the Pacific Film Archive 7. Workshops in collaboration with the UC Berkeley History Social Science Project 8. All other Workshops


12

Of the 1063 unique participants in the database, 311 attended more than one ORIAS program. Table 3 shows a simple distribution of those 311 individuals, according to how many of the 8 different sub-types of programs they attended. Of the 311 participants who attended more than one program, 210 (~20% of ORIAS participants) attended programs of more than one type. Chart 4 shows the distribution of participants across a matrix based on two variables: the number of individual programs they attended and the number of types of program they attended. Intersections with the largest number of participants are orange, those with fewer shift toward blue, those with zero are white. As participants attended more ORIAS programs, they tended to branch out into additional program types. In other words, as you look down and to the right across the matrix, you see individuals who are increasingly instrumental in forging interconnections between sub-groups within the ORIAS learning community. Table 3: Distribution of participants by number of program sub-types attended

# program sub-types # participants

1 101

2 130

3 44

4 19

5 12

6 5

Chart 4: Distribution of participants by number of programs and program types they attended

Number of types of programs 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 63 60 0 0 0 0

3 21 34 7 0 0 0

4 10 15 7 1 0 0

5 1 8 4 2 1 0

6 3 3 5 1 1 0

7 2 3 7 2 1 1

8 1 2 3 3 0 0

9 0 1 2 0 0 0

10 0 0 1 0 1 0

11 0 1 1 1 1 0

12 0 1 1 3 0 0

13 0 1 1 0 0 0

14 0 0 0 0 3 0

15 0 0 1 0 0 1

16 0 0 1 0 0 0

17 0 0 0 0 1 0

18 0 1 0 0 0 0

20 0 0 0 1 0 0

22 0 0 0 0 1 0

23 0 0 1 0 0 1

24 0 0 1 0 1 0

25 0 0 0 1 0 0

27 0 0 0 2 0 0

29 0 0 0 1 0 0

30 0 0 0 0 0 1

31 0 0 0 0 1 0

34 0 0 0 0 0 1

38 0 0 1 0 0 0

43 0 0 0 1 0 0

Nu

mb

er of p

rog

ram

s atten

de

d

Row 7 shows the distribution of

participants based on how many

different sub-types of programs they

attended. Two participants each

attended seven programs of the same

sub-type (perhaps seven Summer

Institutes, for example). Three

participants each split their attendance

over two program sub-types (maybe

four Summer Institutes and three

Workshops). On the far right, one

participant attended seven programs,

distributed across six sub-types.


13

Are certain types of events more likely than others to lead to long-term participation in ORIAS

programs? It is also useful to know if there is any correlation between the first type of ORIAS program a participant attended and the likelihood that they will take part in additional programming. Table 4 breaks down the full set of 1063 participants into cohorts based on the sub-type of ORIAS program they first attended. It then shows the average number of programs attended by each group of participants in that cohort and the percentage of the cohort who went on to attend at least one additional program. From top to bottom, program sub-types are listed in descending order by (approximate) contact-hours, with K-12 Summer Institutes featuring the most face-to-face contact between participants (18 – 30 hours) and Other Workshops featuring the least (2 – 3 hours). The table shows that Working Groups and the K-12 Summer Institutes are the most likely to act as entrées into longer-term engagement with the ORIAS community. Though structured differently, both types of programs provide opportunities for in-depth content learning interspersed with significant time for discussion and relationship-building. Table 4: Likelihood of attending additional programming by sub-type of first program

Sub-type of First Program # Participants Avg. # programs attended % who attended 2+ programs

K-12 Summer Institute 373 2.62 35%

All other Working Groups 132 3.59 39%

Community College Summer Institutes 106 1.87 24%

Humanities West Working Group 9 3 78%*

Reading Group Working Group 36 2.42 36%

UCBHSSP collaboration Workshop 36 1.17 8%

Hearst collaboration Workshop 13 1.54 15%*

PFA collaboration Workshop 2 1.5 50%*

Other Workshops 356 1.54 22%

*small sample size makes this data unreliable

At any given event, how many hours had each participant spent engaged in previous ORIAS

programming?

How much time did members of the ORIAS learning community spend with one another, and in which programs? The final two questions, taken together, seek to outline the composition of ORIAS gatherings and interactivity between participants across programs. The composition of each group of program participants indicates the possibility of cultural reproduction of the values and practices of the learning community. The time spent in shared activity with one another indicates the possibility for relationship-building. Visualizations of this data are available on observablehq.com in the form of two interactive infographics: Participation in ORIAS Programs

https://observablehq.com/d/bc6e977a9ec6e8e5


14

across Time7 and Network of ORIAS Program Participants8. These infographics make relationships across time and between individuals highly visible. Participation in ORIAS Programs across Time shows a chronological list of all known ORIAS programs from July 1998 (top) through July 2019 (bottom). Each dot represents a person who was present at that program and the color of the dot represents the number of hours of ORIAS programming that person had engaged in by the end of each program. The spectrum of each line of dots reveals the mix of newcomers (dark purple) and experienced ORIAS participants (yellow) in the room for that particular program. Hovering over a dot reveals the Participant ID and the number of hours of ORIAS programming to-date for an individual. Click on a dot to highlight every instance when that participant was present at an ORIAS program. Click on all the dots in a line to see when and where participants re-encountered one another. For example, clicking on all the dots in the second program in the series, History via Literature – 6th Grade, reveals each time individuals from that program re-encountered one another over a span of two decades. Select a program from the middle of the series and click on just the yellow and orange dots in a single line; this will reveal groups of individuals who engaged with each other in intellectual exploration regularly, over a period of several years. Along with interactions across time, this infographic suggests the process of cultural reproduction across ORIAS programs by showing the consistent intermixing of more and less-experienced ORIAS participants at the vast majority of events. The second infographic, Network of ORIAS Program Participants, displays relationships between people who attended two or more ORIAS programs together. Smaller, darker purple dots are people with minimal ORIAS experience and interaction. Dots that are larger and more yellow indicate participants who had increasing hours of participations and, therefore, spent more time interacting with other participants. Hovering over a dot will reveal Participant IDs and will highlight lines of connection to other participants. Click on a dot and pull it away from the center to see the full breadth of that individual’s connections within the network. This infographic is a visual depiction of how experienced ORIAS participants have knitted together the ORIAS learning community. The large yellow and orange dots seen here are those same individuals who occupy the lower right quadrant of Chart 4. Analysis of ORIAS records demonstrate that participants collectively comprise one large professional learning community with nodes of greater interaction defined by participation in sub-types of programs. The structure and content-focus of learning goals are co-created by repeat participants and the ORIAS Program Coordinator. This process of co-creation is the subject of the next section.

7 https://observablehq.com/d/bc6e977a9ec6e8e5 8 https://observablehq.com/d/f6689287ee8e5d3d


https://observablehq.com/d/f6689287ee8e5d3d


https://observablehq.com/d/f6689287ee8e5d3d


15

Participant Co-Construction of ORIAS Programming Participants in the ORIAS learning community have had a consistent, direct influence on ORIAS programming. The Program Coordinator engages in an iterative process of synthesizing periodic direction from the NRCs and the stated needs and interests of participating educators. Since participation in ORIAS programs is voluntary for teachers, it is unsurprising to find that their opinions are heavily weighted. Input from program participants strongly influenced the original menu of outreach activities, the focus of Working Groups, the types of resources ORIAS produces, the themes of Summer Institutes, and adaptations to changing circumstances. This strong participant influence is visible from the earliest records of ORIAS activities. When surveys and memos are considered alongside program offerings, it becomes clear that the learning community has always engaged in active co-construction of ORIAS programming.

Original Menu of Outreach Activities Between 1994 and 1996 teachers at Horace Mann middle school in San Francisco initiated a relationship with ORIAS, motivated by their interest in integrating more material about the Islamic World into their curriculum. This was one of a handful of pre-existing relationships the staff Program Coordinator inherited from her graduate student predecessor when she began the job in August 1997. Within a month of taking the job she met with the group at Horace Mann and their goals helped inform her construction of the larger ORIAS program. The teachers had already worked with the previous coordinator on multiple projects, they were already incorporating world literature into their courses (including the Sundiata epic), and they were struggling to make use of the internet as a new medium for instruction and interaction in class. In a memo from October 3, 1997, the new staff Program Coordinator reported to the NRCs at UC Berkeley:

“…We spoke with the computer lab teachers who are interested in integrating the student Islam web page part of the curriculum plan into their own classes…I went into this with a lot of doubts about how useful high technology really is in the classroom but I came away with the sense that the teachers see the internet realistically as one part of hands-on education and not a replacement for other traditional classroom techniques – i.e. they would still like to see some warm bodies from UC visit the classroom.” (Delattre, memo, October 3, 1997)

Within less than a year of this interaction, its effects on ORIAS programming were visible. ORIAS had established a website to make its resources available to teachers and was leveraging university resources to assist k-12 teachers in using the internet as a vehicle to internationalize their courses.


16

Working Groups A February 1998 memo from the Coordinator to the NRCs indicates that between October and February of the 97-98 academic year, ORIAS and the NRCs met to generate thematic ideas for the 1998 Summer Institute. One potential theme was a focus on “World History through literature/storytelling,” suggesting that the interests of teachers at Horace Mann middle school informed the University-level discussion. Following this brainstorming conversation at the University, the Coordinator sought feedback from district-level curriculum specialists and teachers in the Bay Area. She wrote, “So far the teachers have been enthusiastic about all three proposals. They are leaning towards literature since the new core configuration combines social science and English” (Delattre, memo, February, 1998). The 1998 Summer Institute for K-12 Teachers focused on History through Literature, an outcome that synthesized the stated interests of middle school teachers with direction from the NRCs. In March 1999, the Coordinator combined feedback from 1998 Summer Institute participants with input from teachers and the Social Studies curriculum specialist in Oakland to develop the first ORIAS Working Group:

“At the request of our Oakland administrative partners, we are introducing the 7th grade project with a series of two-hour meetings on the subject of sub-Saharan Africa and the Sundiata epic…These working sessions will serve to provide our IU [Interactive University] teacher team with an introduction to the African epic and a background in technology as applied to the social science classroom. The goal of the meetings is also to act as a focus group for ORIAS that will help guide and refine the next year’s history through literature 7th grade series and build a sustainable relationship for outreach to [Oakland] schools.” (Delattre, memo, March 1999)

In this Working Group, initially described as “a series of two-hour meetings,” ORIAS drew on input from across its growing learning community (Delattre, memo, March 1999). Teachers at Horace Mann were already experimenting with the use of websites, as well as the Sundiata epic and medieval Japanese tales. Participants at the 1998 Summer Institute had requested opportunities to learn about more world literature, especially from sub-Saharan Africa, Mesoamerica, and East Asia. The eventual Working Group program included sessions on Sundiata, Tale of the Heike, and Aztec and Mayan heroic narratives, among others. In meeting the requests of Oakland administrators, ORIAS also continued to construct its programming in alignment with the requests of its growing community of teacher-participants across districts. Later Working Groups continued to follow this model. Annually, participants in ORIAS Reading Groups collectively select books in an iterative process: the group selects a theme or number of topics that interest them, the Program Coordinator seeks book recommendations from experts associated with Area Studies Centers, then participants select a slate of books to read from among those suggested. Group members also occasionally suggest titles. The World History Online Cohort, formed in 2019, is a Working Group engaged in the process of constructing two semester-long online World History courses. The project originated in a conversation convened


17

by ORIAS at which repeat participants who teach in community colleges were asked to share their current needs. The discussion led directly to the co-design of the current project.

Production of ORIAS Resources Lesson plans are common products of outreach programming, though their form and function in each program can vary significantly. Are they units of study generated by campus offices or are they teacher-generated? Are they useful to their teacher-authors, or hasty thought-exercises akin to essays students are asked to write to practice writing mechanics and processes? This paper views lesson plan-writing as both a (potentially) engaging joint enterprise between participants and as a signal about the value of teacher-participants within the ORIAS learning community. In the first few years of programming, the Program Coordinator established a stance vis à vis lesson plan-creation in ORIAS programs. In a June 2000 memo, the Program Coordinator informed the group of NRCs:

“I don’t think curriculum units in the traditional sense are the best thing for us to write…Lengthy readers will probably be shelved. Alternatively, I think we should experiment with building curriculum modules which consist of informative small pieces that can be combined in different ways…After we create the initial pieces we can work with teachers during our institutes to develop lesson and assessment activities…What University scholars can best contribute to the professional teacher is advanced scholarship, research, and support (emphasis added).” (Delattre, memo, June 2000)

In other words, the Program Coordinator asserted an equal partnership between teacher-participants and University scholars in which each brought valued expertise to the process. In the same memo, the Program Coordinator describes how members of the recent Working Group remained engaged with ORIAS, working to establish the office as a source of early online resources for educators:

“With funding from the Interactive University I began posting class web pages for each of the [units studied by the Working Group]. I am currently working with two graduate students and two teachers on a template for digital curriculum that will be a model for future ways to distribute resources developed during teacher institutes.” (Delattre, memo, June 2000)

The Hero’s Journey Project, described above, was one of the earliest built-out sections of the ORIAS website and was reconstructed on the new site when it was rebuilt in 2015. The final site lists five contributing teachers, several of whom continued attending ORIAS programs over the next 10+ years. Participation in this Working Group led to deep engagement with the ORIAS professional learning community. Through their contributions to the ORIAS website and their ongoing participation in programs, these participants co-constructed the learning community and reproduced its culture across time.


18

Summer Institutes Beginning with the 1998 Summer Institute, ORIAS established the practice of soliciting attendee input about future programs. All subsequent surveys have included variants of the questions, “What did you find most/least useful about this program and why?” and “What topics would you like to see covered in the future?” 9 Following the practice established in 1998, responses to these questions have been used to inform programming decisions. Table 5 offers a single example of this. Here 2007 participant responses to a question are mapped onto subsequent programs. In the Programmatic Response column, “multiple” means that parts of multiple subsequent programs addressed this topic, but no entire program was constructed around that theme. Table 5: “What international topics would you like to see covered in the future?” matched to future Summer Institute Themes

Request (* = +1 requests) Programmatic Response current issues multiple

international relations*** 2009 European Union Teachers Institute

architecture 2009 Visible Power - Art in National Life; 2017 Architecture: Space, Power and Community

migration through history* 2010 Migration and Labor in the EU; 2013 The Role of Travelers in World History

Latin America* multiple; 2008/09 Reading Group – Central America and the Caribbean theme

human rights 2008 Exploring Humanitarian Law Workshop; 2009 Exploring Humanitarian Law Workshop

food** 2014 Foodways in World History

music and art** 2009 Visible Power - Art in National Life; 2016 Pop Culture in World History

reform movements multiple

everyday life in history 2011 Absent Voices - Experience of Common Life in World History

ancient civilizations multiple

war and peace multiple

environment* 2008 Pestilence and Public Health; 2017 The View from the Sea: Oceans in World History

religion** multiple

literature/mythology* 2008 History via Literature Working Group; 2015 The World Through Literature

national or imperial identity 2009 Visible Power - Art in National Life; 2010 Causes and Consequences of Imperialism in World History

economics* multiple; 2009/10 Reading Group – Transnational Transgressions theme

multinational companies 2010 Energy Through the Ages Workshop; 2011/12 Reading Group – Trade, Finance, and the Global Economy theme

technology* 2012 The Role of Technology in Shaping Human History

period from 1915 - 1940 multiple

icons 2016 Pop Culture in World History

law 2008 A Look at Justinian and Roman Law Workshop; 2011 Creating Modern Law Workshop

9 Surveys were modified in 1998, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2015, 2016, 2019. Updates included minor revisions of wording, additions and subtractions of questions, and changes in digital survey platforms.


19

(K-12 Institute Participants, participant surveys, July 13, 2007)

As the table shows, within three years ORIAS had accessed various University resources to construct programs addressing the majority of participant requests.10 These included Summer Institutes, Working Groups, and Workshops. To the extent possible, ORIAS also revisited topics of interest to new participants, using a different lens to make them interesting to long-time members of the learning community. The programs are co-constructed in that they are a synthesis of participant requests, advice from Area Studies experts, and grant requirements.

Participant Input on Changing Circumstances In 2009 ORIAS sought feedback about how participants wanted ORIAS to respond to likely upcoming budget cuts, asking, “If we have to cut some elements of the institute for budget constraints what would you prefer?” (Participant Survey, 2009) Five options were offered: dropping credit option [teachers being able to get professional development credit through UC Berkeley]; dropping lunches; dropping materials for auditors [people who attended without seeking professional development credit]; charging audit fees; a shorter program [3 days as compared to 5]. Thirty-four participants responded to the question, with some participants selecting more than one option. Table 6: “If we have to cut some elements of the institute for budget constraints what would you prefer?” by number of participant votes.

Option # of votes drop credit option 6

drop lunches 17

drop materials for auditors 7

charge audit fees 11 shorter program 17

(K-12 Institute Participants, participant survey, July 31, 2009)

Respondents also made written suggestions, including: “modify several [elements] rather than cut one” and “scan materials as PDF instead of paper.” Shortly thereafter, when budget reductions required ORIAS to modify its programming, participant responses helped guide changes. Increasingly, materials were provided to everyone in electronic form, with paper handouts becoming the exception rather than the rule. Audit students were never required to pay a fee. Previously ORIAS had offered scholarships to teachers who help cover the cost of credits; this funding decreased but did not disappear. Most significantly, in 2012 Summer Institutes for K-12 Teachers were cut from 5 to 3 days. The NRCs continued to fund lunches for teachers at the Summer Institute. Though responses to this question indicated a willingness to give up the group lunch in order to maintain needed academic resources, in their annual survey

10 Relevant Humanities West programs are not included in this list because ORIAS does not control HW programming decisions.


20

comments teachers consistently articulate an appreciation for the lunch. Participants clearly perceive it as a form of hospitality and community-building and, as such, it remains central to the emotional experience of participating in ORIAS programs. In 2015 ORIAS moved to a new office space with a smaller conference room making gatherings of more than 30 participants difficult. Survey responses in 2015 and 2016 indicated K-12 Summer Institute participants felt the space was physically cramped. The Program Coordinator responded by scheduling portions of program days at other sites on and near campus to alleviate the problem while still keeping the summer program open to as many educators as possible. ORIAS memos, web archives, and archived surveys support the conclusion that ORIAS participants constituted an engaged professional learning community. Multiple office practices originated from participant suggestions and requests, participants were (and are) treated as professionals with acknowledged expertise, programs regularly provide participants with opportunities to take part in communal knowledge-construction and problem-solving, and the products of their work are publicly valued on the ORIAS website. The last section of the paper uses three short narratives to examine how participation in the learning community led educators to internationalize their own and others’ teaching.

Participant Narratives Narrative descriptions of individual professional learning trajectories connect participation in ORIAS programs to its broader professional effects. The three examples here describe markedly different models of interaction within the learning community. The first shows how individual participants have collaborated with the ORIAS office to internationalize other educators’ teaching. The second demonstrates the deep social and emotional connections some participants develop with the community. The third elucidates how participants’ relationships with the ORIAS office and with one another change as they grow professionally. Participant 14811 Participant 148 was one of the educators at Horace Mann Middle School who met with the ORIAS Program Coordinator in August, 1997. He came to ORIAS with a pre-existing interest in the West African Sundiata epic, Ibn Battuta’s travels, and other topics in the broader Islamic World. Most of the programs he chose to attend reflected his interest in these topics. He broadened his knowledge through three K-12 Summer Institutes (1998, 2011, 2013), two Humanities West Programs in 2014 (focused on Rome and Baghdad), one year in a Reading Group, and two additional workshops. ORIAS records show that he spent 92 hours attending programs with other participants, but the resources he produced indicates much more extensive (unrecorded) interaction.

11 Participants are referred to by their number in the ORIAS database.


21

According to an interview with Participant 148, ORIAS was particularly valuable to him because it provided him with technological resources related to website construction and access to photographs from the University’s architectural library (Participant 148, phone interview, February 26, 2020). This enabled him to build online resources to share with colleagues and students. He was one of the teachers who worked to construct The Hero’s Journey Project and he also built a constellation of web resources that were not officially associated with ORIAS. Without a doubt, his most significant contribution to the ORIAS community was The Travels of Ibn Battuta, a web resource that is now part of the larger ORIAS site. In 1998, Participant 148 was already in communication with Ross Dunn, author of The Adventures of Ibn Battuta, about the creation of a website based on his research. Participant 148 wrote the text of the site, while the ORIAS Program Coordinator provided access to images, technological guidance, editing, hosting, and publicizing of the site. Over the next 17 years the site was co-revised multiple times (Participant 148, phone interview, February 26, 2020; Delattre, phone interview, February 26, 2020). At present, The Travels of Ibn Battuta receives over 250,000 visits each year. In 2019, a group of students at a high school in Tangier, Morocco (where Ibn Battuta’s tomb is located), used the site as research for a short film in which they asked locals near the tomb what they knew about the history of the explorer.12 Participant 148 is one of a subset of participants whose involvement has focused closely on the ORIAS office itself. Like them, he finds intellectual and professional fulfillment in the process of sharing his own learning online, in the form of classroom resources. ORIAS has supported these educators with access to scholarly and technological expertise and publicity. At the same time, the office has benefitted tremendously from their work, extending its influence to teachers far beyond the ORIAS learning community.

Participant 1362 Participant 1362 is a high school English and Social Studies teacher who entered the ORIAS learning community through the 2009 K-12 Summer Institute. Her survey response indicated that her mother (also a teacher) told her about the event. In answer to “What did you find most useful about this program and why?” she responded:

“I leave here wanting to be a better teacher. I feel full of new ideas and energy, and learn about things I never would have been exposed to otherwise. And – frankly – these summer institutes don’t just make me a better teacher; they make me a better person.” (Participant 1362, participant survey, July 31, 2009)

She went on to attend a further seven K-12 Summer Institutes (2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2019), as well as three Humanities West programs (2010, 2011, 2019) and three additional workshops, for a total of 182 hours of ORIAS programming. She has attended almost all of these events with her mother, an elementary school teacher. As her comments above

12 https://youtu.be/_FHqhZg89-Q

https://youtu.be/_FHqhZg89-Q

https://youtu.be/_FHqhZg89-Q


22

suggest, she is attracted to ORIAS as a space for learning sees personal and professional growth as interconnected processes. The survey after the 2019 K-12 Summer Institute asked repeat participants, “Please share some examples of specific content from previous ORIAS programs that you have brought into your teaching.” Participant 1362 wrote a very long response, excerpted here:

“A lot of times, they are oblique interjections. For example, a very long time ago… a woman talked about her experiences in a rural village - I think it was in India but I'm not sure. She talked about how the American/Western frame of reference had to be adapted for the small community she was in. So even though she came from a large city, she realized that she had to preface things that were common in her life with, "in my village...." Once she started to use that phrase, the members of the community felt much more receptive to her stories about the West. She said it made her really think about globalization, because so many of her statements really were about broad cultural norms in Western or American culture. So I have shared that story with my students, and said what I just said. Because it is a good anecdote for explaining both cross-cultural understanding and some aspects of globalization… … It wasn't a full-class thing, but a really special moment I had in my class two years ago was when a Persian student was talking about what he would want to name his kids, and he said, "my top name would be Rostom" and I said, "Oh, like in The Shahnameh!?" and he said, "yes! Ms. Aracic, you are the first teacher in my entire 13 years in public education who has ever even mentioned Persian literature to me. You don't know how meaningful it is to me that you just said that." He had been a challenging student at times, but after that, he was totally different towards both me and the class. I should have known about The Shahnameh to begin with, but I didn't. ORIAS taught me about that and made it memorable with the shadow-puppet events… … I had a sublime personal moment in the early years of my first child. The participants of ORIAS that year were almost all women. Edda L. Fields-Black talked about rice cultivation in the slavery-era American Southeast and in some traditional West African communities, drawing the lines between the two and also arguing and supporting the idea that the cultivation of rice had a certain cruelty in it for a few specific reasons, and how that could be a parable about exploitation in slavery in general. She had talked about how women in these West African villages got what I could only think of as a few months of maternity leave, and about how collectivism/private ownership worked there, and about the traditions of male-hood or female-hood were passed down. I felt in that room this community of women who were also - in their American way - going through some of the same human phases of life and had the same social needs as these women in West Africa; it felt like my current life experience of having recently having had a baby was my going through some universal human experience. She was an amazing speaker. But that was also an intense personal experience for me.” (Participant 1362, participant survey, June 28, 2019)


23

The participant describes her experience of ORIAS programs in terms that blend new knowledge, pedagogy, and emotional connection to her students and her fellow participants. Other parts of her response identified ways she used what she learned in specific lessons, but the majority of her comments were like those reproduced here. When asked why they attend ORIAS programs, repeat participants often blend references to intellectual stimulation, usefulness of the material, personal connections to students, and feelings of belonging.

Participant 1095 Participant 1095 was a middle school social studies teacher when she first attended an ORIAS program. Her entrée into the community was a 2002 Working Group, Scripts, Spices and Stories: Mapping Themes in the History Curriculum. This program, which investigated early writing systems, literature, and trans-regional trade, was a collaboration between ORIAS and the Bay Area Global Education Program. This participant went on to attend five K-12 Summer Institutes (2003, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009) interspersed with participation in several more Working Groups (2004, 2005, 2008), and a 2006 Workshop focused on teaching about Asia. On her survey at the end of the 2003 Summer Institute, Participant 1095 wrote:

“I think the most useful aspects of this program were the talks that were, on the surface, the “least” useful (in terms of the content standards and what we teach). I like the “messy stuff” that [presenter] Jonathan Lipman referred to. I have no idea how I will use this right now and that’s fine.” (Participant 1095, participant survey, August 1, 2003)

On the same survey, when asked, “…what would you like to see in a teacher’s program on international studies?” she responded, “More opportunities during the school year for in-services using this model!” (ibid) Participant 1095 stepped away from ORIAS programming between Fall 2009 and Fall 2015, during which time she became a district-level History-Social Science curriculum specialist for a large San Francisco Bay Area district. In 2015, in this position, she reached out to ORIAS for help with a district-wide history-focused writing assessment which was eventually co-constructed in collaboration with the office. Since 2015 she has attended two K-12 Summer Institutes (2018, 2019) and was a founding member of the East Bay Reading Group, which she has attended since its inception (2015/16, 2016/17, 2017/18, 2018/19). She is a regular participant at the Speakers Bureau Draft Talks (2016, 2017, 2018), during which experienced teachers provide feedback to graduate students who are preparing talks for middle and high school classrooms, and an attendee at several workshops in collaboration with the Hearst Museum and Pacific Film Archive (2018). As of June 2019, Participant 1095 had attended 312 hours of ORIAS programming. Though attendance at ORIAS programs is not mandatory for teachers in this (or any) district, Participant 1095 encourages teachers in her district to attend ORIAS programs, both to keep


24

them engaged and to help them build content mastery. Through this mentoring, she has brought new repeat participants into all of the ORIAS programs she attends and also facilitated the application of several district teachers for a Fulbright trip to Morocco, led by the UC Berkeley Center for Middle East Studies. Her close relationship to the ORIAS office has enabled her to leverage scholarly resources at the University for a working group of middle school social studies teachers within her district. This district-based group (whose meetings are not in the database as an ORIAS program) temporarily worked with the Program Coordinator in 2017 to design an artifact-based unit on Latin America. This unit was the inspiration for the new 2018 ORIAS program called How to Read an Object, plus three of the teachers who were part of that district-based working group have become regular participants at ORIAS programs. Once again, educator voices strongly influenced the construction of ORIAS programs. Participant 1095’s ongoing engagement suggests that the ORIAS learning community is flexible enough to accommodate educators changing needs as they grow professionally. The learning community acts as a space for positive interaction for educators at different places in their careers and different levels within one institution. More than a decade after Participant 1095’s 2003 survey responses, she used her position to make ORIAS resources available during paid professional development time within the district. This is a program impact that only becomes visible when the focus of study is the educators themselves and the time frame is years (or decades) rather than months.

Conclusions This analysis demonstrates that ORIAS office practices and programs fostered an ongoing learning community that provided educators the support and resources to grow professionally. The community facilitated the inclusion of teachers with diverse needs and interests and served participants in their professional growth over periods of several years. While 752 individuals each attended a single ORIAS program, a subgroup of 311 participated multiple times, with some attending regularly for periods of over a decade. By analyzing its database and its archived data, ORIAS is able to better understand how this learning community came to be, what practices foster it, and its role in achieving ORIAS’ mission. This paper offers insights into how organizations attempting to internationalize education (or otherwise change educators’ practice) might actively foster a professional learning community. There is a clear correlation between the length of time participants spend with one another at their initial ORIAS program and their likelihood of attending future programming. This suggests that resources aimed at producing engaging Summer Institutes and Working Groups work to maintain and grow the professional learning community. Responsiveness to discussions and survey feedback also seems instrumental in supporting a professional learning community. Participants who see their own suggestions fairly quickly have good reason to attend future events and (accurately) perceive that they are valued voices within the learning community. Finally, offering multiple types of programs creates an environment in which participants can grow and explore while remaining within the larger learning community.


25

References

Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., & Squire, K. (2002). Developing an empirical account of a community of practice: Characterizing the essential tensions. The journal of the learning sciences, 11(4), 489-542.

De Laat, M., Vrieling, E., & van den Beemt, A. (2017). Facilitation of social learning in teacher education: the ‘Dimensions of Social Learning Framework’. In Communities of Practice (pp. 153-174). Springer, Singapore.

Finkelstein, M. J., Walker, E., & Chen, R. (2013). The American faculty in an age of globalization: Predictors of internationalization of research content and professional networks. Higher Education, 66(3), 325-340.

Garrett, R., Citkowicz, M., & Williams, R. (2019). How responsive is a teacher’s classroom practice to intervention? A meta-analysis of randomized field studies. Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 106-137.

Kensington-Miller, B. (2017). Catalyst: Developing a Community of Practice for Supporting New Academics. In Communities of Practice (pp. 449-469). Springer, Singapore

Knight, J. (2004). Internationalization remodeled: Definition, approaches, and rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1), 5-31.

Lalor, B., & Abawi, L. (2014). Professional learning communities enhancing teacher experiences in international schools. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 9(1), 76-86.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press.

Mercieca, B. (2017). What is a community of practice?. In Communities of practice (pp. 3-25). Springer, Singapore.

Owen, S. (2016). Professional learning communities: Building skills, reinvigorating the passion, and nurturing teacher wellbeing and “flourishing” within significantly innovative schooling contexts. Educational Review, 68(4), 403-419.

Poole, C. M., & Russell III, W. B. (2015). Educating for global perspectives: A study of teacher preparation programs. Journal of Education, 195(3), 41-52.

Research IT. (n.d.). Interactive University Project. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from https://research-it.berkeley.edu/projects/interactive-university-project


26

Sanderson, G. (2011). Internationalisation and teaching in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(5), 661-676.

Sanderson, G. (2008). A foundation for the internationalization of the academic self. Journal of Studies in International Education, 12(3), 276-307.

Takahashi, S. (2011). Co-constructing efficacy: A “communities of practice” perspective on teachers’ efficacy beliefs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(4), 732-741.

Woodruff, G., Martin, K., & O’Brien, M. K. (2015). Internationalizing teaching and learning: Transforming teachers, transforming students. Internationalizing higher education (pp. 61-86) Brill Sense.


27

Table 1: ORIAS Events, Event Types, and Duration This table breaks down events to their most granular level, indicating individual meetings of Working Groups, where possible.

Title StartDate EndDate EventType Hours

History Through Literature 13-Jul-98 17-Jul-98 k-12 Institute 30

History via Literature - 6th Grade 09-Jan-99 01-May-99 Working Group 12

Medieval Travelers 19-Jul-99 23-Jul-99 k-12 Institute 30

History via Literature - 7th Grade 09-Jan-00 01-May-00 Working Group 12

Ancient Roots Modern States 31-Jul-00 04-Aug-00 k-12 Institute 30

Comparative Religion via Art and Architecture 21-Oct-00 17-Mar-01 Working Group 30

Summer Research in Southeast Asia 01-Jun-01 01-Aug-01 other 30

Cultural Representations in Children's Literature 30-Jul-01 03-Aug-01 k-12 Institute 30

MESA Conference 2001 18-Nov-01 18-Nov-01 Workshop 4

Mapping Themes in World History WG 26-Jan-02 27-Apr-02 Working Group 17

Role of Food in World History 29-Jul-02 02-Aug-02 k-12 Institute 30

Current Conflicts in Islamic World WG 19-Oct-02 26-Apr-03 Working Group 11

Comparative Mythology - Hero's Journey 14-Dec-02 03-May-03 Working Group 12

Africa and the African Diaspora 16-Jun-03 17-Jun-03 Workshop 15

Religion in World History 28-Jul-03 01-Aug-03 k-12 Institute 30

Changes in Japan Security Policy 17-Nov-03 17-Nov-03 Workshop 2

World Poetry 31-Jan-04 24-Apr-04 Working Group 12

Rule of Law-Human Rights in World History 26-Jul-04 30-Jul-04 k-12 Institute 30

Middle East Studies Assn Conference 21-Nov-04 21-Nov-04 Workshop 2

Constructing Identity - Comparative Short Fiction 15-Jan-05 09-Apr-05 Working Group 15

Mithila Painting Workshop 20-Mar-05 20-Mar-05 Workshop 2

Cultural Interaction through Personal Narratives 25-Jul-05 29-Jul-05 k-12 Institute 30

Chinese Folk Art, Festivals, Symbolism 02-Oct-05 02-Oct-05 Workshop 3

World Music in the Classroom 13-Nov-05 04-Feb-06 Working Group 15

Remembering Alta California 26-Jun-06 28-Jun-06 Workshop 18

Encountering Nature in World History 24-Jul-06 28-Jul-06 k-12 Institute 30

National Council for Teaching About Asia 2006 02-Dec-06 02-Dec-06 Workshop 30

The Making of Cities 09-Jul-07 13-Jul-07 k-12 Institute 30


28

Voltaire via Humanities West 05-Oct-07 06-Oct-07 Working Group: Humanities West 7

National Council for Teaching About Asia 2007 02-Dec-07 02-Dec-07 Workshop 30

History via Literature - Hebrew Bible 27-Jan-08 27-Jan-08 Working Group 2

History via Literature - Panchatantra 10-Feb-08 10-Feb-08 Working Group 3

Genghis Khan via Humanities West 22-Feb-08 23-Feb-08 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Robbins - A Look at Justinian and Roman Law 29-Mar-08 29-Mar-08 Workshop 2

Pericles via Humanities West 02-May-08 03-May-08 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Pestilence and Public Health in World History 28-Jul-08 01-Aug-08 k-12 Institute 30

Exploring Humanitarian Law 2008 14-Aug-08 15-Aug-08 Workshop 6

WHRG_08-09 15-Oct-08 15-Oct-08 Working Group: Reading Group 2

WHRG_08-09 18-Nov-08 18-Nov-08 Working Group: Reading Group 2

History via Literature - 1001 Nights 06-Dec-08 06-Dec-08 Working Group 3

WHRG_08-09 17-Dec-08 17-Dec-08 Working Group: Reading Group 2

History via Literature - Jataka (Buddhist) Tales 10-Jan-09 10-Jan-09 Working Group 3

WHRG_08-09 17-Jan-09 17-Jan-09 Working Group: Reading Group 2

DigTVClassroom 01-Feb-09 01-Feb-09 Workshop 1

India via Humanities West 27-Feb-09 28-Feb-09 Working Group: Humanities West 7

WHRG_08-09 11-Mar-09 11-Mar-09 Working Group: Reading Group 2

European Union Teachers Institute 04-Apr-09 04-Apr-09 Workshop 4

Napoloen via Humanities West 17-Apr-09 18-Apr-09 Working Group: Humanities West 7

WHRG_08-09 22-Apr-09 22-Apr-09 Working Group: Reading Group 2

Visible Power - Art in National Life 27-Jul-09 31-Jul-09 k-12 Institute 30

Copernicus via Humanities West 02-Oct-09 03-Oct-09 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Exploring Humanitarian Law 2009 07-Nov-09 07-Nov-09 Workshop 3

WHRG_09-10 21-Dec-09 21-Apr-10 Working Group: Reading Group 12

Energy Through the Ages 23-Jan-10 23-Jan-10 Workshop 4

Alexander the Great via Humanities West 05-Feb-10 06-Feb-10 Working Group: Humanities West 7

GSE (unknown event) 24-Feb-10 24-Feb-10 Workshop 1

Migration and Labor in the EU 06-Mar-10 06-Mar-10 Workshop 4

Voyage of the Kanrin Maru 17-Apr-10 17-Apr-10 Workshop 1

Florence via Humanities West 30-Apr-10 01-May-10 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Causes and Consequences of Imperialism 26-Jul-10 30-Jul-10 k-12 Institute 30

WHRG_10-11 20-Oct-10 20-Apr-11 Working Group: Reading Group 12


29

Venice via Humanities West 22-Oct-10 23-Oct-10 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Teaching About Africa - African Stud Assn Wkshp 20-Nov-10 20-Nov-10 Workshop 4

Toledo via Humanities West 04-Feb-11 05-Feb-11 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Foodways in the EU and the US 12-Feb-11 12-Feb-11 Workshop 3

Robbins - Creating Modern Law 12-Mar-11 12-Mar-11 Workshop 2

Crete via Humanities West 29-Apr-11 30-Apr-11 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Regional to Global 27-Jun-11 29-Jun-11 CC Institute 14

Absent Voices - Common Life in World History 25-Jul-11 29-Jul-11 k-12 Institute 30


Notre Dame via Humanities West 04-Nov-11 05-Nov-11 Working Group: Humanities West 7


Syllabus Workshop 02-Dec-11 02-Dec-11 CC Institute 3



Ming China via Humanities West 10-Feb-12 10-Feb-12 Working Group: Humanities West 7

WHRG_11-12 16-Feb-12 16-Feb-12 Working Group: Reading Group 2


Robbins - California's Legal Heritage 15-Apr-12 15-Apr-12 Workshop 2

Pompeii via Humanities West 27-Apr-12 27-Apr-12 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Historical Thinking and Global Studies 29-May-12 31-May-12 CC Institute 5

Technology in Human History 23-Jul-12 25-Jul-12 k-12 Institute 18


Paris via Humanities West 19-Oct-12 20-Oct-12 Working Group: Humanities West 7





The Restoration via Humanities West 22-Feb-13 23-Feb-13 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Using Primary Sources 02-Mar-13 02-Mar-13 CC Institute 3


Bernini via Humanities West 25-Apr-13 26-Apr-13 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Travelers in World History 22-Jul-13 24-Jul-13 k-12 Institute 18

Wolrd History at the College Level 29-Jul-13 30-Jul-13 CC Institute 12


30


Verdi via Humanities West 01-Nov-13 02-Nov-13 Working Group: Humanities West 7




One-Day Arabic Workshop for HS Students 25-Jan-14 25-Jan-14 Workshop 3


Constantinople via Humanities West 28-Feb-14 01-Mar-14 Working Group: Humanities West 7

California World History Association Conference 28-Feb-14 02-Mar-14 Workshop 15


Baghdad via Humanities West 25-Apr-14 26-Apr-14 Working Group: Humanities West 7

National History in Global Context 06-Jun-14 07-Jun-14 CC Institute 12

Foodways in World History 21-Jul-14 23-Jul-14 k-12 Institute 18

Rome via Humanities West 24-Oct-14 25-Oct-14 Working Group: Humanities West 7



Charlemagne via Humanities West 27-Feb-15 28-Feb-15 Working Group: Humanities West 7



The Great War via Humanities West 01-May-15 02-May-15 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Continuities and Change 05-Jun-15 06-Jun-15 CC Institute 12

The World Through Literature 20-Jul-15 22-Jul-15 k-12 Institute 18


Dawn of Italian Renaissance via Humanities West 23-Oct-15 24-Oct-15 Working Group: Humanities West 7


Shadowlight Rehearsal Visit #1 21-Nov-15 21-Nov-15 Workshop 2

Dinner w/a Historian - Expansion of Islamic Empire 01-Dec-15 01-Dec-15 Workshop 2

Shadowlight Rehearsal Visit #2 05-Dec-15 05-Dec-15 Workshop 2


Shadowlight Rehearsal Visit #3 12-Dec-15 05-Dec-15 Workshop 2


Shadowlight Show 16-Jan-16 19-Jan-16 Workshop 1

EB_WHRG_15-16 27-Jan-16 27-Jan-16 Working Group: Reading Group 2


31



EB_WHRG_15-16 24-Feb-16 24-Feb-16 Working Group: Reading Group 2

Shakespeare & Cervantes via Humanities West 26-Feb-16 27-Feb-16 Working Group: Humanities West 7


EB_WHRG_15-16 23-Mar-16 23-Mar-16 Working Group: Reading Group 2

Pearls on a String 09-Apr-16 09-Apr-16 Workshop 2


The Celts via Humanities West 06-May-16 07-May-16 Working Group: Humanities West 7

WHRG_15-16 11-May-16 11-May-16 Working Group: Reading Group 2

Women in World History 03-Jun-16 04-Jun-16 CC Institute 12

Pop Culture 18-Jul-16 20-Jul-16 k-12 Institute 18

EB_WHRG_16-17 05-Oct-16 05-Oct-16 Working Group: Reading Group 2


Speakers Bureau Draft Talks 16/17 26-Oct-16 26-Oct-16 Workshop 2

EB_WHRG_16-17 01-Nov-16 01-Nov-16 Working Group: Reading Group 2

Vienna on the Verge via Humanities West 04-Nov-16 05-Nov-16 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Speakers Bureau Open House 10-Nov-16 10-Nov-17 Workshop 1


EB_WHRG_16-17 07-Dec-16 07-Dec-16 Working Group: Reading Group 2





Islamic Paper Making 11-Feb-17 11-Feb-17 Workshop 2

Viking Raiders, Traders...via Humanities West 24-Feb-17 25-Feb-17 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Islamophobia Talk @ Oakland Unified 27-Feb-17 27-Feb-17 District Collaboration 2



Cleopatra: The Last Pharaoh via Humanities West 05-May-17 06-May-17 Working Group: Humanities West 7

EB_WHRG_16-17 10-May-17 10-May-17 Working Group: Reading Group 2


Environmental History 02-Jun-17 03-Jun-17 CC Institute 12


32

Summer of Love via Humanities West 10-Jun-17 10-Jun-17 Working Group: Humanities West 2

The View from the Sea - Oceans in World History 26-Jun-17 28-Jun-17 k-12 Institute 18


Speakers Bureau Draft Talks 17/18 19-Oct-17 19-Oct-17 Workshop 2


Norman Sicily via Humanities West 03-Nov-17 04-Nov-17 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Central American History and Identity 07-Nov-17 07-Nov-17 District Collaboration 2

Challeneges of CC Teaching - discussion 17-Nov-17 17-Nov-17 Workshop 2



500 Years of Resistance - Film Viewing 06-Dec-17 06-Dec-17 Workshop 1




Ancient Greeks via Humanities West 23-Feb-18 24-Feb-18 Working Group: Humanities West 7

How to Read Film: Year of the Pig 28-Feb-18 28-Mar-18 Workshop 2



Sites of Encounter through Artifacts: Calicut 14-Apr-18 14-Apr-18 Workshop 3


EB_WHRG_17-18 27-Apr-18 27-Apr-18 Working Group: Reading Group 2

Lucrezia's Family via Humanities West 04-May-18 05-May-18 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Games Symposium w/UCBHSSP 14-May-18 16-May-18 Workshop 6

Migration and Diaspora 31-May-18 02-Jun-18 CC Institute 18

Architecture - Space, Power, and Community 25-Jun-18 27-Jun-18 k-12 Institute 18

How to Read an Object: Timbuktu 06-Oct-18 06-Oct-18 Workshop 3



Late Czarist Russia via Humanities West 02-Nov-18 03-Nov-18 Working Group: Humanities West 7

Speakers Bureau Draft Talks 18/19 08-Nov-18 08-Nov-18 Workshop 2

EB_WHRG_18-19 09-Nov-18 09-Nov-18 Working Group: Reading Group 2


How to Read a Film: Zero for Conduct 17-Nov-18 17-Nov-18 Workshop 2


33




Community College Online World History Cohort 19-Jan-19 01-Jan-20 Working Group 24

EB_WHRG_18-19 08-Feb-19 08-Feb-19 Working Group: Reading Group 2


Creating Leonardo via Humanities West 22-Feb-19 23-Feb-19 Working Group: Humanities West 7


How to Read an Object: Ancient Egypt 16-Mar-19 16-Mar-19 Workshop 3

Bay Area/South Africa 27-Mar-19 27-Mar-19 Workshop 6

EB_WHRG_18-19 05-Apr-19 05-Apr-19 Working Group: Reading Group 2


How to Read a Film: The Search 28-Apr-19 28-Apr-19 Workshop 2

Bronze Age Greece via Humanities West 03-May-19 04-May-19 Working Group: Humanities West 7


Global Rise of National Populism 31-May-19 01-Jun-19 CC Institute 12

Body and Identity 26-Jun-19 28-Jun-19 k-12 Institute 18

Documents

Internationalizing Education through Maintenance of …...Internationalizing Education through Maintenance of Teacher Learning Communities Shane Carter University of California, Berkeley