Senior Thesis Submitted to Carol Brandt and Thomas Ilgen for Honors consideration Bachelor of Arts in Global Communication

Studies Pitzer College, CA April 27, 2007

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


To Ammachi and Appachan: “Never forget your mother, your motherland or your mother tongue” — A Kerala Proverb

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………..4 Introduction: Locating the Self in the International Education Debate…………………5-8 Chapter 1: The History and Development of Study Abroad in the United States 1.1 In the Beginning, Students Traveled to Learn……………………………..9-12 1.2 What is Public Diplomacy and how did it develop? …………………….13-17 1.3 Important Milestones for Public Diplomacy in the US…………………..18-19 1.4 The Development of CIEE……………………………………………….20-22 1.5 Kennedy’s Peace Corps Takes Flight…………………………………….22-23 1.6 Development of the Rationale for Study Abroad………………………...24-26 Chapter 2: In an Ideal World, Everyone Would Study Abroad 2.1 Beyond the Oceans — the Year of Study Abroad………………………..27-31 2.2President Trombley Sets the Bar High for Pitzer…………………………32-33 2.3 Where and how did we Begin? The WASC Report of 1998……………..33-36 2.4 Intercultural Understanding and the Educational Objectives.......………..37-38 2.5 Pitzer vs. the Nation: Comparing Pitzer to National Statistics…………...38-40 Chapter 3: The Pitzer Model for the Pitzer Program 3.1 Evidence of the Impact of Studying Abroad …………………………….42-44 3.2 The Development of the Pitzer Rationale………………………………...45-47 3.3 The Last Two Phases of Development……………………………….......48-50 3.3 The Development of the Exchange Model……………………………….50-53 3.4 The Theoretical Aspect of Intercultural Education…...………………….54-58 Chapter Four: Developing a Responsible Exchange — Kerala 4.1 The Importance of Pre-Departure Planning………………………………59-61 4.2 Kerala Overview: The Land of Coconuts…………....…………………...62-64 4.3 Implementation of an enhanced exchange program in Kerala..………….64-68 Afterward: Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Development………….69-70 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………….71-74 Appendix A: History of Pitzer College External Studies Programs …………………75-77 Appendix B: Senate Resolution 308 …………………………………………………78-80 Appendix C: Senior Survey 2002-2006………………………………………………….81

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge those who have helped me through my various academic pursuits, co-curricular activities, and work on and off-campus. There have been many people who helped guide me to where I am today, and I thank you for your guidance however small it may have been. First and foremost, I would like to thank those who have helped lead me to Pitzer College and have supported me through both the transition from Peninsula School to Palo Alto High School as well as the greater leap from Paly to Pitzer College: Jerry Hearn, my eighth grade teacher and unfailing editor; Paul Kandell, my journalism teacher; Jane Benson, another editor but also a second mother; Kathleen Flynn an amazing woman who never makes me feel I am doing too much (because I do little compared to her) and Care Auntie for asking the flower essences for guidance and keeping me balanced. A sincere thank you goes to those who have helped me over the last four years, not only with my thesis but with coming to a better understanding of what life and academia is, and what it should be about: Carol Brandt, for reading and rereading Fulbright's Watson's and my thesis, not to mention all those committees that would be lost without her; Kebokile Dengvu-Zvobgo, my on-campus mother and friend without your input and unfailing smile I may not have made it through; Carmen Fought, for bringing linguistics to life – literally – and encouraging me while also listening to me gripe; Tom Ilgen, for taking us to Model UN in Boston every year and for sharing advice and care all along the way; Joe Parker, for helping me to see the world for what it really is (a matrix of domination) even at glorious Pitzer, while challenging me to do what I can, ever so slightly, to change it; and Rachel Vandervorst without your love and support I would be left hungry. A special thanks also goes to my friends and extended family as well, through all walks of life (Peninsula, Paly and Pitzer to NSLC, Bristol and Botswana), who have supported me through good times and bad, while challenging me all along the way. My host-families, flat-mates and language teachers have inspired me to take on this topic as my thesis – for better or worse. Additionally, The David Bloom ’85 Memorial Scholarship, The President’s Council Scholarship, and The University Club of Palo Alto scholarship have all helped make my Pitzer education possible. Finally, I would like to thank my sister and my mother for keeping their cell phones on, and answering them almost whenever I call – night and day. Thank you for raising me, loving me, sustaining me, guiding me and always being there for me, words don’t do justice to express my gratitude to either one of you.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Introduction: Locating the Self in the International Education Debate Politicians and teachers alike have emphasized the importance of understanding our increasingly interconnected world by acknowledging the effects of globalization and interdependence. This may be done by encouraging higher education to take a more proactive role in teaching students to develop international competencies. Universities around the world see the educational system as one that “prepares students to live and work in an international and multicultural society” as essential to the future.1 Study abroad programs have the potential to be instruments for the creation of a more peaceful world and tools for governments do carry out public diplomacy, but for programs to be successful they must be able to facilitate intercultural understanding. Based on my research and experience, the Pitzer model is an effective method that should be replicated to create new programs in different parts of the world. However, this model must also change and adapt to the present circumstances Pitzer College faces with respect to institutional need, finances, and the changing nature of our times. With this in mind I propose the foundation for an enhanced Pitzer Exchange Program in Southern India combining the concept of an exchange with the basic principles intercultural understanding based on the traditional Pitzer program. One of the continual problems of study abroad programs is the difficulty in evaluation. How do we know whether or not a student has increased his/her intercultural understanding? How can we know if a student leaves a country with more prejudices than when he/she entered? I argue that programs based on a model of immersion such as the School for International Training (SIT) and Pitzer College promote a deeper intercultural

British Columbia Center for International Education. Accessed February 7, 2007. <>.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


understanding compared to many other program models in which exchanges create an ‘American island’ simulating a typical American university campus abroad with classes taught in English and students living with other English speakers. Pitzer carries out programs based on a model including language, homestays, intensive writing and an independent project, which I will look at further in the body of this thesis. This study is not an evaluation of all intercultural programs, nor is it a complete historical study of US student’s abroad and international students coming to the US. I avoid taking on a comprehensive critique of study abroad programs as a whole, and focus instead on Pitzer College and the development of study abroad programs over time, and how they have evolved into what they are today. Some of the current debates, or issues within the international education field touch on the concept of exchanges versus immersion as well as experiential learning versus university based programs. The words “immersion” and “exchange” may be viewed differently depending on the context. For the purpose of this thesis, immersion is seen as a program which contains the components of a Pitzer program abroad (homestay, language, fieldbook and an independent study), whereas exchanges refer to a trading places of bodies from one school to another. Before delving into the body of this work, it is important to problematize some of the words included and acknowledge that “understanding,” “mutual understanding” and references to “communication” must take into account the fact that, in many cases, difficult power dynamics come into play. As a result, the idealized view of understanding may come through conflict, or may not be reached at all because of the varying locations of power within the structures of studying abroad.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Within the overall debate on international education, it is important to understand where I am coming from, as the author, in both a political sense as well as culturally, socially and with regard to my experience in intercultural education. I write as a student who has been abroad on both a Pitzer program and an exchange. I went to Botswana in the spring of 2005, and to Bristol England on the Mellon Exchange in its inaugural year of existence (fall 2004). I have served in the governance of Pitzer through the External Studies Committee for two and a half years (2003-2004, 2005-2006 and fall 2006), worked in the Office of Study Abroad (fall 2005) and served on the Ad-hoc Global/Local WASC committee in 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. To locate myself further, my father is from India and my mother is American (ethnically half Italian and half Polish/Russian/French). I identify as a multiracial woman of color. Although I am not fluent in Malayalam (the local language of Kerala, India) and have only been there twice in my life, I have a large extended family on my father’s side and feel a strong connection to my relatives. Although my personal location provides me with more than enough experiences to draw upon in the creation of this program, the aim of this thesis is to make a contribution to the field of intercultural understanding and study abroad literature by gathering materials and viewpoints from a variety of sources and people in a comprehensive summary of where Pitzer College is today and where it should be going. In the first chapter, the history of students traveling to learn is briefly highlighted, followed by a discussion of public diplomacy, and how it developed. This chapter also looks at the important milestones for public diplomacy in the US as well as the development of consortia exchange programs and the Peace Corps while also including

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


how the rationale for study abroad has changed over time. Chapter two highlights the naming of 2006 as the “Year of Study Abroad” by the United States Congress, and why the US and others argue for the importance of studying abroad. It goes over a brief history of Pitzer students studying abroad, including the establishment of Pitzer’s own programs abroad and the self-study reports from 1988 and 1998 which outline the importance of study abroad as an integral aspect of the curriculum. The Pitzer Catalogue and educational objectives are used in order to show how Pitzer has incorporated study abroad into the college on a broad basis. This section also incorporates data from the study abroad office in order to compare national averages from Open Doors statistics to where students go abroad. Focusing on the model of international understanding that Pitzer aims to achieve, Chapter three looks at the evidence of the impact of studying abroad and the development of Pitzer’s own rationale. It looks at the last two phases of development of Pitzer study abroad from 1999 to the present and also includes a brief look at theory behind intercultural education. Chapter Four serves as a model for a proposal for an exchange program in Kerala, including a statement of rationale. Stressing the importance of pre-departure preparation this chapter looks at how an enhanced exchange would be implemented in Kerala. The conclusion places the reader where we are today and contains suggestions for Pitzer to maintain its role as a progressive college in the field of international education for decades to come. This final section illustrates how this model may be replicated by other colleges and universities alike to create a path for face-to-face diplomacy promoting sustained international education, in hopes of a more peaceful world to come.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Chapter 1: The History and Development of Study Abroad in the United States In the Beginning, Students Traveled to Learn Study abroad and the migration of scholars and professionals has been called a “pervasive phenomenon,” dating back to 500-300 B.C., when intellectuals migrated to Athens. In later centuries there were similar migrations to major intellectual centers such as Alexandria, Rome, and Gundi Sapur in East Persia.2 In Charles Frankel’s The Neglected Aspect of Foreign Affairs: American Educational and Cultural Policy Abroad, he argues that there is a longstanding precedence of students traveling beyond their own countries to learn. As he says: “the tradition of cultural exchange across political boundaries is as old as the history of civilization.”3 Frankel sees the movement of students, scholars, information, and ideas as one of the ancient features of civilized life dating back to Athens, “we Athenians throw open our city to the world,” said Perciles.4 The ancient concepts of travel, as a medium of learning and promoting understanding between varying cultures and societies provides the foundation for today’s student ambassadors abroad. De Wit (1996) explored the history of international education going back to the middle Ages and Renaissance periods when “the use of Latin as a common language, of a uniform program of study and system of examinations, enabled itinerant students to continue their studies in ones ‘studium’ after another, and ensured recognition of their


Fry, Gerald W. The Economic and Political Impact of Study Abroad. Comparative Education Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, Foreign Students in Comparative Perspective. (May, 1984), 203. 3 Frankel, Charles. The Neglected Aspect of Foreign Affairs: American Educational and Cultural Policy Abroad. The Brookings Institution: Washington D.C., 1965. 4 Ibid, 2.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


degrees throughout Christendom.”5 Gutek (1997) also discusses a broad picture of international education throughout the middle ages. He studies the theory of Erasmus (1466-1536), a Roman Catholic priest, who believed that “educators were colleagues in an international and cosmopolitan collegiums rather than servants of particular denominational or nationalistic masters.”6 Other philosophers, such as Johann Amos Comenius (1592-1670), a Czech educator, based his philosophy on a strong argument for international education.7 The US has a long history of international education, tracing back to 1919, just after WWI, when the Institute of International Education was created. In the early 1920s, the first documented student, teacher and faculty exchanges were facilitated with several European countries.8 The development of international education after WWI in the US mainly focused on international studies and foreign languages, but the major shift toward international education development and exchanges came after WWII. As mentioned in a CIEE document on Higher Education Programs (1996), “study abroad, as various studies have shown, has been something of an elite experience… the population has tended to be female, white, upper class and able to afford the associated costs.”9 Generally speaking, although this demographic may still comprise the majority of students going abroad to study, this is also changing.


De Wit, 1995; Mikhailova, Liudmila K. “The History of CIEE: Council of International Educational Exchange and its Role in International Education Development: 1947-2002.” October 2003, 32. 6 Ibid, 32. 7 Ibid, 35. 8 Ibid, 20. 9 Ibid, 94.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Since the end of World War II, the tradition of studying abroad has significantly grown, “the postwar growth of both public and private exchange programs has reached a scale and significance undreamed of a few decades ago,” Frankel says. He highlights the importance of educational exchange for more than individual growth and illustrates how international relations and international education are interrelated. “This crossing of national frontiers via numerous cultural bridges is increasingly important, not only as an end in itself but as a major force in government relations.”10 This concept is further highlighted by US President Johnson at the Smithsonian Institution Bicentennial Celebration in September 1965: “We know today that… ideas, not armaments will shape our lasting prospects for peace; that the conduct of our foreign policy will advance no faster than the curriculum of our classrooms; that the knowledge of our citizens is one treasure which grows only when it is shared.”11 In 1965, the main objectives of Frankel’s book were to “reexamine purposes that govern US government exchange programs, describe present institutional arrangements for achieving objectives, appraise these practices and suggest possible improvements.”12 While there is still the idea of scholarly inquiry and expanding individual horizons there are more reasons for broadening connections across cultures: “Educational and cultural exchange is presented as a means to the construction of a peaceful world order. It is held to be indispensable to the economic and social modernization of traditional societies.”13

10 11

Frankel, vii. Ibid. 12 Ibid, viii. 13 Ibid, 3.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


In this way intercultural understanding is said to be a tool of foreign policy, “to promote the strategic interests of the nation.”14 Although not explicitly stated and perhaps dated since Frankel’s time, the “longrange objective of United States foreign policy…is the creation of a peaceful world, respectful of diversity.”15 Frankel believes that one of the breakdowns of foreign policy has been the lack of personal interaction, “it is reasonably clear that the breakdown of relations with Germany or China began with the breakdown of communication with people in those countries who had never had close relations with Americans or close knowledge of America.”16 He sees misunderstanding as a product of impersonal relationships leading to negative essentializing of the other, showing “the simple fact that relations between the members of different nations are not immediate and personal, but vicarious and impersonal. In such circumstances, powerful stereotypes take over,” he says, arguing for more personal relationships.17 Frankel advocates that educational and cultural exchanges “help them [individuals and governments] not madden themselves with words.” In this respect, there is solid warrant for the belief that such exchanges are important instruments for the promotion of “international good will and understanding.”18 He also argues the United States is a nation within the global community with an interest in educational and cultural programs

14 15

Frankel, 3. Ibid, 81. 16 Ibid, 82. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


abroad because of the positive image that programs contribute to the US, and make it more likely that United States political policies will succeed.19

What is Public Diplomacy and how did it Develop? As a more recent field of study, public diplomacy is defined in several different ways, many of which the USC Center on Public Diplomacy has gathered together. In the US Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy 1991 Report it is seen as “the open exchange of ideas and information… an inherent characteristic of democratic societies. Its global mission is central to foreign policy. And it remains indispensable to [national] interests, ideals and leadership roles in the world."20 In a report of the US Advisory Group on Public Diplomacy for the Arab and Muslim World it is defined as "the promotion of the national interest by informing, engaging, and influencing people around the world.”21 According to the report, public diplomacy helped win the Cold War, and now has the “potential to help win the war on terror." Also within the government, from the United States General Accounting Office report to the Committee on International Relations in the House of Representatives, public diplomacy is a means to "inform, engage, and influence global audiences.” It is able to reach beyond foreign governments to “promote better appreciation of the United States abroad, greater receptivity to U.S. policies among foreign publics,” as well as access and influence in important sectors of

19 20

Ibid, 88. “What is Public Diplomacy?” USC Center on Public Diplomacy <> (February 12, 2007). 21 "Changing Minds Winning Peace: A New Strategic Direction for U.S. Public Diplomacy in the Arab & Muslim World," (October 1, 2003), USC Center on Public Diplomacy, 13. <> (February 8, 2007).

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


foreign societies.22 University of Southern California’s, Nicholas J. Cull wrote that the earliest use of the phrase ‘public diplomacy’ came from The Times in January 1856, “used merely as a synonym for civility” in a piece criticizing President Franklin Pierce.23 Some scholars argue Woodrow Wilson’s notion of “open diplomacy” provided the rationale for cultural and educational endeavors that would later become known as cultural diplomacy, according to Lindsay Beverly in “Integrating International Education and Public Diplomacy” in the 1989 Comparative Education Review.24 According to, a website sponsored by the United States Information Agency Alumni Association, public diplomacy was first coined by Edmund Gullion in 1965 discussing the Edward R. Murrow Center at Tufts University's Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. The Murrow Center brochure described public diplomacy as: “The influence of public attitudes on the formation and execution of foreign policies. It encompasses dimensions of international relations beyond traditional diplomacy” it also includes “cultivation by governments of public opinion in other countries; the interaction of private groups and interests in one country with those of another . . . (and) the transnational flow of information and ideas.”25 With varying definitions by both


"U.S. Public Diplomacy: State Department Expands Efforts but Faces Significant Challenges," (September 2003), USC Center on Public Diplomacy <> (February 3, 2007). 23 Nicholas J. Cull. "'Public Diplomacy' Before Gull ion: The Evolution of a Phrase”. USC Center on Public Diplomacy < omacy_before_gullion_the_evolution_of_a_phrase/> (January 22, 2007). 24 Beverly, Lindsay. “Integrating International Education and Public Diplomacy,” Comparative Education Review (1989): 426. 25 United States Information Agency Association. “USIA Alumni Association,” <> (February, 7, 2007).

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


scholars and politicians alike, it is easy to see that the definition of public diplomacy is in constant flux. Beverly acknowledges that the term ‘public diplomacy’ appeared in the mid1960s, but did not become institutionalized until the 1970s, as a result of the Stanton Commission Report. During the Reagan administration, policymakers gathered together for the purpose of understanding various perspectives on public diplomacy, which changed depending on the person supplying the definition.26 Former Congresswoman Millicent Fenwick argued, “public diplomacy must not involve selling America as much as telling the truth.” A former American Ambassador to Italy declared that “public diplomacy should be envisioned as countries’ efforts to explain and understand each other’s values, purposes, and policies.” In his view, this included an effective “intellectual connection between one’s own and foreign countries.”27 Educational and cultural programs evolved and became integrated into public diplomacy, in order to “promote mutual understanding through autonomous educational and cultural contacts.”28 In “Diplomacy by Other Means,” Mark Leonard, the director of the Foreign Policy Centre, an independent London-based think tank, argues that the end of the Cold War has made the task of communicating with overseas publics more important than ever before.29 For Leonard, public diplomacy is about relationship building, “starting from understanding other countries’ needs, cultures, and peoples and then looking for areas to make common cause.”30 He also believes one dimension of public diplomacy is

26 27

Beverly, 426. Ibid, 427. 28 Ibid, 428. 29 Leonard, Mark. “Diplomacy by Other Means,” Foreign Policy, Sept/Oct 2002, 48. 30 Leonard, 48.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


developing long-term relationships with people through activities such as scholarships, exchanges, trainings, and conferences.31 He stresses the need to move beyond intellectual communication to relationships. “It is a paradox that, as interdependence has increased, the effort invested in nurturing relationships with the rest of the world has steadily declined.”32 In an Op-Ed piece for the International Herald Tribune, Harvard Professor Joseph Nye sees public diplomacy as a soft power tool, Soft power is the ability to get what you want by attracting and persuading others to adopt your goals. It differs from hard power, the ability to use the carrots and sticks of economic and military might to make others follow your will. Both hard and soft powers are important in the war on terrorism, but attraction is much cheaper than coercion, and an asset that needs to be nourished.33 He argues for the development of soft power as opposed to coercion tactics. In an address on May 10, 2005 he pointed out that countries such as France and Britain spend equal amounts on public diplomacy, compared to the US, despite the fact the US is five times larger. Nye reported that the billion dollars spent on public diplomacy is merely onequarter of 1 percent of what is spent on defense and argues for Congressional support, like Representative Henry Hyde's proposal to “bolster” 34 the State Department's public diplomacy and international broadcasting efforts. Mikhailova further echoes Nye’s statements when she says public diplomacy “sees exchanges of persons as effective vehicles for building understanding and trust between nations” as well as “creating

31 32

Ibid, 49. Ibid, 56. 33 Nye, Joseph. “Propaganda isn’t the Way: Soft Power,” The International Herald Tribune, January 10, 2003. Accessed February 24, 2007 <>. 34 Nye.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


opportunities for accomplishment in the areas where official means cannot achieve it alone. Every person can contribute to maintaining peace.”35 Both Mikhailova and Nye argue for public diplomacy as a means to achieve a more peaceful world. Nye was concerned about the US image before the exposure of the Abu Graib torture scandals. He describes the way the US goes about its foreign relations as akin to “a child with a hammer seeing everything as a nail.” As he argues, “we have such capacity in our military that we forget that we need to have other capacities to supplement the military.” He emphasizes the importance of learning from the lessons in the Cold War: “to be a smart power you need to be able to combine hard and soft power.” Nye does not believe the US government should control popular culture abroad, but argues instead that the State Department cultural and exchange programs remind people of “noncommercial aspects of American values and culture.”36 While a purely traditional view of public diplomacy might limit the definition to government-sponsored cultural, educational and citizen exchanges solely for the promotion of national interest and influencing foreign policy, the USC Center on Public Diplomacy, as well as this thesis, defines public diplomacy in broader terms. Along with government sponsored programs, private programs of international study also impact countries relations between one another. Whether or not explicitly stated, pop culture, media, sports and private institutional programs inevitably influence foreign policy. More specific than diplomacy at the governmental levels, public diplomacy focuses on the ways in which a country (or multi-lateral organization such as the United Nations),

35 36

Mikhailova, 207. Nye.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


“through both official and private individuals and institutions, communicates with citizens in other societies.”37 A New York Times article from early April detailed the strategy of Dutch troops in Afghanistan taking on a more soft-power approach. Dutch forces have “mostly shunned combat” opting instead for efforts to improve living conditions and selfgovernance.38 The Dutch force of 2,000 has taken on an approach deemed by counterinsurgency theorists as the “oil spot” in hopes of expanding slowly and surely like an oil stain. So far the Dutch forces have built schools, mosques, courtrooms and hospitals and have plans to open a trade school as well as other projects to rebuild Afghanistan’s infrastructure. Not only have the Dutch attempted to avoid violence and harm to citizens, but they have also taken responsibility for destructed property. After one armored vehicle damaged mulberry trees, the captain negotiated a payment to the farmers as a means of compensation. Although the estimated time for this approach to be a success was 10 years, the Dutch still believe that “too much fighting is counterproductive.”39

Important Milestones for Public Diplomacy in the United States To understand how study abroad may be used as a tool for public diplomacy, it is important to trace the history of studying abroad through the structure of diplomacy within the US government. In 1938 the Interdepartmental Committee for Scientific Cooperation and the Division of Cultural Cooperation were created in the US Department
37 38

USC Center on Public Diplomacy. Chivers, C.J. “Dutch Soldiers Stress Restraint In Afghanistan.” New York Times, Friday April 6, 2007, A-1. 39 Ibid, A-12.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


of State, “ushering in official educational and cultural exchanges with other nations.”40 After World War II, within the Department of State, the Office of Information and Cultural Affairs was established.41 In 1946 Senator J. William Fulbright furthered this idea of diplomacy by establishing a program for academic exchanges emphasizing “mutual understanding,” among the people of the world. Other legislation has created strong support for international education such as the Fulbright-Hayes Act in 1961 and the 1979 Foreign Relations Authorization Act, stressing the importance of “interactive aspects of diplomacy at people-to-people levels—a key characteristic of public diplomacy”.42 Beverly characterizes the purpose of public diplomacy in terms of propaganda, without intending to propogate: The atmosphere for mutual understanding, desired by all audiences, can be created through open and probing discussions of common educational and cultural problems in the United States and other nations. Creating and maintaining this atmosphere is ingenious propaganda since, to paraphrase former Secretary of State Rusk, the best propaganda has no propagandistic purpose.43 She illustrates how students are integral actors in discussing commonalities and differences with people abroad. Senator J. William Fulbright further articulates the importance of educating students in order to “humanize” international relations, arguing for education as a “basic factors of international relations—quite as important as diplomacy and military power in its implication of war and peace. Educational exchange

40 41

Beverly, 425. Ibid, 426. 42 Ibid, 429. 43 Ibid, 436.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


can turn nations into people, contributing as no other form of communication can to the humanizing of international relations.”44

The Development of CIEE: The Beginning of Exchanges The Council on International Education Exchange provided means for humanizing international relations beginning in 1947. It grew from just a few individuals to a leading US non-profit in international education and study abroad organization and is now one of the largest non-profit organizations in the international education field, with nearly 500 staff in 30 countries, 274 member institutions and 183 Academic Consortium members.45 In a doctoral thesis on the history of CIEE, Ludmila K. Mikhailova “continues a discourse around public diplomacy and the role of exchanges in enhancing US foreign policy and complimenting traditional diplomacy.”46 She sees international educational providers as one of the main actors for carrying out US foreign policy in the field of public diplomacy.47 Educational agencies and the US Department of State negotiated the possibility of using troop transports to establish educational travel and exchange programs.48 In the spring of 1947, at the request of the Department of State, the Maritime Commission, agreed to allow troop ships to be used for sending US American students on exchange programs to Europe.49 As director of CIEE, John Bowman noted, the epitome of the

44 45

William Fulbright (1994). Mikhailova, 24. 46 Ibid, vi. 47 Ibid, 2. 48 Ibid, 84. 49 Ibid, 85.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


council’s program was illustrated in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.50 He describes his experience saying: T/N Irpinia steams eastward with 1170 passengers… In a small bar forward on port side, 40 persons crowd into an elementary French lesson. Just across the starboard side a similar room is filled with students sitting on benches, tables and the floor for travel tips to Italy. On an upper deck a tour group meets to discuss its itinerary, an experiment group discusses how an American should behave in an Italian family, a committee writes a parody for the skit night three days hence. In the main lounge 80 persons gather for a discussion of European educational system…51 He highlights the role of the ship for preparation and orientation, and discusses some of the many reasons students use the ship/ According to a 1955 New York Times article, 50,000 US students and 45,000 foreign students used The Council for international educational travel. The Council did not want to be merely a facilitator of exchanges, but they also saw the importance of educating students going abroad about the country they traveled to, while also maintaining an understanding of the their own US culture. It is not enough to send thousands of students abroad and believe, that, because they are nice young boys and girls who ‘mix,’ this will be sufficient. If they go to Germany and don’t know anything about the Berlin Wall; if they go to Indonesia and don’t know about the West New Guinea problem… If they are good-looking, pleasant, eager and uninformed, we are just not going to get the job done… If our young people are to accomplish good abroad they must know something about the United States… a little bit more than that George Washington was founder of our country and its first President.52 CIEE clearly acknowledged the importance of pre-departure education on the host country, while not leaving out the importance of US students having a basic understanding of US society and culture. The importance of this concept is further
50 51

Ibid, 98. Ibid, 98-99, Council Annual Report 1959, 2-3. 52 Ibid, 119.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


illustrated when discussing new opportunities to expand exchange programs after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. The US-USSR exchange programs proved to be “vivid example of CIEE’s devotion to building international understanding among nations.” The Cold War period allowed approximately 3,000 students and scholars to visit the USSR during 1979-1993,53 showing how exchange programs could be used as a tool for public diplomacy. Currently, CIEE’s mission is "to help people gain understanding, acquire knowledge, and develop skills for living in a globally interdependent and culturally diverse world."54 As director of CIEE, John Bowman, said in the 1977 Annual Report, “student exchanges did not solve the world’s problems” but they did play a role in the creation of a more “world-minded” outlook in the post-war generation. This reduction of national bias also allowed this generation to focus on certain critical problems which cut across national boundaries.”55 Although the critical problems of the 1970s have changed, the United States continues to face issues beyond its borders. CIEE’s programs show that students may be important conduits for social change across borders.

Kennedy’s Peace Corps Takes Flight During the creation and evolution of CIEE, Senator John F. Kennedy began the Peace Corps, with similar wide-reaching goals. On October 14, 1960, Kennedy addressed students at the University of Michigan Union, challenging them to give two years to assist people in countries of the developing world. Kennedy argued the Peace Corps was
53 54

Mikhailova, 155. “Mission + Offerings,” Council on International Educational Exchange <> (February 26, 2007). 55 Mikhailova, 142.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


the most important campaign since 1933, “because of the problems which press upon the United States, and the opportunities which will be presented to us in the 1960s.”56 He said opportunities must be acted upon through the President and the cooperation of the Congress to “make the greatest possible difference.” The Peace Corps was established in March, 1961 and grew into an agency of the federal government “devoted to world peace and friendship.”57 Since then, 187,000 Peace Corps Volunteers have served 139 countries in a myriad of ways, from AIDS education and information technology to environmental preservation. The Peace Corps has also been at the forefront of intercultural education and has changed and altered its training programs with the times.58 The goals of the Peace Corps are: “Helping the people of interested countries in meeting their need for trained men and women; helping promote a better understanding of Americans on the part of the peoples served and helping promote a better understanding of other peoples on the part of Americans.” As the website notes, the “Peace Corps is more vital than ever” because of its programs working in newly important areas, such as information technology and business development. Changed with the times, in May 2003, the Peace Corps committed 1,000 new Volunteers to work on HIV/AIDS-related activities as part of President Bush's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. With a budget $318.8 million (in fiscal year 2006) the


“What is the Peace Corps?” Peace Corps <> (March 1, 2007). 57 Ibid. 58 Bennhold-Samaan, Laurette discussed this further in “The Evolution of Cross-Cultural Training in the Peace Corps.” Handbook of Intercultural Training, Third Edition. Dan Landis, Janet M. Bennett, and Milton J. Bennett eds. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc., 2004, 363-394.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Peace Corps has included new initiatives focusing on HIV/AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean, information technology, and expanding programs into new countries.59

Development of the rationale for Study Abroad During the course of the evolution of study abroad programs there have been different goals and rationale as to why study abroad is important. Schlechter (1993) identifies three levels of educational rationales: “the pragmatic (aimed at the acquisition of knowledge and skills for effective functioning in a global environment), the liberal (aimed at the education of students with intercultural competence and tolerant perception of differences), and the civic (aimed at developing student’s ability to act as global citizens in the pursuit of global democracy).”60 De Wit (2000) stresses a political rationale for internationalization and the promotion of international education as “connected with the expansion of American influence in the world, which increases a need for internationalization of knowledge and learning of other cultures, languages, and systems.”61 Allan sees the desired outcome of study abroad through the intercultural learning process as a person who has learned personal interaction skills and is able to communicate with people from other cultures, “not only one with which s/he has had concrete experience.” Allan also stresses the importance of achieving personal growth as a result of encountering cultural diversity,” which enhances and extends cultural identity.62

59 60

Ibid. Mikhailova, 43. 61 Ibid. 62 Allan, Michael. “Frontier Crossings: Cultural dissonance, intercultural learning and the multicultural personality.” Journal of Research in International Education. 2003, 84.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Many authors agree there has been a shift from political to economic: The “National Policies for the Internationalization of Higher Education in Europe” designed by the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education (1997) says that recent shift from political to economic rationale occurred in all Northern European countries. The Scandinavian countries, Austria, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands, as well as those of Central and Eastern Europe illustrated a shift from cultural and political rationale to economic, with the exception of Greece.63 In an analysis of the economic and political impacts of studying abroad, Gerald Fry looks at the impact of study abroad in developing nations and concludes, “study abroad is a basic building block in the development of a peaceful cooperative global community.”64 He argues that the global empirical data analyzed in his study indicates “positive economic effects of study abroad over the long term.”65 According to the Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program “recent federal reports cite a language and cultural skill shortage in more than 70 agencies critical to public diplomacy, and economic competitiveness, among other reasons for studying abroad. Colin Powell, former US Secretary of State, argues that “International Education prepares our citizens to live, work and compete in the global economy and promotes tolerance and the reduction of conflict,”66 highlighting the importance of both politics and economics.

63 64

Mikhailova 44-46. Fry, 220. 65 Ibid. 66 The Lincoln Commission. “Global Competence and National Need: One Million Americans Studying Abroad,” Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program <> (January 29, 2007).

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Conclusion By understanding some of the history behind the development of programs for US students, as well as what public diplomacy is and how it developed, the various rationales for studying abroad may be seen. Over the year’s, in the US, public diplomacy has changed from being an abstract concept to an important soft power tool of the future. This has been established with the creation of programs such as the Fulbright, the Peace Corps and NGO’s facilitating and training students for programs abroad such as CIEE. Alongside the changing nature of public diplomacy have been increased opportunities for students to go abroad.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Chapter 2: In an Ideal World, Everyone Would Study Abroad Beyond the Oceans — The Year of Study Abroad In 2005, the U.S. Senate declared 2006 the "Year of Study Abroad" in order to boost the visibility of study abroad, set the stage for further action, and expand study abroad opportunities.67 The Senate resolution 308 includes clauses supporting the premise of studying abroad as essential for ‘global literacy’ and states the importance of educating students internationally is a means to “share the values of the United States, to create goodwill for the United States around the world, to work toward a peaceful global society, and to increase international trade.” Sighting recent statistics such as the fact that, according to the American Council on Education poll from 2002, “79 percent of people in the United States agree that students should have a study abroad experience sometime during college, but only 1 percent of students from the United States currently study abroad each year.”68 As sad as these statistics may be, another rationale behind the importance of global education, or just simply traveling abroad, is the knowledge of the world that is gained. The Senate resolution included reference to the National Geographic global literacy survey which found that 87 percent of students in the United States between the ages of 18 and 24 cannot locate Iraq on a world map, 83 percent cannot find Afghanistan, 58 percent cannot find Japan, and 11 percent cannot even find the United States.69


“2006, The Year of Study Abroad,” Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program <> (February, 4, 2007). 68 Congressional Record. November 10, 2005 <> (January 29, 2007). 69 “109th Congress, 1st Session Designating 2006 as the `Year of Study Abroad,'” November 10, 2005. Senate Resolution 308

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Other statements uphold the importance of having a citizenry with an understanding of foreign languages, supported by the Coalition for International Education, an ad-hoc group of higher education organizations of the Department of Education. Their reports have found that Federal agencies, educational institutions, and corporations in the United States are “suffering from a shortage of professionals with international knowledge and foreign language skills.” The Senate resolution used as evidence a survey done by the Institute for the International Education showing that studying abroad influences later educational experiences and decisions to expand or change academic majors as well as decisions to attend graduate school.70 Senate Resolution 308 argues that the substantive research literature shows core values and skills of higher education are enhanced by participation in study abroad programs. It also argues that programs not only open doors to foreign language learning, but empower students to better understand themselves and others through a comparison of cultural values and ways of life. It referenced the bipartisan Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program, which was charged with recommending ways of expanding and enhancing US undergraduate study abroad options. The Report, issued in November 2005: “Global Competence & National Needs: One Million Americans Studying Abroad” aimed at emphasizing a variety of destinations, institutions and students. The Resolution further extended the Commission.71 In the final active sentences of the bill, the senate encouraged secondary schools, institutions of higher learning, businesses, and government programs to

<> (January 29, 2007). 70 Senate Resolution 308. 71 “Year of Study Abroad.”

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


“promote and expand” study abroad opportunities. According to the Lincoln Report, about 191,321 college students, making up just over 1 percent of total enrolled undergraduates, studied abroad in 200405. However, 50 percent of college-bound high school students said they were interested and 75 percent think it is important to study or participate in an internship abroad during their academic career.72 Just over 60 percent of study-abroad participants study in Europe, with much fewer studying in Latin America (15 percent), Africa (3 percent), the Middle East (.5 percent) and Asia (7 percent). Nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of those who study abroad are female and one-third (34 percent) is male, while the total undergraduate population is 56 percent female and 44 percent male. In addition, only 5 percent are Hispanic and 3 percent are black, despite the fact that each group makes up about 12 percent of the U.S. undergraduate population. There are disparities as well in terms of which majors go abroad. A high number of humanities majors (14 percent of total undergraduates) comprise 30 percent of all students who study abroad, while engineering/computer science majors, who represent 14 percent of total undergraduates, enroll only 5 percent in programs abroad.73 The British Columbia Center for International Education (BCCIE) recognized the need for using educational strategies to help students achieve desired outcomes, identifying the need to use participatory techniques and exchange programs as it is recognized that “direct experience is a powerful and effective method for developing

72 73

Lincoln Report. Ibid.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


international skills and understanding.”74 In a statement on International Education Week 2002, US Secretary of Education, Rod Paige emphasized the importance of “increasing student knowledge and awareness of the world's cultures, peoples, and languages” along with a recognition of “the necessity of bringing an international perspective into American classrooms.”75 He also saw diplomacy as not just among public officials, but also citizens. “We realize that the task of diplomacy belongs not only to governments, but to individuals as well. Each of us is an ambassador when we interact with our global neighbors,” said Paige. He further emphasized that international education can promote both mutual understanding and cooperation as well as strengthen national security, foreign policy, and economic competitiveness.”76 On the same occasion, then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s speech, Intolerance Is Taught and Can Be Untaught, argued for a need “to use education to advance tolerance and understanding.” Annan sees understanding as essential to world peace, “we know that just as no nation is immune to conflict or suffering, no nation can defend itself alone. We need each other — as friends, as allies, as partners — in a struggle for common values and common needs.” He believes that no one is born intolerant and that intolerance is learned and can be unlearned, even if it is done with great difficulty. Annan cites the founding of the United Nations as evidence in the belief

“Internationalizing Teaching/Learning,” British Columbia Center for International Education <> (January 20, 2007). 75 International Education Week, 2001 <> (January 10, 2007). 76 Paige, Rod. “Statement on International Education Week 2002, Washington D.C., August 2002” <> (January 10, 2007).

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


that “dialogue can triumph over discord, that diversity is a gift to be celebrated, and the world's peoples are united by their common humanity far more than they are divided by their separate identities.”77 Neighboring Claremont McKenna College also highlights the importance of studying abroad, arguing “The future of the United States and other countries is in their global connectedness.” Anyone with an understanding of these connections based on experience, “including a direct familiarity with another culture and knowledge of a second language, will be much better prepared personally and professionally for the 21st century.”78 Claremont McKenna College’s study abroad website highlights the importance of students going abroad, arguing that going abroad gives students an opportunity to enhance their education and “acquire an international perspective needed to function in a global society” and alumni who have studied abroad “report a greater sensitivity to global issues and a deeper understanding of the challenges facing us in the Twenty-First century.”79 A proponent of Senate Resolution 308, Congressman Durbin said on the Senate floor, “nearly 600,000 international students from more than 200 countries study in the United States each year. The future of our nation depends on our ability to prepare the next generation of leaders for an increasingly complex global society.” If done correctly, study abroad “not only opens doors to careers, it opens minds and worlds of possibilities” and is a way of creating a peaceful global community. “The future challenges that face all

77 78

Ibid. Camp, Roderic. Philip M. McKenna Professor of the Pacific Rim, Claremont McKenna College Study Abroad Brochure, 2007. 79 “Study Abroad,” Claremont McKenna College, Claremont, CA. <> (January 10, 2007).

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


nations will require an unprecedented degree of understanding and cooperation among countries and their leaders.”80 Congressman Durbin’s statements are in line with Pitzer College President Laura Trombley’s inaugural address.

President Trombley Sets the Bar High for Pitzer Colleges have taken on the concept of studying abroad as instrumental to learning. Even before 2006 was declared the “Year of Study Abroad,” Pitzer College President Laura Trombley addressed the need in her inaugural speech in February, 2003, forty years after Pitzer was founded. Trombley highlighted Pitzer’s past, built on the foundation of the Claremont village dump, in the words of the first Pitzer president John Atherton, “The big yellow bulldozers leveling the mounds for Scott and Sanborn Halls turned up bedsprings and baby buggies — all the effluvia of the early pioneers underlay the educational hopes of the wonder child who came to transform the world.” Atherton showed the importance of being different, and proud of it, while also respecting difference and independence of thought. As Trombley said, "a continuing discussion and debate of current social and political issues" is still solidly in place at Pitzer. She also argued that Pitzer stands at “the forefront of educating for and effecting social change. We stand as a model for other liberal arts colleges of how they could and should be educating.” Trombley argued for the need to continue to provide students with tools to “understand and to be agents for change in local and global communities.” In 2003, sixty percent of students studied abroad in over thirty countries, but Trombley would like to


Congressional Record, November 10, 2005.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


increase this number to one hundred percent. “Pitzer students should have the experience of immersing themselves in cultures that are not their own so that they may gain deeper understanding of themselves and their native communities,” Trombley said, stressing the importance of serving the community as a reciprocal providing equal benefit. “What our students learn in their studies around the world … is one of the College's most distinctive educational objectives: concern with social responsibility and the ethical implications of knowledge and action.”81 Trombley’s words are further emphasized in the Pitzer College Catalogue, 2006-2007.

Where and how did we begin? The WASC Reports of 1988 and 1998 In order to understand where we are at present with regard to Pitzer’s study abroad programs, it is necessary to go back to the beginning. While Pitzer has sent students to many sites in the U.S. and abroad for study throughout its history, it was not until the 1980s that it became seen as “integral to the College’s curriculum and educational mission.”82 In the beginning students who studied abroad were handled out of the Dean of Faculty's office and administratively, students took a leave of absence to study abroad transferring credit after the fact, if approved by the Registrar's Office and a faculty member in the field of study. Prior to the establishment of the External Studies Committee, students on financial aid were not able to study abroad because no aid was


Trombley, Laura. “We Have Come of Age,” Inaugural Speech, February 15, 2003. <> (February 1, 2007). 82 Pitzer College Self –Study Report for Reaffirmation of Accreditation. Prepared for Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges & Universities, The Western Association of Schools and Colleges, Fall 1998.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


possible for a student on a leave of absence.83 In the fall of 1987 a formal External Studies Committee was established, with the first task of the committee aimed at putting “the entire external studies operation on sound financial footing.”84 Under the system, students on financial aid were only allowed to attend certain programs. The new financial plan used the tuition fees for all students participating on external studies in a given year to pay for external studies, administration, and financial aid. The college also committed to subsidizing the budget, to a certain extent, and chose to admit twenty additional students to make up for the tuition revenues lost.85 The new plan allowed for greater flexibility and developed five basic criteria for program selection: 1) “immersion” was favored over “island,” 2) homestays were preferred to dorm-style living, 3) programs with independent study versus class-based learning were also favored, 4) prior language training was not seen as integral for all locations, especially for programs where language training was not easily accessible in Claremont, and finally 5) the committee favored programs which had faculty interest in order to have sustained academic support.86 Based on these criteria some previous programs were eliminated. Also during this time Pitzer joined cooperative programs through CIEE and IES (Institute for European Studies) and operated its own program in Nepal. Mike Donahue, Director of Pitzer Programs in Intercultural Education, elaborated on how the Nepal program was developed, discussing how it came out of a collaboration

83 84

Barker, Neva. Interviewed on April 11, 2007. Claremont, CA. Ellsworth, Frank L. Pitzer College Application for Re-Accreditation to the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, June 1989, 74. 85 Ibid. 86 Ellsworth, 75.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


with Don Brennis, an Anthropology professor who had previously done the Peace Corps in Nepal, Jan Cory (Pitzer class of 1975) and then Vice President of the College Jim Jamison. Donahue was hired in 1978 and ostensibly found homestays, language teachers, scholars and experts to create the foundation of the Pitzer’s oldest program. After students came back transformed, faculty began to question the components of the “ideal transformative experience.”87 Over the course of subsequent years, the college “made a firmer commitment to this program to ensure its quality, by providing long-run contracts for language instructors in Nepal,”88 and establishing formal ties with a local university in Kathmandu. The section on External Studies in the WASC report ends by declaring a “financially sound, fairer and reinvigorated External Studies Program is now in place, constituting a further important ingredient of Pitzer’s renewed commitment to intercultural education.”89 The development of the External Studies program was central to the College’s Educational Objectives and curriculum in the Western Association of Schools and College’s self-study report from 1998. It was characterized by four overlapping phases: from 1987-1992, when a new set of offerings, policies and procedures were designed and implemented; from 1990-1997, during the creation of a series of Pitzer College External Studies sites; the third, began in 1992 and was expected to conclude in 1999, involving faculty involvement and quality control; and finally beginning in 1996 and expected to

87 88

Donahue, Mike. Interview on April 11, 2007. Claremont, CA Ellsworth, 77. 89 Ellsworth, 79.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


run through 2002, a period of deepening community ties, growing reciprocity, and greater curricular integration.90 Phase one, ‘Setting the Philosophy and Foundations,’ describes the early period of reorganizing of the college, (as aforementioned) noting 1987 as a time of change. After a study of Pitzer programs in Italy and Nepal, comparing other programs, four elements were designated as important for students to have as components to study abroad programs forming the basis for Pitzer programs. These four elements are synthesized from the five criteria from the 1988 report. They are: 1) host-family, living with people of the host culture; 2) language, studying the local language intensively in non-English speaking countries; 3) independent study, a directed study or internship specific to the student’s concentration; 4) interaction, engagement with the people of the host culture in such a way as to “demonstrate appropriate and tangible appreciation for the culture.”91 At this point the college recognized the fact that not all programs would offer each of these components and that not all Pitzer students would seek out immersion experiences with these criteria. Thus the college incorporated flexibility into the new model. Overall, the aforementioned criteria were the foundation upon which an ‘approved’ program list was built. In phase two, “these criteria would become the foundational keys to the development of a series of Pitzer-run programs.” Just after the financial changes in 1987, fewer than 40 students took advantage of the educational opportunity to go abroad. But, levels of participation continually increased to 79 students in 1988-89 and 110 by 1990-91. At the time of the WASC report in 1998, according to the Institute of International Education (IIE), Pitzer College ranked
90 91

WASC 1998, 59. Ibid, 60.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


among the top fifteen colleges and universities of any size in percentage of students participating in study abroad.92 In the period after 1998 numbers increased; and the last two phases will be discussed in Chapter 3.

Incorporation of Intercultural Understanding into the Educational Objectives To show how highly Pitzer regards intercultural understanding, it has been incorporated into an objective for all students. Pitzer’s fifth Educational Objective, Intercultural Understanding, asks students to learn “about their own culture” by placing it in “comparative perspective, students appreciate their own and other cultures, and recognize how their own thoughts and actions are influenced by their culture and history.”93 The International and Intercultural Studies field group has also incorporated external study into their Mission Statement (passed in 2003). Looking at the methods and requirements for students, they must combine “interdisciplinary coursework with disciplinary classroom study, experiential learning at an external studies site and through community based involvement, linguistic training, in-depth regional or global study, and advanced coursework using interdisciplinary methods and epistemologies, such as postcolonial studies… and environmental studies.”94 Pitzer encourages students from all majors, not just IIS, to think globally in hopes of expanding their “understanding of other cultures while working to translate that knowledge into action that will benefit the communities they become a part of whether

92 93

WASC 1998, 61. Pitzer College Catalogue, 2006-07, 9. 94 Emphasis added, IIS Mission Statement, 2003.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


here or abroad,”95 thus combining Intercultural Understanding with the Ethical Implications of Knowledge. As the catalogue argues, this type of learning is fostered by the Pitzer curriculum in Claremont and at study abroad sites around the world.96 Pitzer does not see study abroad as an experience separate from the rest of a student’s education and students are expected to do coursework prior to their experience abroad in order to “facilitate a sustained engagement with another culture.”97 Integrating study abroad into the Pitzer education is argued as a key factor contributing to the recordbreaking number of post-graduate grants and fellowships and study abroad participants are said to make up 85% of those winning such awards.98

Pitzer vs. the Nation: Comparing Pitzer to National Statistics According to a Pitzer Student Fact sheet (2006-2007), 151 Pitzer students are studying abroad in 26 different countries on 37 different programs, of those, 87 percent are studying sixteen different languages, 81 percent are living with host families, and 77 percent are pursuing independent study projects. From 1988-1998, out of the total number of students studying outside the Pitzer campus, 1116, 10 percent went to Africa, 17 percent went to Asia, 2 percent went to Eastern Europe, 11 percent went to Latin America and the Caribbean, 4 percent went to the Middle East, 4 percent went to Oceana and 44 percent went to Oceania with the remaining 8 percent studying within the US or Canada.99

95 96

Pitzer College Catalogue. 2006-07, 19. Ibid. 97 Ibid. 98 Ibid. 99 WASC 1998, 62.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Out of the Pitzer students studying abroad, “nearly 90 percent are on full semester or year-long programs” and the remaining student’s are part of Pitzer’s own six-week summer programs that are said to be “particularly demanding due to the intensive program structure.” As the catalogue says, destinations chosen by Pitzer students “are more diverse and widely distributed around the globe than the national averages with the majority of Pitzer students choosing programs outside of Western Europe and the English-speaking world.” Pitzer further “encourages students to stretch beyond their comfort zone to become engaged, thoughtful and critically reflective citizens both of their own country and the contemporary world.”100 According to Open Doors, the annual report on international education published by the Institute of International Education, 205,983 students studied abroad in 2006 (an 8% increase over the prior year's report). Open Doors have documented a growing interest in destinations in Asia and South America. Nationwide, students are increasingly studying in “non-traditional” destinations, and increasingly to non English-speaking countries. U.S. study abroad has been rising steadily in recent years, with an increase of 144% in the last decade, up from only 84,403 in 1994/95.101 President and CEO of the Institute of International Education, Allan E. Goodman, highlights the recent trend of U.S. students studying in countries such as China and India that “will provide useful language and cultural skills for their future careers" and he argues, as President Trombley did, that “International study should be a part of every student's education." As Goodman said: "American colleges are providing more

100 101

Ibid. Open Doors Report: Information and Data Tables released November 13, 2006 <> (January 30, 2007).

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


opportunities for students to have an international experience and are beginning to address some of the barriers to participation in study abroad, in order to prepare their students to be global citizens."102 The 20 most popular destinations for study abroad in Open Doors 2006 were: United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, France, Australia, Mexico, Germany, China, Ireland, Costa Rica, Japan, Austria, New Zealand, Czech Republic, Greece, Chile, South Africa, Argentina, Brazil, and India. While 45 percent of all U.S. students abroad study in Western European destinations (#1 United Kingdom, #2 Italy, #3 Spain, and #4 France), the number of students going to other countries increased, including a 35 percent increase (to 6,389, up from 4,737 the previous year) in students going to China, now the 8th-leading host destination. The report also highlighted the increase in the number of students going to other non-traditional destinations throughout the world, noting specifically the large increases in three countries in the top 20 list for the first time: Argentina, Brazil, and India. India is now the 20th leading destination, up 53 percent to 1,767.103 In contrast to the majority of Pitzer students studying abroad for a semester, the Open Doors 2006 data showed the largest growth area as short-term study. Over 50 percent of US students studied abroad over the summer, January term, or other programs of less than one semester. According to Open Doors, “These short-term programs have played an important role in increasing the popularity of study abroad, offering flexible international study opportunities to students who might otherwise be unable to participate

102 103

Ibid. Ibid.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


in traditional programs.” The "semester abroad" model now attracts 38 percent of students and only 6 percent of students studied abroad for a full academic year.104

Conclusion Prior to the US Congress’s naming of 2006 as the year of study abroad, President Trombley’s assertion that all students should study abroad marked a turning point in the College’s goals and operations. By looking at the WASC reports from 1988 and 1998, the evolution of Pitzer’s programs may be seen up to 1998. The establishment of Intercultural Understanding as an educational objective is an important point as well. Where Pitzer was in the 1990s, compared to the nation as a whole, is also telling of the importance Pitzer places on studying abroad. Finally, the history of where we are today and how we can adapt to give all students opportunities to study abroad that are meaningful and transformative while also maintaining social responsibility and ethical implications of knowledge and action is a challenge. The following chapter looks specifically at the periods of development after 1998, to understand where we are now.



Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Chapter 3: The Pitzer Model for the Pitzer Program Evidence of the Impact of Studying Abroad While the impact of studying abroad is difficult to measure quantitatively, questionnaires in the 1998 WASC report attempted to evaluate the experience. From an alumni questionnaire asking: “Did Pitzer’s emphasis on interdisciplinary learning, intercultural understanding and social responsibility play a part in your college experience in developing connections across disciplines?” 87.6 percent of the respondents selected a rating of 5, 6, or 7 while 41.3 percent selected the very highest rating.105 The survey also asked questions with a specific focus on intercultural understanding: “Did Pitzer’s emphasis on interdisciplinary learning, intercultural understanding, and social responsibility play a part in your college experience of developing a sense of understanding and sensitivity to other cultures?” To this, 88.6 percent of Alumni/ae selected ratings of 5-7 with a majority choosing the highest ranking of seven.106 Finally, the last question asked about Pitzer’s own programs: If you participated in an external studies program while at Pitzer, how valuable was the experience?” Showing the strength of the programs, 87 percent rated their experience as high as possible.107 More recently, annual graduate senior surveys have asked if students studied abroad and attempt to show the differences in attitudes between those who studied abroad and those who didn't, focused on several key questions. In addition, Appendix C includes an alumni survey; however, this is problematic because only 8 percent of alumni

105 106

WASC 1998. Ibid. 107 Ibid, 163-5.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


complete it and the survey includes people graduating in different eras, most from before Pitzer’s current study abroad programs.108 Such data is further supported by personal reports, such as the 1996 Hewlettfunded faculty seminar in Nepal and South Asia with a set of alumni/ae who had attended Pitzer’s program in Nepal in it’s inaugural year in 1974 until 1995. “Without exception, these alumni/ae attested to the transformative effect their semester in Nepal had had on them. While each of them has taken a different course in life, all of them spoke powerfully and eloquently to the significant impact of their cultural immersion experience in a non-Western society.”109 Although not supported with clear quantitative data, first-hand accounts contribute to qualitative analysis of the programs. According to statistics from IIE, study abroad changes student’s perceptions of the world in several different ways: 98 percent of those returning state that studying abroad helped them understand their own culture, 94 percent of students said the experience continues to influence interactions with people from different cultures, and 86 percent of returning students felt a reinforced commitment to language study. Study abroad also impacts students in a positive manner in many ways: 97 percent felt study abroad made them more mature, 96 percent felt study abroad increased their selfconfidence and 89 percent felt they were better able to tolerate ambiguity. In addition, students reflected on the impact study abroad had on career paths with 76 percent of returnees saying the skills learned while abroad influenced their career path and 62


Appendix C. WASC 1998, 165

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


percent saying that study abroad “ignited a new career interest that they pursued after graduation.”110 In a report prepared for IIE, employers advocated that individuals with international study experience are likely “to possess cross-cultural communication skills, flexibility, autonomy, leadership skills, innovation, maturity, presentation skills, ambition, independence and cultural awareness.”111 To further illustrate the evidence such an experience abroad may have, Carol Brandt, Pitzer College Vice President for International Programs notes that “of Pitzer’s record-breaking number of Fulbright winners in 2006, 87 percent participated in Study Abroad. All of our Watson, Coro, and Rotary Award winners studied abroad,” of the 16 awardees, 11 had immersion or homestays, 13 studied a foreign language abroad and 11 did an independent study or internship for credit.112 Further study into the correlation between Pitzer’s immersive model as a means of preparing students for awards such as the Fulbright may lead to interesting results. There have been several different studies attempting to show the impact of study abroad in “cognitive, affective, and behavioral development.”113 In studies from 1985 (Koester), 1999 (Lathrop) and 2000 (Pettigrew & Tropp) research has found that while both short and long-term programs have an impact, “the longer and more fully integrated

Statistics from the Institute for the International Education of Students. The 50-Year IES Alumni Survey, 2004. 111 An Exploration of the Demand for Study Overseas From American Students and Employers, 2004. IIE. 112 Brandt, Carol. “Studying Abroad Delivers Results.” Pitzer College Participant, Spring 2006, 15. 113 A review of these studies from 1975-2002 may be found in Cushner, Kenneth and Ata U. Karim. “Study Abroad at the University Level.” Handbook of Intercultural Training, Third Edition. Dan Landis Janet M. Bennett, and Milton J. Bennett eds. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc., 2004, 295.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


the program, the greater potential for impact.”114 Short-term programs may lack the time it takes to cross fully into a culture and the impact may not remain over a period of time. However, even among these various studies there have been conflicting results between quantitative and qualitative analysis and what these tell about the impact of a program.115

The Development of the Pitzer Rationale During the beginning of the External Study reorganization (1987-1990), most of the attention focused on the “development of an explicit rationale for expanding participation and a means to pay for it.”116 After the process began, many students and faculty members became interested in improving upon the offerings, many times, in places where no programs existed or alternatively, where programs existed that were far from the ‘Pitzer Model’ and thus did not meet the College’s needs. According to the WASC self-study report, in the late 1980s, there were not many options for studying abroad in Africa, and perhaps not surprisingly (during Apartheid) none in the Southern Africa region. Both for the purpose of encouraging study to this region and meeting demand, Pitzer College joined Scripps College in the development of a site in Zimbabwe, which opened in March 1990. Subsequently, in 1997, when Scripps College decided not to operate its own off-campus programs, Pitzer became responsible for the Zimbabwe program, which then moved to Botswana in 2000, as a result of political instability in Zimbabwe.117

114 115

Ibid, 300. Ibid. 116 WASC, 1998. 117 Ibid, 63.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


The Pitzer program in Parma, Italy, with its inaugural Spring 1992 semester, is “an example of the type of educational experience that the college wanted for its students.”118 Despite the plethora of study abroad programs in Italy, there were none which successfully used the field-study and immersion criteria Pitzer College advocated, demonstrated in the Nepal program. Pitzer in Nepal, which started in 1974 as an everyother-year offering “became emblematic of Pitzer College’s External Study Program at its best, giving self-motivated learners the linguistic and cultural knowledge to become meaningfully engaged in a field study environment.”119 According to the WASC report, students “returned from Nepal transformed by an experience that helped … to put their own cultures and privileges in perspective.” The program, composed of a communitydevelopment project and an outreach service, “brought substance and agency to the students desire to ‘give back.’” In 1988 the Nepal program began operating every semester until it was moved to Darjeeling India in 2004 for political reasons and currently awaits its return to Nepal. After several years of increasing costs for External Studies programs, in 1992, the college engineered a plan for the purpose of increasing “financial and academic control of Pitzer programs.” Over a period of five-years the goal was to increase the number of Pitzer students participating in Pitzer-run programs (From 1988-90 until 1993-94 that proportion ranged between 10-15 percent, after which it has grown steadily, exceeding 30 percent in 1994-95 and nearing 50 percent in 1996-97).120

118 119

Ibid, 64. Ibid. 120 Ibid.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


In 1998, 11 semester programs were operated by the College: Nepal (1974), Japan (Summer, 1987), Zimbabwe (1990), Italy (1992), Turkey (1994), China (1995), Wales (1995), Ontario, CA (1996), and Venezuela (1996), Guatemala (Summer 1997), Costa Rica (Summer 1998), and Ecuador (1997).121 The opportunities have ballooned and currently there are at least seven Pitzer programs to choose from and a myriad of exchanges.122 As the WASC report says, “We now have a 25-year record of watching students return literally transformed by their experiences in Nepal. Nonetheless, we are aware that we need techniques for better understanding how such transformation can occur and how to increase the probability that it will occur for students attending our External Studies programs.”123 As one faculty member said in the WASC report: “I suspect that the vast majority of students who study abroad will find something good to say about their experiences. But some of them are aglow when they return. There is a light in their eyes, and I would like to know why.”124 Pitzer realized that programs involving students in the local culture through basic interaction such as language, family stays, community projects, and independent study “were for Pitzer College students more likely to result in meaningful learning than those that dichotomized ‘experiential’ and ‘academic’ learning, viewing the former as personal and/or social and the latter as intellectual.”125 In addition, for students participating in programs without the structure to promote cultural engagement, the greatest educational benefit was attributed to the “‘non-intellectual’ dimensions of the study abroad

121 122

Listed with the date the program began. All the programs as of spring 2007 can be seen in Appendix A. 123 WASC, 1998, 136 124 Ibid. 125 Ibid.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


experience.”126 At this point, it was clear to the College that it needed to “structure its own programs in ways that would enable students to integrate their affective and cognitive learning.”127 While each program was different and tailored to its specific location, homestays, language study, internships/independent study, and an element of community service were components of all the programs. In addition, the programs included intensive writing, using a Pitzer innovation called the fieldbook, promoting critical reflection, observation, and expression through a series of writing assignments.128 During phase three, “Faculty Involvement and Quality Control,” faculty seminars and visits to the program sites were carried out and in phase four, known as “Reciprocity, Community Partnerships and Reentry” the Political Studies 30: Intro to Comparative Politics course was revamped to focus on six countries with Pitzer programs. This period also marked the development of the External Studies Colloquium Course to help students re-enter after going abroad.

The Last Two Phases of Development After 1998, the development of external studies can be broken into two additional phase outside the purview of the WASC review. These may be categorized as “Responding to Political and Economic Changes” from 1999-2003 and the “Creating New Opportunities and Models for Studying Abroad” from 2004 to the present. A report in 2004 prepared for the External Studies Committee highlighted five major changes in structure, funding and external conditions from 1999-2003: A concentration on

126 127

Ibid, 137. Ibid 128 WASC, 1998, 64.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


deepening rather than expanding Pitzer programs, unprecedented support from foundations and grants, increasing recognition across the nation of Pitzer’s model of intercultural and language education through publications and presentations, global changes affecting both outbound and inbound programs and the shift to a “net revenue” model for external studies.129 In looking at depth versus breadth, the report focused on then President Massey’s request to deepen existing programs using Pitzer’s model of intercultural education and strengthen efforts to show the success of programs to audience’s outside the college in conjunction with advancement and public relations goals. During this period, the college received foundational support totaling almost 2.5 million dollars from various grants such as Andrew W. Mellon, The European Union, The Freeman Foundation, and Atlantic Philanthropies. Presentations were made at national conferences such as CIEE, The International Educators Association (NAFSA), Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) and the Association of Academic Deans (AAD), among others. The period of 1999-2003 was also a time of global economic and political change. During the 1990’s, Pitzer’s programs had enjoyed generally stable conditions aside from the Gulf War, unrest in Los Angeles, and the Asian economic crisis. Some of the changes included a coup d’etat in Ecuador in 1999, violent land distribution in Zimbabwe (2000 to present), conflict between the Nepali government and Maoists (2001-present), September 11, 2001 and “its subsequent effect on perceptions of safety and travel and destination, the SARS crisis in China (2003) among other State Department warnings


“Report on External Studies and the Center for Intercultural and Language Education 1999-2003.” Prepared for the External Studies Committee, Pitzer College, January 2004.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


against Nepal, Venezuela, China and Turkey.130 During this time, programs were relocated and as a result of the economic and political situation around the world and there was a decline in Pitzer and non-Pitzer student enrollment in Pitzer programs. The final change during the report highlights the shift to a net revenue model for external studies. In 1999, after years of increasing revenues by external studies, the college built in an expectation for increased revenue into the general budget for the college. This change marked a shift from External Studies expected to break even. The timing of the shift also happened to be at the same time as problems at program locations abroad and unforeseen circumstances both in the US and abroad. At this time, the college reduced fixed and variable costs to the programs and initiated a program of low cost/no cost exchanges funded through the Mellon Foundation. However, as the report notes “these measures have been helpful” but cannot address the “larger problems of our current financial model.”131 As a result, in a Board of Trustees meeting in February 2004 the model was changed to enroll more Pitzer students in Pitzer programs, reduce reliance on non-Pitzer enrollment, allow students to study abroad for more than one semester and meet budget conditions. Thus exchange programs began.

The Development of the Exchange Model To respond to the changes in the development of External Studies in the last two phases, from 1999 to now, Pitzer expanded opportunities to create a financially feasible means for more students to go abroad and allow for a second experience abroad. In 2003, Pitzer requested 300,000 dollars from the Mellon Foundation to implement a three-year
130 131

Ibid, 12. Ibid, 14.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


project focusing on intercultural faculty and student exchanges with partner institutions abroad.132 The rationale articulated Pitzer’s desire for ethnic and racial diversity on campus, believing that, “daily interactions among people from diverse backgrounds in both formal and informal educational settings encourage intercultural understanding.” The report also cited that despite politics around the world, study abroad continues and participation has nearly tripled in the last decade illustrating its importance today. The proposal envisioned a three-year project with four basic components: “faculty exchanges, student exchanges, shared syllabi, and collaboration through technology.” The proposal contained five main goals: 1) to achieve the presidential vision of 100 percent student participation in study abroad programs; 2) to increase the number of international students on the Pitzer campus; 3) to provide a different kind of immersion experience having a more tightly focused intellectual content based on a variety of academic disciplinary areas, not solely on language learning; 4) to further collaboration with other Claremont College faculty, and; 5) to generally enhance the diversity of viewpoints to which Claremont students and faculty are exposed.133 In discussing exchanges it is important to note that Pitzer has operated exchanges with a number of colleges in the US, such as Colby, Haverford, and Spellman. The 2003 proposal aimed to go a step further and result in a more “internationalized campus with multiple perspectives and worldviews cutting across race, ethnicity, class, gender, and religion.”134 To do so, partnering institutions were (and still are) encouraged to “broaden


Dengu-Zvobgo, Kebokile. “International Faculty and Student Exchanges.” To The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, from Pitzer College in association with Harvey Mudd College and Claremont McKenna College, July 2003. 133 Dengu-Zvobgo, 4. 134 Ibid.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


their selection beyond the affluent elite.”135 In addition to the shared course, students in both sites were able to determine their own courses so that each student had a program suiting his/her needs determined with a faculty advisor. It was hoped that exchanges would “further diversity by bringing new perspectives to classrooms as well as general campus intellectual life.” Some of the anticipated benefits from carrying out this project were: a chance to bring additional multicultural influences to all the involved campuses’ intellectual communities; an intellectually focused alternate immersion experience for students; and the broadening of the number of sites beyond the eight current external study sites.136 In the First Interim Report to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, covering the period December 2003 to November 2004, five Pitzer faculty created partnerships with professors abroad to teach courses taught at both Pitzer and abroad. Under the section titled, “Extension of Model to Other Types of Exchanges” the report discusses five other exchange projects which evolved as a result of other funding sources (Australia, Spain, Thailand, Turkey and the UK). These have been instituted administratively, with a hope to involve faculty in the later stages. In 2004, exchanges took many forms, but the hope was, and still is to harmonize them with the rest of the External Studies programs and the overall educational objective of intercultural understanding and immersion.” This is an important concept in determining the next step of the evolution of Pitzer programs.137 Based on the differences between sites, course structure and semester timing the expectation was aimed at maintaining equivalency over a 3 year period. These exchanges
135 136

Ibid. Ibid, 7-8. 137 Dengu-Zvobgo, Kebokile. “International Faculty and Student Exchanges.” First Interim Report to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, December 31, 2004.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


are also different, because not only are they exchanges, but they are also intended as socially responsible exchanges aimed at increasing Pitzer’s own presence of internationally diverse students on campus. The report also mentions that “what is particularly exciting is that for the first time we can tell students that anyone who wants a study abroad experience can have one,” a feat not every college is able to offer. Since 2003 (to spring 2007), a total of 74 students from Pitzer participated in exchanges and for 2007-2008 this number is expected to total roughly 67.138 This is in part a result of collaborating with International Student Exchange Program (ISEP), in which Pitzer was able to offer seven more locations for study abroad.

Adapting Exchanges and New Programs and Opportunities for Studying Abroad One of the challenges for the exchange programs is to bring them in line with the facilitation of intercultural understanding by integrating components of Pitzer programs that are more likely to result in deeper understanding. Under the basic structure of university-based exchanges the type of intercultural sensitivity Pitzer strives for is not necessarily produced, without intentionally aiming to have this experience. Accordingly, by acknowledging and altering university-based exchanges to contain the components of language study, homestays and independent study Pitzer is able to realize these goals. Along with the integration of the components for facilitating intercultural understanding, as a general educational objective for the upcoming review by WASC, Pitzer has chosen "Connecting the Global and Local: deepening knowledge and understanding about, developing skills and competencies related to, and fostering


Barker, Neva. Interviewed on April 11, 2007. Claremont, CA.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


engagement with and action on global/local issues." As Peter Nardi writes in the Pitzer Participant, for nearly 20 years the College has required students to “acquire a somewhat vaguely specified level of international and intercultural understanding.”139 The intention of choosing Global/Local as a subject is to further develop the college’s approach to attain “international and intercultural understanding informed by increasing understanding of the connections between global processes and local communities.”140 This summer (2007), will be the first set of linked courses on global/local issues for firstyear students. Professor of Psychology Mita Banerjee is offering Children at Risk to be followed by Community-Based Interventions: HIV/AIDS and Vulnerable Children in Botswana at the Pitzer program site in Gabarone, Botswana and Associate Professor of Sociology and Black Studies Dipa Basu is teaching Framing Urban Life to be paired with Framing Rural/Urban Life in South Asia at Pitzer's Nepali Studies program site in Darjeeling, India.141 With new opportunities, come new questions such as: Will one month be long enough to facilitate a transformative model of intercultural understanding? What kind of reciprocity or opportunities will there be for giving back to the host community in such a short length of time?

Theoretical Aspects of Intercultural Education To critically analyze the rationale behind studying abroad, Georgina Tsolidis, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak and Milton Bennett’s approaches and theories of


Nardi, Peter. “Pitzer’s Accreditation Process, A Commitment to Excellence.” Pitzer College Participant, Spring 2006, 14. 140 Ibid. 141 Dengu-Zvobgo, Kebokile. Third Interim Report to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, from Pitzer College. December 31, 2006.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


intercultural education and understanding will be discussed. These authors are used to show the importance of pre-departure knowledge on cross-cultural communication as well as country-specific information. Georgina Tsolidis, professor of Education at Monash University in Australia, quotes Dutch Feminist Rosi Braidotti posing a series of questions important for educators, “What sort of agents of international exchange are the young students of today planning to be? What values will they defend? What is our vision? What is the ‘pursuit of excellence’ worth for us?”142 Curriculum and pedagogy, are themselves culturally situated knowledges, “students with cross-cultural expertise are likely to be more successful global citizens than those who are staunchly monocultural.” 143 She argues that if the context of teaching is seen as global rather than local, “this inverts traditional conceptions of ethnic disadvantage”144 and cultural fluidity is then the currency of globalization, “all students need to know how to function between cultures, not just within one, albeit one associated with dominance.”145 In an article by Spivak titled, “Righting Wrongs,” she uses her own experience to show the importance of seeing the self in the eyes of the global South. Looking at the lack of communication between and among the subaltern cultures of the world, Spivak argues that, while cultural borders are “easily crossed from the superficial cultural relativism of metropolitan countries” going the other way is much more difficult. Socalled peripheral countries (or those in the global South), “encounter bureaucratic and

142 143

Braidotti, 1994 quoted in Tsolidis, 218. Tsolidis, Rosi. “When global citizenship sounds like a cliché.” Journal of Research in International Education. 2002, 219. 144 Ibid, 221. 145 Ibid, 225.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


policed frontiers,” especially for those outside of the elite.146 This speaks to the importance of a reciprocal exchange bringing students from peripheral sub-cultures within the dominant culture. Spivak also argues for reframing privilege to recognize limitations and to increase knowledge. This may be done by working critically through one's “beliefs, prejudices and assumptions and understanding how they arose and became naturalized.” Spivak asks those who are in power within the discourse to “de-hegemonize their position and themselves” and learn how to occupy the subject position of the other.147 Spivak’s discussion begs the question: how can we dehegemonize our positions within a study abroad program with concrete and specific practices? While, she doesn’t provide an explicit answer, she argues those in the dominant culture must not speak for the other. In this case, examining Spivak takes steps towards educating students concerning some of the critiques of study abroad programs and how to remedy these problems (if at all). Milton Bennett outlines two major schools of intercultural communication: theory-and-research and theory-into-practice.148 He sees studying intercultural communication as an attempt to answer the question: “How do people understand one another when they do not share a common cultural experience?”149 Intercultural communication further interrogates the concept of a “global village” by asking “Will its


Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. “Righting Wrongs.” Nicholas Owen ed. Human Rights, Human Wrongs: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures, Oxford University Press, 2001, 119. 147 Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. "The Intervention Interview." Southern Humanities Review 22:4 (Fall 1988): 323-342. Accessed April 18, 2007 <> 148 Bennett, Milton J. ed. Basic concepts of intercultural communication: Selected readings. Yarmouth: Intercultural Press, Inc., 1998, ix. 149 Ibid, 1.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


residents be neighbors capable of respecting and utilizing their differences or clusters of strangers living in ghettos and united only in their antipathies for others?”150 Milton Bennett’s Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) provides the “theoretical framework to understand and assess the cognitive growth process that occurs as students encounter cultural differences” (Bennett, 1993). Bennett’s underlying assumption is that “difference must be experiences and then cognitively processed to effect change in levels of intercultural sensitivity. The DMIS model brings one through ethnocentric stages to ethnorelative stages. The stages work through minimization, in which similarities between cultures are stressed and “differences are almost ignored or trivialized in favor of universal characteristics.” Going from minimization to the ethnorelative phase, difference is no longer seen as threatening, but rather “just different.” This stage is one of “Acceptance, Adaptation and Integration” accepting the view that though there are different cultures, “each culture has a valid and viable construction of the world.”151 Acceptance recognizes culture as a variety of worldviews, with respect to each one. Adaptation brings aspects and constructs from other cultures into one’s own worldview and finally, the integration stage is in the “margins” between cultures. This last stage is when people are outside the cultural frames of reference and there “are no unquestioned assumptions, no intrinsically absolute right behaviors, nor reference group.”152 Bennett describes three basic assumptions within intercultural sensitivity: 1) “The phenomenology of difference is the key to intercultural sensitivity”; 2) using difference

150 151

Ibid, 1. Ibid. 152 Bennett, 1993: 63 quoted on page 281.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


as a means to reach intercultural sensitivity is done by ethnorelativism, such that cultures are seen as “variable and viable constructions of reality”153; 3) While ethical choices must be made for intercultural sensitivity to develop these choices should not be based on “absolute or universal principles.” Therefore the end goals of ethical behavior must be selected with an understanding that different actions are possible.154 In the Handbook of Intercultural Training, the authors categorize intercultural training within intercultural relations, as a new field with an interdisciplinary focus on cultural anthropology, sociolinguistics, multicultural education and international business management.155 Exchange programs are as diverse as definitions of public diplomacy. As Mikhailova says, they “embrace the whole spectrum of attributes and represent differences from program to program and from country to country” depending to a certain degree on the level of cultural adjustment, thus their impact has to be considered within the context of theories on intercultural education and adjustment and how best to facilitate these competencies.

Conclusion The Pitzer model and rationale has informed the ethos of the external studies committee since its inception in the 1980s. Jumping forward to the most recent phases of development: “Responding to Political and Economic Changes” from 1999-2003 and the “Creating New Opportunities and Models for Studying Abroad” from 2004 to the present, exchanges have come into the discussion. As a low-to-no-cost endeavor that has
153 154

Ibid. Bennett, 1993. 155 Landis, Dan. Bennett, Janet M and Bennett, Milton J. eds. Handbook of Intercultural Training, Third Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc., 2004, 1.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


the potential to be socially responsible in that they allow for a student from another country to come to Pitzer, this is a viable solution. Exchanges, when done in a socially responsible manner would allow students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds to exchange with Pitzer students. Exchanges may also allow students to have additional experiences abroad, for longer than a semester; however, exchange programs do not facilitate intercultural understanding in the same manner as Pitzer programs do. As a result, looking to the theories of Tsolidis, Spivak and Bennet, there is a need to enhance exchanges keeping in mind these authors to ensure students have the opportunity for transformative learning to take place, at a low cost for the college. One opportunity to create an enhanced low-cost exchange would be in the region of South Asia and more specifically, Kerala, India.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Chapter Four: Developing a Responsible Exchange — Kerala The Importance of Pre-Departure Planning Pitzer is caught in a challenging and potentially problematic situation. With the focus on volume and making sure that as many students can study abroad as possible Pitzer may be placing too much confidence in the idea of improving “merely by expanding the volume of exchanges,” without regard for who/where/what/why a student goes, creating a paradox under which cultural exchanges are promoted.156 Is it better to ensure students go abroad in some capacity, even if they may not deepen their intercultural understanding, or to insist upon a specific type of study and immersion? Given the institutional priorities for studying abroad as an integral aspect to a Pitzer education as well as the financial limitations combined with the desire for more study abroad options, the following model is one that, if done correctly, is both socially responsible and financially viable while maintaining the essential components of Pitzer programs. In planning programs, Frankel outlines some basic safeguards and guiding principles; beginning with a cautionary note that the people involved in exchange programs should be carefully selected and appropriately prepared.157 As Frankel notes, experience suggests that “Americans abroad or foreigners in this country have the best time, and contribute most effectively to the cause of good will and understanding, when they are required by their work and their environment to immerse themselves thoroughly in the local scene.”158

156 157

Ibid. Ibid. 158 Emphasis added. Frankel, 85.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


The following model is based on the premise that it is important to maintain our current programs and external study sites around the world and in the creation of new programs, there is a moratorium on the creation of new Pitzer programs. It is also based on the understanding of the importance of reflection and processing, and the possibilities open for this reflection by taking advantage of technology in our current age of globalization through Sakai, an interactive learning tool for online communication and other technologies. Recognizing that crossing cultures is a stressful experience, further complicated by academic expectations, “preparing sojourners for dealing with the inevitable cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions of intercultural adjustment may allow them to deal more effectively with this experience and facilitate their cross-cultural adjustment”(Brislin & Yoshida, 1994; Cushner and Brislin, 1996; Landis & Bhagat, 1996; Martin & Harrell, 1996; Paige, 1993).159 While preparation and training programs should not be seen as a panacea, well-designed programs may provide a “frame of reference for interpreting and effectively managing cognitive, emotional and behavioral reactions” while also providing ways to adjust and adapt to cross-cultural situations.160 In the Journal of Research in International Education, John Scott Lucas provides a teaching model for an introductory intercultural communication course, for the needs of US students studying abroad. As he argues “what is missing is a course designed to take students beyond basic orientation towards a full introductory communications course


Emphasis added. Cushner, Kenneth and Ata U. Karim. “Study Abroad at the University Level.” Handbook of Intercultural Training, Third Edition. Dan Landis, Janet M. Bennett, and Milton J. Bennett eds. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc., 2004, 295. 160 Ibid, 295 (also in Brislin, 1993; Cushner & Brislin, 1996, 1997).

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


specifically geared to their experience on international study programs.”161 According to Lucas, research has shown that greater knowledge about the host culture “leads to more accurate expectations and decreased anxiety.”162 This model would begin with a preparatory class for students to gain the tools necessary to engage with the host culture. Azusa Pacific has preparatory “Global Learning Term” in which students take a group of 4 courses: Global Study Project, International Internship, and Family Organization; and either Community Life or SelfDirected Language Learning.163 While I am not arguing it is essential to have a full semester load of preparatory study, a course combining aspects of these courses would be beneficial for students nearing their study abroad experience, “The aim is to provide each student with the necessary contrasts during their study and research to critically examine their faith, politics, culture, and identity.”164 According to Azusa Pacific and affirmed by other authors, “students typically find that the impact of their experience is in direct proportion to the quality of the preparation that precedes the sojourn abroad, and the degree to which students interact directly and intensively with the host people and culture.”165 During this time a student would be able to research organizations they would be interested in working with (and/or volunteering for). This course would also help to organize and connect the experience to the student’s academic course of study, and would

Lucas, John Scott. “Intercultural Communication for International Programs: An Experientially-based Course Design.” Journal of Research in International Education, 2003, 302. 162 Gudykunst, 1995, quoted in Lucas, John Scott. Intercultural Communication for International Programs: An Experientially-based Course Design. Journal of Research in International Education, 2003, 308. 163 “Department of Global Studies and Sociology,” Azusa Pacific University, 2006-07 <> (February 1, 2007). 164 Ibid. 165 Ibid.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


compliment the External Studies Colloquium class which facilitates a re-entry after being abroad. “Long after students return to their home institutions, coursework and faculty should continue to challenge them to think critically and contextually about their experiences abroad.”166 Kerala overview: The Land of Coconuts Population: 31.6 million Capital: Trivandrum Main Language: Malayalam A state in southwestern India, Kerala borders Tamil Nadu and Karnataka to the east and the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean on its west and south. Although the etymology is disputed, many believe Kerala is a combination of “kera,” meaning coconut palm and “alam” meaning land, translated to mean land of the coconuts. During the course of Kerala’s history, the Portuguese, the Dutch, and the British have all contributed in different ways to the economic development of the state.167 Along the country’s long coastline are many reminders of its colonial past in the form of Syrian Churches, mosques, Dutch and Portuguese heritage homes and a 16th century synagogue.168 As the government of Kerala website states, “Its history unfolds the romantic and fascinating story of a unique process


Coffman, Jennifer E. “Study Abroad in Africa Considered within the New World Economy.” African Issues, 50. 167 Harding, Paul. Janine Eberle, Patrick Horton, Amy Karafin and Simon Richard. South India, 3rd Edition. Lonely Planet: 2005, 258. 168 Harding, 258.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


of cultural synthesis and social assimilation. In response to every challenge Kerala has demonstrated through the ages its genius for adaptation and fusion of old traditions and new values in every sphere of human thought and endeavor.”169 Described by tourist guides as a “sliver of dense greenery sandwiched between the Arabian Sea and the forested Western Ghats,”170 Kerala would be an intriguing place for further study. Kerala has many unique geographical and socioeconomic features. Few of Kerala’s buildings extend higher than the coconut palms, but the occasional cell phone tower alerts the visitor to continually modernizing scenery. In 1957 Kerala was the first state in the world to democratically elect a communist government. Despite low per capita income it has been argued to have “the most
Kerala, India 2007

equitable land distribution” as a result of land

reform policies in the 1960s, 1970s. Kerala is proud of its healthcare and education, boasting a literacy rate of officially 100 percent.171 In addition, UNICEF and the World Health Organization (WHO) designated Kerala the world's first "baby-friendly state.” In South India, women have traditionally had more freedom than in the North. This is seen as especially true for Kerala, which was the first state to recruit female police officers in 1938 and has a history of matrilineal kinship system dating back to the 14th century when
169 170

“History and Culture.” Accessed March 8, 2007, <>. Abram, David. et. al. The Rough Guide to India, 6th Edition. Rough Guides: New York, 2006, 1207. 171 Ibid, 1209.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


certain Hindu communities used to follow a traditional matrilineal system known as marumakkathayam.172 Southern India and Kerala specifically serves as an ideal location for a Pitzer exchange, following the model of immersion based on Pitzer programs. It is a stable experiential platform on which to base a model for future exchanges. Kerala is well known as progressive in the realm of women’s education and literacy for girls and has a great deal to teach students, particularly students from the US, about sustainability and what it is like to harvest and produce one’s own food from the land surrounding one’s home as well as economic development and parliamentary elected communism. With the emergence of technology, call centers and the internet there is potential for sustained exchange through technology. Kerala would be an interesting place to study a variety of fields: Gender/Feminist Studies, Queer Studies, Environmental Studies, Religious Studies among other subject areas.

Implementation of an enhanced exchange program in Kerala Beyond the homestays, intensive language and an independent project should be background study of the host country prior and during the time of studying abroad as well as an exploration of the country through independent trips within the country. The flexibility of exchange programs should also be seen as a feature adapting to current conditions, as the CIEE President stressed, “students in the next decades will become more proactive; they will need less traditional and more flexible study options.”173

172 173

Harding, 54. Mikhailova, 203; CIEE higher Education Programs, 1996, 3.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Using Marian College as a model to show what an enhanced exchange would look like it is also important to note the importance of adapting to the conditions of the host country. Looking at Marian College, it is a fully residential campus located in the Sahyadri mountain range. In the on-campus housing, known as hostels, buildings are run by priests and nuns, providing “a homely and secure environment for the students.” Established in 1995, Marian College prides itself as being an eco-friendly campus and students and faculty do not use plastic or other non-biodegradable materials on the campus, according to their website, “students are made aware of the modern-day environmental hazards and the social out-reach programs conducted by the college awakens the local people to their responsibility for a greener earth.” Classrooms are also equipped with modern teaching learning equipment and wired and wireless internet access.174 Marion College’s vision is "to be a centre where knowledge enlightens through incessant 'sadhana' and empowers its constituents to bring about life in abundance in the universe.” Their mission incorporates concepts of globalization, networked economy and e-learning, and the college claims to have: A paradigm shift in education through Management and Information Technology based courses to evolve into a dynamic centre grounded on Indian ethos, destined to achieve the 'magis' (excellence in everything) by producing a pool of skilled and innovative minds with personal integrity, professional ingenuity and social commitment achieved through our motto: 'Information, Formation, Transformation.’175


Marion College Kuttikkanam: Kuttikkanam P.O., Peermade 685 531, Office : +91.4869.232203/232654. Fax : +91.4869.232438,, 175 Emphasis added. “The College with a Difference.” Accessed March 2, 2007 <>.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


The college has an emphasis on English, but they also provide remedial classes, which may be a point of partnership, if a Pitzer student were to assist with conversational classes. The college also boasts it has a “Zero strike campus: From the moment of its inception no classes have been disrupted due to strikes or demonstrations.” Marian College is also affiliated with Mahatma Gandhi University which was established on October 2, 1983 by the Government of Kerala and is the largest of the seven Universities in Kerala.176 Using Marion College as a model in Kerala India, prior to attending Marian College it would be important for a student to have a basic understanding of Malayalam. Enrolling students in a one-month intensive Malayalam course through the Vijana Kala Vedi Cultural Centre, or contracting out a Malayalam tutor in coordination with the Centre while a student did a homestay could satisfy the language component.177 The bulk of the time would be spent as an exchange student at Marian College. Ideally, the school would be able to assist with finding and placing a student in a homestay for at least part, if not all of their time in Kerala. At the University, students could also have the opportunity to share hostel facilities with Malayalee students, helping to teach English while continuing conversational Malayalam and taking courses at the university. In order to facilitate interaction with various sectors of society the student would enroll in 2-3 courses through the University with one focusing on some aspect of culture and society, and do the equivalent of 1-2 independent projects facilitated either through Marian College or a professor at Pitzer. One option for study may be with the local community by working in a school, orphanage or NGO. Students could also do a

Ibid. Harding, 284.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


research project or apprenticeship culminating in a Directed Independent Study Project. For an exchange of this nature to be successful, it would need dedicated planning ahead of time and a student prepared to face the many challenges of intercultural learning.

Conclusion Kerala provides a location in which an enhanced socially responsible exchange is both feasible and desirable. As the section on pre-departure planning notes, for this to be successful students must be prepared and equipped with the tools and an understanding of the basics of intercultural training to embark on a journey abroad in which they will be both students and diplomats. Pitzer students have had the opportunity to meet Nelson Mandela, Robert Mugabe and Ian Smith as well as lesser-known individuals possessing indigenous knowledge. Former host-mother, program director and current visiting assistant professor Kebokile Dengu-Zvobgo described perhaps the most important feature of Pitzer programs as more than meeting high profile people such as Mandela, Mugabe and Smith, but rather, faceto-face diplomacy. “It is easy when we are in this kind of business to think everyone knows that there’s a whole world out there,” Dengu-Zvobgo said. She sees the importance on a more personal level, “When you walk into a woman’s house that’s from Ranaka [a rural village in Botswana] and live with her for four weeks – that is diplomacy,” she says. “When she hears on the radio that Americans are bad and want to kill everyone and then she sees your photos of your family and meets you — that is diplomacy. That is what is unique about a Pitzer education: it makes you all diplomats.” Students learn about the people gaining citizenship of another place, “I dare even think

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


what you are doing is more important than political ambassadors,” Dengu-Zvobgo said. In the most basic terms, she argued studying abroad takes steps toward making the world a better place by “making the world a more peaceful space.” As she said, “If you really know people in Gaborone, that impacts your mindset when you decide to throw a bomb. If George Bush had a buddy in Baghdad who he had gone to college with — if there was a home-stay mom there — there is no way he would have bombed Iraq.”178 Pitzer students are carrying out public diplomacy on a face-to-face level every time they go abroad. Charles Frankel looks at the premise behind cultural exchanges and intercultural understanding and critiques them by positing that it is “possible to understand another man without liking him.”179 He debunks the natural assumption that the promotion of international understanding will automatically lead to international good will. Frankel also points out the importance of having substance behind phrases such as “good will and “international understanding” standing alone, these are insufficient guides to wellconstructed programs of educational and cultural exchange: “The words are too vague to indicate what a reasoned program of action should be, and they do not provide criteria by which the success of educational and cultural programs can be adequately measure.”180 But, by providing a model of intercultural education for a socially responsible enhanced exchange in Kerala, these are not just empty phrases but instead loaded with potential for the creation of a more peaceful world, one student at a time.

178 179

Based on interviews and discussion, February 20, 2007. Frankel, 83. 180 Ibid, 85.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Afterword: Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Development As already mentioned, Pitzer faces what may be seen as a moral dilemmna: Do we allow 100 percent of student to go abroad without ensuring that their experience is meaningful to the fullest extent? The challenge is harmonizing the two models to create a reputable hybrid program that meets the needs of the college, while not sacrificing the colleges integrity. It is important to maintain a commitment to the ethical implications of knowledge through action by ensureing our exchanges are socially responsible to allow students from a variety of difference socioeconomic backgrounds on exchanges. The aim of this thesis is to show that students have the capacity to bring about change in themselves and others with the facilitation of a study abroad experience that is not only positive but transformative. Furthermore, it is hoped that by looking at where Pitzer is today and establishing a model for an inexpensive way of studying abroad in a way that facilitates intercultural understanding, this model may be duplicated and applied not only to colleges and universities, but also smaller independent programs through NGOs. In the future, further research would be necessary for evaluation of the model, to see if this is an effective alternative to the already established model of Pitzer programs.

Importance of preparation: It is important to help students develop intercultural competence and intercultural sensitivity. A course to prepare students for communication and one that would facilitate a deeper understanding of diversity is important for students to recognize their own privilege and power, and how these intersect with gender, race, sex and class. The college must also stress the importance of students having a basic understanding of the country

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


they are going to, and support this by allowing independent research within a classroom structure.

Development of exchange programs in line with needs and desires: While it is important to understand the importance of providing exchanges in locations such as Morocco and France, in which there has been a demonstrated need over the years, for a French and Arabic speaking location. The college must also think about where there should be programs in the future. An exchange in Southern India would complement the the already established offerings with a new geographic location. It may also allow students the opportunity to study in two completely separate areas of the same broader regions, illustrating the heterogenous nature of nation-states and regions in the global South that may be initially perceived as homogenous.

Student support in addition to faculty support: The importance of faculty support is unquestionable for the sustainability of any program abroad. In addition, the college should consider students as an important resource of knowledge. In the same way Pitzer formerly had a faculty member as the point person for each international program, the appointment of students who have attended a given program as an accessible person to help with country-specific informational sessions, as well as basic knowledge and understanding of the program may be beneficial. Given the important role of students at Pitzer, the development of future programs and exchanges should incorporate student feedback, input and suggestions to the greatest degree possible.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Bibliography Abram, David. et. al. The Rough Guide to India, 6th Edition. Rough Guides: New York, 2006. Allan, Michael. Frontier Crossings: Cultural dissonance, intercultural learning and the multicultural personality. Journal of Research in International Education 2003. Barker, Neva. Interviewed on April 11, 2007. Claremont, CA. Bennett, Milton J. ed. Basic concepts of intercultural communication: Selected readings. Yarmouth: Intercultural Press, Inc., 1998. Beverly, Lindsay. “Integrating International Education and Public Diplomacy,” Comparative Education Review (1989): 426. Brandt, Carol. “Studying Abroad Delivers Results.” Pitzer College Participant, Spring 2006. Page 15. British Columbia Center for International Education. Accessed February 7, 2007. <>. Camp, Roderic. Philip M. McKenna Professor of the Pacific Rim, Claremont McKenna College Study Abroad Brochure, 2006. "Changing Minds Winning Peace: A New Strategic Direction for U.S. Public Diplomacy in the Arab & Muslim World," (October 1, 2003), USC Center on Public Diplomacy, 13. <> (February 8, 2007). Chivers, C.J. “Dutch Soldiers Stress Restraint in Afghanistan.” New York Times, Friday April 6, 2007, A1, A12. Coffman, Jennifer E. Study Abroad in Africa Considered within the New World Economy. African Issues, Vol. 28, No.1/2, Study Abroad in Africa. (2000), pp. 49-53. Congressional Record. Senate S12708. November 10, 2005. <> (January 29, 2007). Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program (Statistics from the Institute for the International Education of Students. The 50-Year IES Alumni Survey, 2004) Cull, Nicholas J. "'Public Diplomacy' Before Gullion: The Evolution of a Phrase”. USC Center on Public Diplomacy

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


< lic_diplomacy_before_gullion_the_evolution_of_a_phrase/> (January 22, 2007). Cushner, Kenneth and Ata U. Karim. “Study Abroad at the University Level.” Handbook of Intercultural Training, Third Edition. Dan LandisJanet M. Bennett, and Milton J. Bennett eds. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc., 2004, 295. Dengu-Zvobgo, Kebokile. “International Faculty and Student Exchanges.” First Interim Report to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, December 31, 2004. Dengu-Zvobgo, Kebokile. “International Faculty and Student Exchanges.” Third Interim Report to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, from Pitzer College. December 31, 2006. “Department of Global Studies and Sociology,” Azusa Pacific University, 2006-07 <> (February 1, 2007). Donahue, Mike. Interviewed on April 11, 2007. Claremont, CA Ellsworth, Frank L. Pitzer College Application for Re-Accreditation to the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, June 1989. Frankel, Charles. The Neglected Aspect of Foreign Affairs: American Educational and Cultural Policy Abroad. The Brookings Institution: Washington D.C., 1965. Fry, Gerald W. The Economic and Political Impact of Study Abroad. Comparative Education Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, Foreign Students in Comparative Perspective. (May, 1984), pp. 203-220. “Global Competence and National Need: One Million Americans Studying Abroad,” Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program <> (January 29, 2007). Harding, Paul. Janine Eberle, Patrick Horton, Amy Karafin and Simon Richard. South India, 3rd Edition. Lonely Planet, 2005 “International Faculty and Student Exchanges.” A proposal to The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation from Pitzer College in association with Harvey Mudd College and Claremont McKenna College, July 2003. ‘Internationalizing Teaching/Learning.’ British Columbia Center for International Education. International Education Week, 2001 <> (January 10, 2007). International Education Week, 2001 <> (January 10, 2007).

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Landis, Dan. Bennett, Janet M and Bennett, Milton J. eds. Handbook of Intercultural Training, Third Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc., 2004. Leonard, Mark. “Diplomacy by Other Means” (Foreign Policy, Sept/Oct 2002 48). Lindsay, Beverly. Integrating International Education and Public Diplomacy: Creative Partnerships or Ingenious Propaganda. Comparative Education Review, Vol. 33, No. 4. (Nov., 1989), pp.423-436. Lucas, John Scott. Intercultural Communication for International Programs: An Experientially-based Course Design. Journal of Research in International Education, 2003. Mikhailova, Liudmila K. The History of CIEE: Council of International Educational Exchange and its Role in International Education Development: 1947-2002 A thesis submitted to the faculty of the graduate school of the University of Minnesota by. In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy. October 2003. “Mission + Offerings,” Council on International Educational Exchange <> (February 26, 2007). Nye, Joseph. “Propaganda isn’t the Way: Soft Power,” The International Herald Tribune, January 10, 2003. < > (February 24, 2007). Nye, Joseph. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. FPA Event Transcript. May 10th, 2005. Nardi, Peter. “Pitzer’s Accreditation Process, A Commitment to Excellence.” Pitzer College Participant, Spring 2006. page 14. Open Doors Report: Information and Data Tables released November 13, 2006 <> (January 30, 2007). Paige, Rod. “Statement on International Education Week 2002, Washington D.C., August 2002” <> (January 10, 2007). Pitzer College Self –Study Report for Reaffirmation of Accreditation. Prepared for Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges & Universities, The Western Association of Schools and Colleges, Fall 1998.

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Pitzer College Catalogue, 2006-07. p.9 Trombley, Laura. “We Have Come of Age,” Inaugural Speech, February 15, 2003. <> (February 1, 2007). Tsolidis, Rosi. When global citizenship sounds like a cliché. Journal of Research in International Education 2002, 219. United States Information Agency Association. “USIA Alumni Association,” <> (February, 7, 2007). "U.S. Public Diplomacy: State Department Expands Efforts but Faces Significant Challenges," (September 2003), USC Center on Public Diplomacy <> (February 3, 2007). “What is Public Diplomacy?” USC Center on Public Diplomacy <> (February 12, 2007). “What is the Peace Corps?” Peace Corps <> (March 1, 2007). “109th Congress, 1st Session Designating 2006 as the `Year of Study Abroad,'” November 10, 2005. Senate Resolution 308 <> (January 29, 2007). “2006, The Year of Study Abroad,” Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program <> (February, 4, 2007).

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Appendix A: History of Pitzer College External Studies/Study Abroad Programs Bold = Currently running programs and exchanges May, 2007 1963 - 1964 1965-1966 1968 - 1969 1969 - 1970 1971 - 1972 Pitzer College opens to students Pitzer's first two students participate in study abroad in Italy and France Semester in Appalachia program (ended 1974) Semester in France (ended 1985) Pitzer History Project in England (ended 1972) Semester in Marin, California (ended 1972) 1973-1974 Semester in Nepal (renamed Pitzer in Nepal. In Spring 2004, relocated to Darjeeling, India ) Semester in Africa (offered in Kenya until 1975) 1974 - 1975 Semester in Rome (ended in 1987) Semester in Tuscarora, Nevada (ended 1978) Semester in Argentina (ended 1975) 1976 - 1977 1977 - 1978 1982 - 1983 1987 – 1991 Summer 1988 1989 - 1990 1991 - 1992 1993 - 1994 1994 - 1995 1996 – 1997 Semester in London (ended 1983) Semester in Washington, DC (ended 1983) Earth Sky and Water Project in New Mexico (ended 1984) with Carl Hertel Summer Study at London School of Economics with Harvey Botwin Summer Study in Japan (continues through present) Pitzer-Scripps in Zimbabwe (continued as Pitzer in Zimbabwe – then relocated to Botswana in Fall 2000) Pitzer College in Parma (continues through present). Now known as Pitzer College in Italy Pitzer College in Turkey (converted to an exchange for Fall 2004) Pitzer College in China (relocated from Shanghai to Beijing in Fall 2000, continues through present) Pitzer College in Venezuela (relocated to Ecuador in Spring 2003 due to economic situation in Venezuela)

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


1995 – 1996 1996 – 1997

Pitzer College in Wales (ended Fall 2001) Pitzer College in Ontario, California (CCCSI took over administration in Fall 2004, continues through present) Pitzer College in Guatemala – Summer Health Program (relocated to Costa Rica in 1997) with Ann Stromberg

1997 – 1998

Pitzer College in Ecuador – University Based Studies (continues through present – took over the Scripps program, which was started in the late 1980’s) Pitzer College in Costa Rica – Summer Health Program (continues through present) with Ann Stromberg

1998 – 1999 2000-2001 Spring 2003 Spring 2004 Spring 2004 2004 - 2005 2004 - 2005 2004 - 2005 2004 - 2005 2004 - 2005 2004 - 2005 2004 - 2005 2004 - 2005

Route 66 Program with Michael Woodcock (one time program) Pitzer College in Botswana (continues through present) Pitzer in Ecuador – Intensive Language and Culture (relocated from Venezuela) Pitzer in Darjeeling – (relocated from Nepal) Mellon Exchange – Flinders University in Australia (ended Fall 2004) Mellon Exchange – Bristol University in England Mellon Exchange - University of Koblenz-Landau in Germany Mellon Exchange –University of KwaZulu Natal in South Africa Exchange – Middle East Technical University (Pitzer in Turkey converted to an exchange program) Exchange – University of Birmingham in England Mellon Exchange – Autonoma Universidad de Yucatan in Mexico Exchange – Payap University in Thailand Exchange – University of Adelaide in Australia

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


2005 - 2006 2005 - 2006 2005 - 2006 2006 - 2007 2006 - 2007 Summer 2007 Summer 2007 2007 - 2008 Summer 2008

Pitzer in Costa Rica – Firestone Center for Restoration Ecology founded. Exchange – Geranios Institute and University of Seville in Spain Exchange – Biotechnology in Healthcare in Germany, Ireland or Finland Exchange – Kwansei Gakuin University in Japan Exchange – University of Leon in Spain Global Local Program to Botswana with Mita Banerjee Global Local Program to Darjeeling with Dipa Basu Exchange – Al Akhawayn University in Morocco Global Local Program to Nepal with Emily Chao

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Appendix B: Senate Resolution 308 Designating 2006 as the "Year of Study Abroad". Whereas ensuring that the citizens of the United States are globally literate is the responsibility of the educational system of the United States; Whereas educating students internationally is an important way to share the values of the United States , to create goodwill for the United States around the world, to work toward a peaceful global society, and to increase international trade; Whereas, according to a 2002 American Council on Education poll, 79 percent of people in the United States agree that students should have a study abroad experience sometime during college, but only 1 percent of students from the United States currently study abroad each year; Whereas study abroad programs help people from the United States to be more informed about the world and to develop the cultural awareness necessary to avoid offending individuals from other countries; Whereas a National Geographic global literacy survey found that 87 percent of students in the United States between the ages of 18 and 24 cannot locate Iraq on a world map, 83 percent cannot find Afghanistan , 58 percent cannot find Japan , and 11 percent cannot even find the United States ; Whereas studying abroad exposes students from the United States to valuable global knowledge and cultural understanding and forms an integral part of their education; Whereas Congress recognized through the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.) that the security, stability, and economic vitality of the United States in an increasingly complex global age depend largely upon having a globally competent citizenry and the availability of experts specializing in world regions, foreign languages, and international affairs; Whereas the Coalition for International Education, an ad hoc group of higher education organizations with interests in the international education programs of the Department of Education, and Government Accountability Office reports have found that Federal agencies, educational institutions, and corporations in the United States are suffering from a shortage of professionals with international knowledge and foreign language skills; Whereas, according to the Coalition for International Education, institutions of higher education in the United States are struggling to graduate enough students with the language skills and cultural competence necessary to meet the current demands of business, government, and educational institutions;

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Whereas a survey done by the Institute for the International Education of Students shows that studying abroad influences subsequent educational experiences, decisions to expand or change academic majors, and decisions to attend graduate school; Whereas substantive research literature demonstrates that some of the core values and skills of higher education are enhanced by participation in study abroad programs; Whereas study abroad programs not only open doors to foreign language learning, but also empower students to better understand themselves and others through a comparison of cultural values and ways of life; Whereas study abroad programs for students from the United States can provide specialized training and practical experiences not available at institutions in the United States; Whereas a blue ribbon task force of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, a global association of individuals dedicated to advancing international education and exchange, found that a national effort to promote study abroad programs is needed to address a serious deficit in global competence in the United States; Whereas the bipartisan, federally-appointed Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program, established pursuant to section 104 of the Miscellaneous Appropriations and Offsets Act, 2004 (division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108-199; 118 Stat. 435), is scheduled to make recommendations by December 1, 2005, for a national study abroad program to meet this need: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate— (1) designates 2006 as the `Year of Study Abroad'; (2) encourages secondary schools, institutions of higher learning, businesses, and government programs to promote and expand study abroad opportunities; and (3) encourages the people of the United States to— (A) support initiatives to promote and expand study abroad opportunities; and (B) observe the `Year of Study Abroad' with appropriate ceremonies, programs, and other activities.181


Accessed February 2, 2007. <>

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Appendix C: Senior Survey 2002-2006 Statistics from Peter Nardi, Director of Institutional Research April 23, 2007
N = 157 187 193 182 188

studied abroad

2002 56.7%

2003 58.3%

2004 53.9%

2005 52.2%

2006 52.1%

All graduating seniors combined from 2002-2006 Generally or Very Satisfied with their Pitzer education Pitzer greatly enhanced ability to read or speak a foreign language Agree or Strongly Agree that “I am informed enough to talk intelligently about a culture other than my own” Pitzer greatly enhanced ability to relate to people of different races, nations, religions Pitzer greatly enhanced ability to develop an awareness of social problems Pitzer greatly enhanced ability to understand myself Pitzer greatly enhanced ability to place problems in an historical perspective Definitely would or probably would relive experience at Pitzer Applied for a fellowship or grant Did not Study Abroad 92% 9% 76% 45% 56% 53% 47% 72.5% 19% Studied Abroad 95.5% 38% 87.5% 54% 68% 65% 59% 80% 38.5%

Percentage differences between the two groups are statistically significant.

Alumni survey
Satisfaction with external studies (study abroad) Very 57 2004 (n=82) Somewhat Total Satisfied 21 78 Very 49 2005 (n=107) Somewhat Total Satisfied 28 77

Lakshmi Saracino Eassey


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.