The Learner Profile in the Global Community: Developing Compassionate, Connected 21st Century Citizens in Multicultural Settings

 

1. Introduction Is the Learner Profile an idealization of global human values or a more narrow reflection of Western educational and philosophical traditions? Does East in fact meet and merge with West in the Learner Profile? For IB World Schools located outside of the English speaking world, the Learner Profile and some non-Western systems of personal and societal values and attributes are not naturally aligned. Continuing the ‘East-West’ dialogue facilitated by George Walker’s 2010 workshop and recent position paper, this paper seeks to explore some of the challenges involved in putting the Learner Profile into practice while exploring some of the opportunities presented by the sensitive and intelligent merging of culturally disparate attributes and value systems in IB World Schools. The IB mission statement offers a useful point of departure for discussion on this issue; it states:

The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect (International Baccalaureate Organisation, 2011).

The absence of universally agreed standards or even guidance on what constitutes a better and more peaceful world makes the challenge of educating compassionate, connected 21st century global citizens somewhat problematic in non-Western settings. Within the broad range of cultural settings that comprise the global community of IB World Schools, the Learner Profile is one part of a complex array of cultural and educational influences that inform choices, decisions, and behaviours. The employment of the Learner Profile as a tool for the socialization and enculturation of a compassionate and connected 21st century citizenry is both complex and problematic, particularly for those schools located in culturally diverse communities where the educational value or cultural appropriateness of some of the profile attributes may not be self-evident. The absence or implicit nature of some culturally important values and attributes in the Learner Profile similarly creates a tension for some schools. Some of the Learner Profile attributes, such as risk-takers, are clearly problematic in some cultural settings. Others, such as balanced, present a more subtle challenge, as the parameters of ‘balance’ and the points at which someone might be considered balanced, may vary according to cultural context. Ultimately, the Learner Profile can be successfully contextualized within non-western communities and cultural settings that emphasize a stronger collective orientation. The key

lies in finding ways in which to integrate the strongly individualistic attributes of the Learner Profile within more collectively orientated value systems and cultural settings.

2. Aim of Paper This paper explores this problem through the ‘lens’ of the Learner Profile and draws on each attribute as a parameter for discussing three essential properties made explicit in the conference theme: compassion, connection, and citizenship. These three essential properties pose certain questions in relation to education in a diversity of cultural settings around the world. While there may be a shared understanding surrounding the use of terms like ‘compassion’ in one cultural setting. It is highly likely that a different community in a different cultural setting will arrive at a different set of understandings, even where both communities share a common language, for example, the English language is shared between the United States and the United Kingdom, but with profound cultural contrasts. Compassionate: defines what or who we care about and how we express our care. The form by which compassion is expressed is determined to an extent by cultural factors. Furthermore, the discretionary exercise of compassion in one cultural context may be obligatory in another. Connected: describes the critical relationships in our lives that connect us within a community (and beyond) and how these connections shape our decisions and behaviours. The durability of our familial and communal connections needs to be carefully considered. A key feature of relationships in a cultural context is to consider at what point an ethical or moral principle would override commitments to other members of our group, school, or the wider community. Examples of this include protest or civil disobedience actions. Citizenship: describes the rights and responsibilities conferred through membership of a specific community, incorporating what is expected of a citizen and how these expectations link or isolate citizens. Questions about citizenship focus on the extent to which the rights and responsibilities are enduring properties of a legal or constitutional system, i.e., a set of principles (e.g., Bill of Rights), or are conferred through the personal authority of a leadership figure, with the possibility of problematic transference to another leadership figure through governmental succession.

3. The IB Learner Profile: Cultural Questions  The following section considers each attribute in the Learner Profile from a cultural perspective, raising questions that reflect the different ways in which the virtues of the profile might be seen in the light of other cultural perspectives. Defining what culture is offers a useful starting point from which to consider questions of differing cultural perspectives. A working definition to be adopted for the purposes of this paper is that

culture is a shared pattern of attitudes, understandings, and behaviours that acts as a defining quality of a discrete social grouping. Language is a social artefact that acts as the primary carrier of culture. The following discussion needs to take two different approaches. The first and more straightforward consideration is that there are culturally mediated differences within each of the IB Learner profile attributes and these differences are explored in summary form below. The point at which an individual may be balanced, for example, reflects the cultural orientation of the individual and surrounding community, risk-taking also reflects specific culturally mediated attitudes shared across a community. The more difficult discussion deals with the list of attributes itself and whether this list is populated with a comprehensive set of attributes that reflect the universal human condition or just those attributes that are important in one cultural setting or region. This debate requires a more nuanced and multi-dimensional approach, as to include all potential attributes for the sake of completion may strip the profile of any heuristic power to shape our thinking on the nature and outcomes of learning within the IB context. Ultimately, the challenge of course is determine whether or not Hofstede is correct when he states that culture does not exist and that values don’t exist (Hofstede, 2002, p. 5). To Hofstede, culture and values are shared cognitive constructs that retain power only to the extent that they have some capacity to explain and predict behaviour, attitudes, and other social phenomena. In his own deconstruction of generally observable cultural phenomena that are part of the shared human experience, Hofstede identified the following five key parameters of cultural difference: distribution of power (PDI: Power Distance Index), individuality versus collectivism (IDV: Individualism), tolerance of ambiguity (UAI: Uncertainty Avoidance Index), gender roles (masculinity versus femininity), and respect for traditions, virtue, and temporal orientation (LTO: Long-Term Orientation) (Hofstede, 2009).

4. Balanced Each culture will interpret the notion of balance within the context of the community’s primary life parameters. These parameters reflect the essential dimensions of life in the host culture and will certainly vary from country to country or region to region. What is ‘balanced’ in terms of an individual’s life will therefore vary enormously, depending on what a host culture considers to be important. Teachers need to be sensitive to the different parameters of life and the ‘balance points’ within the spectrum of acceptability for each parameter. The paired attributes listed below illustrate some of these dimensions:

a. Individual and the group (individual index): are the rights and concerns of the individual or the group paramount and to what extent does one override the other?

b. Public/state and the private/personal (personal index): are public concerns and issues more important than personal feelings and concerns? Is there a cultural imperative to put public service ahead of individual needs?

c. Ecclesiastical and secular (religious index): are matters of faith more important in a particular cultural setting? Are spiritual values or religious observances significant influences over individual decisions and behaviours?

d. Work/study and recreation (‘fun’ index): what is the value placed on personal recreation and ‘free time’ in a cultural setting? How is this balanced against the demands of work, family, community and state?

e. Family and community (community index): what is the status of the family and its needs/demands with respect to those of the wider community? Do family obligations take precedence over community or even legal/public expectations and obligations?

f. Vocational/professional and personal (vocation index): how important is the place or status of work in a given cultural setting and how is the identity of the individual shaped by what they do?

g. Parents/older generation and peers/contemporaries (age index): what expectations and obligations are placed on members of younger generations? Are they expected to be obedient to older members of the community without question, purely on the basis of seniority?

h. Merit/achievement and equality/egalitarianism (merit index): how is merit viewed? Does merit take precedence over fairness and equality?

i. Tradition and innovation (conservation index): how important and ‘sacrosanct’ are traditions? Is innovation encouraged and what are the limitations of innovation?

j. Political activism and civil obedience (power index): is dissent tolerated or encouraged? Is disobedience allowed if the cause is considered to be justified by the circumstances? Are students allowed to express dissenting perspectives and if so, how ‘safe’ are they in doing so?

k. Mobility and stability (mobility index): are families and individuals highly mobile, both geographically and socially? What prompts a family or individual to move to a new location or change their social status?

l. Values and pragmatism (values index): are values paramount in determining decisions and courses of action or do changing circumstances allow for values to be set aside in the pursuit of a specific need as determined by circumstances and potential gain or benefit?

m. Relationships and legal standards (relationship index): are individuals allowed to ‘bend’ or break laws in order to sustain the integrity of a personal relationship? What grounds are needed to justify this and how would such a course of action be viewed by members of the wider community?

n. Friendship and morals (moral index): are moral standards subservient to friendships?

It is of course entirely possible for an individual to have more than one ‘balance point’ in a given cultural context these balances may be adjusted with changing locations, cultural orientations, or circumstances. Individuals with multiple cultural ‘identities’ may find that they are balanced in different ways within a single parameter depending on cultural context. This raises the question of the prioritisation or hierarchy of balance points.

5. Caring Caring takes differing forms within different cultural contexts; there are different ways in which caring attitudes are expressed and different thresholds of need that trigger a ‘caring’ response from individuals and institutions. For example, the ways in which the ill and infirm are treated within a community and the attitudes of the carers themselves vary from culture to culture (Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2008). Is caring seen as an individual attribute, a family obligation, or a community obligation? How does the individual feel about their caring: what is their attitude towards caring? Expressions of care between cultural groups have enormous potential for misinterpretation, particularly where issues of national sovereignty and self-sufficiency are involved. In working with Amity International in the Peoples Republic of China over a period of years, the author’s own experience with the politics of care were highly instructive about the way in which one cultural group’s care might be interpreted as patronising and even construed as political interference by another group or government. The message intended by the carers was simple: “We care”; the message perceived by the recipient community, however, was more complicated: “You don’t have the resources to manage this problem yourself, so we have to intervene.” These are two very different messages. Anecdotally, it can be asserted that philanthropic work may have unintended and disproportionate influences on the recipient community. The Australian Indigenous communities in central and northern Australia have received significant financial aid and material support over many decades that in many cases have not resulted in discernible improvements in living standards for the participants. Care expressed through the payment of donations may not amount to care at all. Community service groups may be seen as ‘care tourists’ in regions of Australia or elsewhere with high-needs groups and some communities actively discourage this type of activity. This phenomenon has also been reported in other parts of the world (e.g., indigenous American communities) and as such has direct implications for the modes through which IB learners might express caring beyond their own communities.

6. Communicators The attribute of communication is one of the most complex and culturally difficult attributes in the Learner Profile and space does not permit a comprehensive treatment of the different aspects of communication that are culturally constructed. In fact, all communication acts are shaped by culture, if the broadest definition of culture as a ‘shared pattern of interactions between a self-defined group of people’ is adopted. The way utterances are constructed, the forms of body language used during communications acts, the ways in which the taking of turns is achieved within a group – all of these reflect cultural context.

Body language is profoundly different from culture to culture. The next time a Chinese person refers to himself or herself in conversation, observe closely which part of the body they point to (the nose). An example of body orientation in communication is the phenomenon of avoidance of direct eye contact between Australian Indigenous communicators, as eye contact reflects power and challenge and as such may be seen by the recipient as threatening (Walsh & Yallop, 1993, p. 187). In other contexts, eye contact is seen as a demonstration of sincerity and honesty (“look at me when I am speaking to you!”).

(All Yours, 2007)

The length of silences or communication gaps tolerated by groups varies from culture to culture (Kypriandides, 2010). The extent to which overlapping speech is tolerated is similarly culturally determined, with some cultures, such as Latin American (especially Mexican) communities, demonstrating a high degree of tolerance towards overlapping speech acts (Grün, 1998). Where speech overlap is common, gestures are more frequently used to convey or reinforce meaning and emotion (Steininger, Schiel, & Louka, 2001). Within the educational context, these considerations are significant, as they determine the way in which the classroom dynamic develops. The locus of control for speech acts typically rests with the teacher in most educational settings, but can students initiate or exercise any form of control over turn taking? Does the host culture tolerate or encourage interruptions to speech acts and what are the acceptable forms of interruption? Some cultures use non-verbal forms of communication to indicate that someone wishes to contribute to the conversation. Particular gestures, such as the eye blinking used by some British people, may be employed to communicate an intention to speak (Grün, 1998). The form of address used by students when addressing a teacher is another case in point. In some settings, familiarity is encouraged and students may use a teacher’s first or given name. In Chinese culture, for example, students are expected to use the teacher’s surname and the honorific title ‘teacher’ (laoshi – 老師). This status is retained for a lifetime, and certainly well beyond the time spent by the student studying at the institution. In any set of communication acts there may be an overarching need to seek or sustain consensus or to challenge the status quo (tradition versus innovation). The dominance of

‘questioning’ attributes such as communicator, inquirer, thinker, reflective, and risk-taker in the Learner Profile implies that protection of the existing canon of human knowledge is not an overt aim of an IB education. It is therefore perhaps implicit that respect for tradition is not necessarily an expected outcome of IB programs; this no doubt needs further debate within the ranks of IB educators. If questioning is taken for granted, we must be careful to ensure that questions are managed carefully and sensitively. Other parameters of communication include:

a. Politeness index: what degree of politeness is expected during interaction and how is politeness expressed or communicated – by the use of honorifics, by deferential body language, use of politeness markers in language (e.g., in Chinese the use of the respectful ‘nin’您 instead of the more common ‘ni’ 你 for ‘you’)?

b. Proximity index: how close do speakers stand when communicating? What is the locally accepted ‘personal space’ volume? In some Asian countries, personal proximity is much closer than in the West.

c. Volume index: what level of speech volume is expected or tolerated in a communication act?

d. Personal disclosure index: how much personal information can be shared? For example, Chinese conversationalists will routinely ask and expect to receive details about personal finances, such as income, whereas this is considered to be an inappropriate topic in most European and American cultural settings.

e. Duration index: length of turn – how long is one party allowed to speak? These offer a brief snapshot of some aspects of communication acts that need to be understood by teachers in the classroom, regardless of cultural background. Each culture has its own standards for these and other parameters. This does not mean that each culture is right and all others are wrong.

7. Inquirers, Knowledgeable, & Open-minded The act of inquiry lies at the heart of the IB’s educational philosophy. Fundamentally, constructivism asserts that all knowledge is constructed by the learner and that the inquiry or the learning question is the point from which all learning and hence all knowledge proceeds (Piaget, 1952). The French constructivist Gaston Bachelard states:

All knowledge is in response to a question. If there were no question, there would be no scientific knowledge. Nothing proceeds from itself. Nothing is given. All is constructed (Bachelard, 2002 [1938]).

This idea of knowledge as the product emerging from a process of inquiry is fundamentally and philosophically Western in its origins and orientation, although it is commonly accepted and adopted in schooling systems around the world. The fact that inquiry might be culturally problematic, however, is not something that is the topic of frequent debate.

IB students are expected to inquire: to question, to examine, to scrutinise, and to explore. Implicit in this approach culturally is that the student has considerable individual volition, if not an absolute obligation, with respect to initiating inquiry.

(Taylor, 2011)

A further implicit value in this obligation to inquire is that there is no particular premium placed on protecting the status quo. Students are expected to challenge and probe and provided that inquiry is undertaken in an intellectually honest manner, there are no generally imposed protected topics. This is not the case in all cultures. At an IB school in northern Australia, when teachers investigated habitual acts of truancy by an Australian Indigenous student, it was discovered that the student was compelled to absent himself from the study of science because the unit of inquiry was dealing with the weather and particularly the rain cycle. In the student’s home community, rain was considered to be a sacred totemic topic directly connected to cultural legends and it was culturally taboo for the student to question the source of rain. Indeed, the quality of open-mindedness is itself a tacit challenge to a canon of accepted truth. It concedes implicitly that what is held to be known may not in fact be accurate. This quality is subject to debate in all cultures and one must be careful and selective in being open-minded. For example, a strong taboo in contemporary Western countries involves a non-negotiable prohibition on the exploitation or even depiction of children in a way that could be construed as sexual. This is not a topic that one can be ‘open-minded’ about. To what extent, however, is this attitude shaped by contemporary cultural values that are now at variance with community values in times past? For example, Shakespeare wrote a celebrated play in the late 16th century in which the female lead had not yet seen the change of fourteen years (Shakespeare, 2008, pp. 27-31). Modern attitudes would certainly not tolerate a similarly romantic depiction of a thirteen-year-old girl. Interestingly, by the 19th century, in a reprinting of this same work, Juliet’s age had been changed to eighteen (Shakespeare, 1839, pp. 11, 16). This has been changed

back to the original rendering for reasons of historical accuracy, not because this content is any more palatable in the 21st century. Open-mindedness, along with free speech, has its limits in every culture and community.

(Leunig, 2005)

8. Principled  While the Learner Profile is careful not to be prescriptive about the specific nature of the principles to which learners adhere, it is universally agreed that having a set of principles is a fundamental expectation. Various web-based authorities define principles as a set of rules, axioms, fundamental beliefs, standards, truths, or doctrines. The Learner Profile specifies that learners should have a set of guiding principles, but does this imply that these should be universally agreed upon in the community of world schools, or are principles held to be an individual property that is constructed by the learner in the same way as knowledge? Does the Learner Profile allow the student to adopt principles that are subject to revision or negotiation, and if so, by what mechanism might they be renegotiated? The notion that principles might have the quality of ‘universality’ is a particularly European notion that has its philosophical roots in western thinking about the world (Kotzur, 2005). The possibility that some principles established in one part of the world might have an application in another part of the world is also the topic of international debate in the post Cold War world (Kotzur, 2005). Implicit in the notion of universality is that principles have an independent existence that transcends the individuals that created the principles in the first place. This contention is not

accepted in all cultures, as it is held by some that people create principles and these must logically be subject to human, subjective interpretation and negotiation.

9. Risk-takers  Perhaps the most problematic of the Learner Profile attributes, risk-taking certainly arouses some strongly polarised views among educators and non-educators alike. While risk-taking is equated with the willingness of students to be courageous in the face of uncertainty, making mistakes to further learning, there is also an element of ‘daring’ in this attribute that poses a potential conflict in more conservative cultural settings that value traditions and respect to a greater extent than in the West. Learning without risk, mistakes, or uncertainty, is for many educators ineffective and uninteresting. If learning is philosophically directed towards the acquisition of novel experiences and the construction of new knowledge, logically there must be uncertainty for both the learner and the educator. At an institutional level, however, aversion to risk in learning settings, whether cultural, legal, or ethical, is increasingly a fact of life in schools. The increasing limitation placed on experiential learning programs outside of the classroom in many countries is a case in point. This trend is contrary to the spirit of inquiry that informs and underpins all IB learning programs.

(Mueller, 1995)

The risk aversion spectrum ranges from no risk, high certainty, with teachers in absolute control, through shared control, with some student volition, ambiguity or uncertainty, and experimentation, to high-risk, student controlled, self-directed learning with high uncertainty. The learning outcomes vary dramatically across this spectrum, with student engagement in

learning generally increasing in direct proportion to the level of risk, independence, and uncertainty.

Figure  1:  Zones  of  Educational  Risk  

 Striking a balance between appropriate, managed risk to maximise learning, while managing the legal and ethical dimensions of educational risk, is a complex and time-consuming task that lies increasingly beyond the expertise and experience of many educators.  

10. Reflective and Thinkers While the primacy of place accorded to ‘thinking’ in the learning process is not questioned in this paper, the modes and expressions of reflection and the ways in which reflection connects thinking to learning, do vary somewhat across cultures. There is acknowledgement of the importance of reflection as a discrete step in the learning process, as the mechanism by which sensory perceptions associated with a learning activity become realised as new knowledge and changed attitudes. The modes of reflection are more likely to manifest other characteristics of the learning process in a particular context: for example:

a. Teacher-centred/directed; i. Formal and assessed (specified output: written, oral); ii. Informal and unassessed (student determined output: journal,

discussion group); or b. Student centred/directed.

These attributes are perhaps the least problematic culturally, but nevertheless need careful consideration when viewed from a classroom and school implementation perspective. What is the function of reflection and who is the intended audience?  

low  risk  low  certainty    

(random  -­‐  low  engagement)  

low  risk    high  certainty    

(predictable  -­‐  med-­‐low  engagement)  

high  risk  low  certainty  

(dangerous  -­‐  fear  )  

high  risk  high  certainty  (adventurous  -­‐    

high  engagement)  

educational  risk  versus  

 student  engagement  

11. The Eight Virtues + One: An Alternative Approach Introduced in an independent school in Hong Kong, the Eight Virtues + One are intended to provide an alternative to the Western systems of values that are typically found in schools that aspire to a global orientation in the region. The Eight Virtues are traditional values that date from the founding of the Republic of China in the early 20th Century in their current form, with one modification for school use (the value li 禮 is substituted for the value xin信). They are strongly rooted in Chinese culture, providing an educational framework of values that draws from Chinese heritage. Each virtue has been reinterpreted to offer greater relevance to 21st Century students. The Eight Virtues + One provide a strong foundation of values that shape attitudes, decisions, and behaviour. While each of the virtues does not translate easily into English, the following offers a summary of the ideas embodied in each: 忠 (zhong) – embodies the concept of loyalty and responsibility to others, making a commitment and being devoted to what is important. Zhong sets the standard for the establishment of relationships between members of a community. 孝(xiao) – recognizes that learners are sometimes leaders and sometimes followers; it emphasises the importance of mutual respect in hierarchical relationships. Xiao 孝 implies an obligation and a duty to the past. 仁 (ren) – recognizes the need to approach every person and all living things with kindness and care. 愛 (ai) – is a love of learning, an intellectual curiosity that encourages lifelong learning. 禮 (li) – is manifested in traditions, courtesies, habits and daily routines; it also denotes the importance of ceremonies and formal actions. 義 (yi) – is the concept justice, or just principles, which should apply to all members of the community. 和 (he) – is harmony, moderation, tolerance, and good humour. 平 (ping) – is balance, equality, and fairness; it is closely tied to the concept of 和 and when the two characters are combined, they form the word "peace". 智 (zhi) implies having intelligence and wisdom, being able to use knowledge and experience to make decisions that benefit the community. It is only by following eight virtues

that an individual can truly have 智 and thus reach academic, personal, and professional success; one’s intelligence is only effective within a framework of values.

Figure  2:  The  Eight  Virtues  +  One

The diagram shows the framework of eight virtues surrounding the central goal of wisdom. It is only with the support of these virtues that a learner can expect to develop wisdom.

Figure  3:  Mapping  the  Eight  Virtues  against  the  Learner  Profile

智!

忠!孝!

仁!

愛!禮!

義!

和!

平!

!"#$%&#'

()*+),&'

-".+$**/"0'

!"1)'

-"23&)*#'

42*5,)'

6$3."0#'

7$%$0,)'

80&)%%/9)0,)'

:/*;".'

����

IB Learner Profile! Eight Virtues + One!Balanced! Balance!Caring! Compassion!Communicator!Inquirer! Love Knowledgeable! Knowledge!Open-minded! Harmony!Principled! Justice!Reflective !Risk-taker!Thinker! Wisdom !

Loyalty!Respect !Courtesy!

The Eight Virtues and the Learner Profile appear to provide some overlapping or even conflicting or incompatible objectives for learners. The following figures illustrate the relationship between the Eight Virtues + One and the Learner Profile. The way in which the individual attributes of the two systems is structured provides some guidance as to the location of the attribute – is it an individual or a shared attribute. In the Learner Profile, for example, balanced is a property of the individual (i.e., the learner is balanced), whereas the virtue of balance in the Eight Virtues is an attribute that exists independently of the learner; it is sought as community virtue. The same holds true for each subsequent attribute. Love is equated with inquirer in this comparison because this refers to a love of learning, an intellectual curiosity, or a passion for inquiry. Harmony is not a good match with open-mindedness, but it does imply openness to a diversity of viewpoints, attitudes, and beliefs. Three virtues, loyalty, respect, and courtesy (or etiquette) do not map directly onto attributes in the Learner Profile, although respect is one of the attitudes embedded in the Primary Years Program. Similarly, reflective and risk-taker do not find an equivalent place among the Eight Virtues. This is perhaps a little surprising in the case of reflection, which does tend to have a more natural place in eastern thinking. In fact, reflection is seen an implicit component of the virtue wisdom. Without reflection, wisdom is seen as unobtainable. Risk-taking alone stands out as an anomaly; it offers a stark cultural contrast to the attributes of the Eight Virtues, which do not suggest the need for courage, challenge, or innovation, valuing instead, respect, loyalty, and harmony.

Figure  4:  Dominant  Interpersonal  Orientation  of  the  Eight  Virtues  

The Eight Virtues offer a strongly interpersonal orientation, reflecting the underlying intent to describe how individuals living together in a community should behave towards each other. It governs the modes and nature of interaction and by implication, imposes certain

Outward - interpersonal •  Loyalty • Respect • Compassion •  Love • Courtesy •  Justice • Harmony

Inward - intrapersonal

• Balance

!"#$%&'"(%)*+&,&-.*&/&0("*.%120.&

demands on the attributes of community membership. Put simply, these are attributes that belong to the community as a discrete entity. While balance here is listed as an intrapersonal attribute (i.e., individuals seek internal balance in their lives), it is actually also expressed in the quality of balance between people and as such could equally be applied to the interpersonal side of the equation.

 

Figure  5:  Dominant  Intrapersonal  Orientation  of  the  Learner  Profile  

By contrast, the dominant intrapersonal orientation of the Learner Profile is evident. These are attributes possessed by individuals and are therefore seen as agentive tools that shape how each member of the community constructs their interaction with other members of the community. They are individual properties that govern the actions and attitudes of each person. How this is expressed at a collective level is not part of the profile.

12. Compassionate, Connected Citizenship  This paper has attempted to examine the Learner Profile as a reflection of a particular cultural context that emphasises the individual over the collective. How does the Learner Profile contribute towards a compassionate, connected citizenship? Does it provide a complete set of learned attributes and moral standards that equip graduates from IB World Schools with all that is needed to create a better and more peaceful world? One question that needs to be answered is this: if not the Learner Profile, then what should take its place? If the Learner Profile does display a strong Western cultural orientation, as is contended here, does its cultural provenance negate its validity as a universally or broadly applicable educational construct? This is not the position taken here. In fact, at an individual level, the Learner Profile takes an educationally sound position with respect to a learner-centred approach to education that seeks to maximise engagement in

Outward - interpersonal

• Caring • Communicators

Inward - intrapersonal

• Balanced •  Inquirers • Knowledgeable • Open-minded • Principled • Reflective • Risk-takers • Thinkers

!"#$%&$'#()*#)$+),-.#$/$,)0#*1(2,*$

all dimensions of the human experience, but most importantly, in learning itself. So the question is not what should replace the Learner Profile, but what else needs to be added to complete the picture?

Figure  6:  Balance  between  the  Individual  and  the  Collective

The following figure illustrates in two dimensions the notion of a matrix that recognises that humans have both an individual and a communal dimension to their lives. It is in fact not a case of either or, but both dimensions that need to be incorporated into the value systems that apply to learning.

 

 

Figure  7:  A  Synthesis  of  Individual  and  Collective  Values

Individuality  Learner  Pro>ile  

Collectivity  Eight  Virtues  

Loyalty  Respect  

Compassion  Love  

Etiquette  Justice  

Harmony  Balance  

Balanced  Caring  

Communicator  Inquirer  

Knowledgeable  Open-­‐minded  Principled  Re>lective  Risk-­‐taker  Thinker  

In recognising that we act at times as individuals and at other times as members of a group, this matrix offers a vision of education that is more complete than either the Learner Profile or the Eight Virtues alone.

13. Towards Cultural Stereoscopic Vision – Bicultural Education A final thought on the nature of cultural context in education offers a comparison with the possibilities of depth perception afforded by the provision of stereoscopic vision. Humans are gifted with stereoscopic vision that allows the brain to process visual stimuli from two physically separated perspectives, which is then interpreted by the image processing centres of the brain to produce a fully integrated, three-dimensional view of the world; it is through stereoscopic vision that we have depth perception. The notion of multicultural education is not new, but in those settings and institutions in which cultural and linguistic competence is pursued in depth, the dichotomization of cultural values suggests that students are in danger of a form of cultural schizophrenia, trapped by opposing systems of values and world views. In fact, the metaphor of cultural stereoscopic vision is entirely appropriate as these students are fully able to process stimuli and integrate these to produce a coherent, three-dimensional ‘view’ of the cultural landscape. The bicultural student in fact sees the world in depth, with issues understood in their complexity and richness from different – not opposing – cultural perspectives, which are then in turn processed into an integrated whole. Biculturals and multiculturals simply see the world differently. A final thought comes from the words of Lev Vygotsky: “Through others, we become ourselves.” If we become ourselves through interaction with others who bring a rich diversity of cultural experience and background, then the people we become and the world we build must inevitably reflect that richness.

Through others, we become ourselves… (Vygotsky, 1998, p. 170)

References All  Yours  (2007).  Never  Make  Eye  Contact  Retrieved  28  March,  2011,  from  http://www.all-­‐

yours.net/c/gallery/2992.html  Bachelard,  G.  (2002  [1938]).  The  Formation  of  the  Scientific  Mind:  A  Contribution  to  a  

Psychoanalysis  of  Objective  Knowledge  (M.  McAllester  Jones,  Trans.).  Manchester:  Clinamen  Press  Ltd.  

Grün,  U.  (1998).  Visualization  of  Gestures  in  Conversational  Turn-­‐taking  Situations.  Retrieved  from  http://coral.lili.uni-­‐bielefeld.de/Classes/Winter97/PhonMM/UlrichGruen/differences.htm  

Hofstede,  G.  (2002).  Dimensions  Do  Not  Exist:  A  Reply  to  Brendan  McSweeney.  Human  Relations,  55(11),  1-­‐8.  

Hofstede,  G.  (2009).  Geert  Hofstede  Cultural  Dimensions  Retrieved  23  February,  2011,  from  http://www.geert-­‐hofstede.com/index.shtml  

International  Baccalaureate  Organisation  (2011).  Mission  Statement  Retrieved  9  March,  2011,  from  http://www.ibo.org/mission/    

Kotzur,  M.  (2005).  Universality  –  a  Principle  of  European  and  Global  Constitutionalism.  Historia  Constitucional,  2005(6).  Retrieved  from  http://hc.rediris.es/06/articulos/pdf/09.pdf  

Kypriandides,  R.  (2010).  Socio-­‐cultural  Competence  in  ESL  Education  Retrieved  28  February,  2011,  from  http://sitemaker.umich.edu/356.kyprianides/non-­‐verbal_communication  

Leunig,  M.  (2005).  Under  Fire  Retrieved  28  February,  2011,  from  http://www.smh.com.au/news/arts/alert-­‐and-­‐alarmed-­‐art-­‐under-­‐fire/2005/11/28/1133026405834.html  

Mueller,  P.  (Artist).  (1995).  Where's  the  sense  of  danger?  Piaget,  J.  (1952).  The  Origins  of  Intelligence  in  Children  (M.  Cook,  Trans.).  New  York:  

International  Universities  Press.  Royal  College  of  Psychiatrists  (2008).  Study  Reveals  Cultural  Differences  In  Attitudes  Towards  

Caring  For  People  With  Dementia.  Medical  News  Today.  Retrieved  from  http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/119927.php  

Shakespeare,  W.  (1839).  Romeo  and  Juliet.  London:  James  Pattie.  Shakespeare,  W.  (2008).  Romeo  and  Juliet:  parallel  texts  of  quarto  1  (1597)  and  quarto  2  (1599).  

Cranbury,  NJ:  Associated  University  Presses.  Steininger,  S.,  Schiel,  F.,  &  Louka,  K.  (2001).  Gestures  During  Overlapping  Speech  in  multimodal  

Human−Machine  Dialogues.  Retrieved  from  http://www.phonetik.uni-­‐muenchen.de/Bas/BasSKGESDoc.pdf  

Taylor,  P.  (Artist).  (2011).  Knowledge  Sharing  [cartoon].  Vygotsky,  L.  S.  (1998).  Child  Psychology  The  Collected  Works  of  L.S.  Vygotsky  (Vol.  5.  ).  New  

York:  Plenum  Press.  Walsh,  M.,  &  Yallop,  C.  (1993).  Language  and  Culture  in  Aboriginal  Australia.  Canberra:  

Aboriginal  Studies  Press.