The Context
Since October of 2021 the Curriculum Sub Group of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Society have been engaged in discussions with Heads of Department and Heads of Faculty about students’ perspectives around representations in the current taught curriculum. Discussions focused on the need to make some amendments to what is taught and to how we teach certain topics, to ensure greater international representation, that is more reflective of our diverse community. Some students spoke about the need to address the Eurocentric nature of our curriculum. In some subjects, like History, it was suggested that rather than holding onto the last vestiges of a traditional Eurocentric curriculum, students would like to work with the faculty to diversify toward a more culturally and nationally diverse curriculum. These views were also reflected in some of the @unsettledcInstagram posts, which further emphasised the need to work in partnership with our student body to evaluate current provision.
As a result of the feedback from our students we began to reach out to universities such as Leeds Beckett and The University of Birmingham in Dubai to look for existing frameworks that the school could utilise to allow us to take an evidence based approach to evaluating the curriculum. We met with Vini Lander from Leeds Beckett about the possibility of using their Anti Racist Award framework, a well constructed framework mainly focused on anti racism. We also reached out to our partners, The University of Birmingham, who were immensely helpful in sharing frameworks that centred around inclusivity, decolonisation and anti racism. Coupled with the work of Betty Leask around internationalising the curriculum, we took account of each of these inputs in designing our own framework, to help departments and students begin a curriculum review in September 2021 (see appendix).
There is a great deal of debate as to whether schools should seek to diversify or decolonise their curriculum. Some argue that diversifying the curriculum continues to authorise the pre existing advantage of the dominant group by merely including ‘other’ people, while decolonising the curriculum actively seeks to rehabilitate those marginalised by the current systemic bias. Conversely, others argue that decolonisation is too aggressive and totalitarian in its objectives, seeking the complete overthrow of the current order.
As educators, particularly educators in a British School Overseas in the UAE, it is important that we remember that the law prohibits promotion of partisan political views in teaching. Schools must take reasonable steps to ensure that, where political issues are brought to pupils’ attention at school, there is a balanced presentation of opposing views.
Through our weekly discussions it became abundantly clear that the most important aspect in all of this is that we listen to our students, who are asking for the curriculum to better represent the lived
experiences of our wonderfully diverse international student body. Our students want us to educate them using this broader knowledge base. By focusing on internationalising our curriculum, we will be able to incorporate more securely an international and intercultural dimension into the content of the curriculum and into our teaching and learning arrangements and our support services of students.
Our key objectives were to ensure that we were:
· Developing faculty staff and students as global learners and citizens
· Preparing students to perform capably and sensitively in international and multicultural societies
· Facilitating collaborative links between international communities, especially those located in local and regional areas
· Encouraging staff to develop their knowledge of international perspectives and embed these into their schemes of work using our own evaluative framework (see appendix)
The curriculum
There is often a preconceived idea around what is meant by “curriculum,” perhaps this is due to the Latin origins of the word currere (to run), translated literally this means a circular athletic track. Perhaps the implications of this etymology are that the curriculum may be perceived as a predetermined course to be followed, or an orderly well planned controlled cycle of study. Teachers sometimes conceptualise it as a list of topics and content areas to be covered, to ensure that the syllabus is covered. In other debates, particularly pertinent at the moment, it is conceptualised as something more holistic and complex, with consideration given too to pedagogy, assessment and skills. In term of the scope of the curriculum and the knowledge base from which it is drawn, as educators we need to acknowledge that it could restrict learners if it is too narrowly focused (Goodson, 1995).
The curriculum in practice is inseparable from teaching and pedagogy, when we began to involve our students in discussions around the internationalisation of the curriculum, they were not hesitant in being forthcoming about the need to diversify our case studies, pedagogy and assessment approaches. The actual processes of learning and teaching, including interactions in the classroom and the way in which themes were assessed were as important as the ordering and sequencing of content.
The formal, informal and hidden curriculum
For the purpose of analysis, it is useful to break down the curriculum into its formal, informal and hidden elements. By formal, we will be referring to the syllabus and schemes of learning, along with the planned activities that students undertake in lessons. By informal, we are referring to additional extracurricular offerings that are not assessed and do not form part of the formal curriculum, although they may support learning within it. When we talk about the hidden curriculum, we are referring to the various unintended, implicit and hidden messages sent to students; these may be messages that we are not always aware we are sending. This could be a function of the textbooks we choose for students, or the images and videos we use within our lessons. For the purpose of this evaluation, our focus will be on the formal and hidden curriculum, in time we will also start to evaluate our informal curriculum offering.
Formal Curriculum
Informal Curriculum Hidden Curriculum
Figure 1: the three interactive parts of the curriculum
Internationalisation of the Curriculum (IoC)
The internationalisation of the curriculum is an incorporation of international, intercultural and global dimensions into the content of the curriculum as well as the learning outcomes, assessment tasks, teaching methods and inclusive support services of a program of study (Leask, 2009).
We have adapted the conceptual framework from Leask (2015:27) to our context. It places the subject/discipline (and the people who contribute to the curriculum) at the centre of the internationalisation process. From discussions with students, teachers and leaders it became obvious that IoC means different things in different subjects because the international perspectives required
by different subjects vary (Leask, 2011: 13). We wanted to work in unison with teachers, Heads of Department and students to ensure that we were broad view of the disciplinary paradigm.
The DEI Curriculum working party also wanted to ensure that the changing nature of the student body was taken into consideration. Dubai is a transient location, and further global and economic changes have seen the nature of our cohort change. Whilst we do capture nationality data this is not always reflective of the globalised nature of our student’s ethnic backgrounds and nor are we at liberty to collect that data on an organisational level here in the UAE.
When exploring the internalisation of the curriculum it is impossible to ignore the impact of globalisation. Those who were once far away are now our students, our colleagues and our neighbours. The boundaries between the local, the national and the global have been blurred and our future, collectively and individually, depends on how flexible, open and creative we in the way that we think, live and work. We can no longer ignore that the fact that the students that sit with us bring a myriad of perspectives, histories and lived experiences that may lead them to contradict or challenge some aspects of our curriculum.
The relationship between internationalisation and globalisation is undoubtedly complex. Marginson (1999, 19) argues that internationalisation is a form of soft imperialism because its main function is the “formation of the skills…required to operate in the global environment itself.” It is argued therefore that it imposes “western” ways of thinking, doing and acting on an ever increasing proportion of the world population. For some of our students the current curriculum provision is associated with the hegemony of Western perspectives and the import of a Western conception of secondary education and the dominance of Western educational models that define “what is knowledge” (Goodman, 1984, 13), who is an expert and who can claim privilege.
So much of the knowledge that must be delivered to students is dictated to us as educators by the examination specifications that are created in the United Kingdom, within these specifications there are however choices that can be made to ensure a more broad and balanced coverage. It is often the lens or perspective from which the topic is taught that needs to be broadened. We also have an abundance of flexibility at KS3 to internationalise the curriculum, alongside the opportunities to go beyond the specification at A level to stretch and challenge out students.
The most pivotal part of this whole process has been understanding the perspectives, experiences and opinions of the students. Working with and alongside them to review, redesign and adapt our curriculum approaches has been essential to the success of this project. To begin to understand the complexities that many of our third culture students are grappling with was insightful but also purposeful in helping us to understand the content we teach from the perspective of different lenses.
The Method
When we began to have these discussions with the DEI Curriculum Group it was very evident that the students felt that their voices needed to be heard. Whilst the initial discussions were worthwhile and helped us to establish themes, we needed a more robust evaluation mechanism to allow both departments and students to reflect upon and evaluate the curriculum. We reached out to both Leeds Beckett University and Birmingham University who were very kind in sharing their experiences of diversifying and decolonising their curriculums. As mentioned in the introduction, as educators, particularly educators in a British School Overseas in the UAE, it is important that we remember that the law prohibits promotion of partisan political views in teaching. Schools must take reasonable steps to ensure that, where political issues are brought to students’ attention at school or school extra curricular activities, there is a balanced presentation of opposing views. For this reason, and due to the very international nature of our community we took full account of guidance from Betty Leask around internationalising the curriculum in a way that was non partisan. We have used all these conversations to design our own framework to help departments and students to begin a curriculum review in September 2021 (see appendix).
The departments that were requested to be involved by the students were:
• History
• English
• Economics
• MFL
• Geography
• Economics
We first sent the evaluation form in electronic form to departments so that they could collectively reflect on the questions and rate themselves accordingly, the second phase was sending this evaluation in electronic form to students across different year groups to ensure there was a representative sample of students in terms of age, ethnicity, gender and ability. After these were completed, we reached out to the students who had taken the time to fill out the survey and invited them to a series of focus group meetings. Each department met with their focus groups three times over the course of this project to:
1. Contextualise the project and understand why the students had scored the curriculum in the way that they had
2. Harness feedback on the current curriculum provision through a DEI lens
3. Feedback on the adaptations
4. Evaluate the adaptations
Students as Learning Partners: SALP
“Students as learning partners” is not necessarily a new way of thinking about collaborative planning, but it is one that re positions students as active stakeholders in the process of teaching and learning, empowering students to feel like their voice matters and to create a shared responsibility for their learning. In partnering with students through this process we wanted to foster a relationship whereby they felt involved in the development of the curriculum, teaching and learning approaches and issues related to equity and inclusivity. We wanted to harness their feedback on the content, the assessment approaches and the inclusivity of our teaching approaches. In doing so, we fostered meaningful collaborations that broke down traditional hierarchies and which allowed for a better awareness of students’ perspectives.
Thematic and Subject Findings
One of the key prompts for this research project were some of the comments that appeared on the dcunsettledInstagram page (figure 3). The page in its entirety was very difficult to read and digest but there were some recurring themes around Eurocentrism, Britishness and othering that were commented upon by students that had previously attended the college. In response to these comments, we wanted to evaluate how our curriculum was perceived by the students and to investigate if there were opportunities to educate our students such that they were exposed to a broader range of perspectives, which would in turn help to alleviate any misconceptions and prejudices they might harbour. The framework that we created focused on five core areas and sub questions that were used with staff and students across all six departments.
Figure 2: A conceptual framework for internationalisation of the curriculum
Figure 3 : Posts from the unsettleddc instagram page
Below are a list of the themes and questions used with departments and within the SALP Focus Groups
Profile and Orientation:
To what extent do the content of our schemes of work presume a particular profile or orientation to the world?
• What are the characteristics of this profile?
• Who is represented as an ‘Other’ in my teaching and how?
• Is this potentially problematic and for whom?
Local, National and Global Perspectives:
To what extent does the course/unit promote a global perspective? (Examples could include international case studies, comparative studies, articles or texts.)
• Are units of work informed by local, regional or national contexts only?
• Do schemes integrate a range of international case studies that progressively promote a global perspective?
• How far are international cultural perspectives clearly articulated, and systematically developed throughout units of work?
• Are these an afterthought or more central to the mode of study?
Teaching Controversies:
To what extent could particular topics/units or readings on the syllabus/schemes of work be potentially traumatic or painful to students either in general or in particular?
• Should this be examined / acknowledged / managed?
• If so, how?
Heritage and Lived Experience:
To what extent do we engage with our students' families and communities on interpreting national curriculum requirements in a way that aligns with their expériences
• To what extent does our curricular engage the lives and heritage of our international student body
Texts and Resources (images, videos, films, instruments, books):
To what extent is the demographic profile of authors and resources on the syllabus / schemes of work internationalised?
• What is the effect of this on the diversity of views with which the students are presented?
• What is the effect of this on student engagement? How do you know?
• Is the profile of authors acknowledged and examined as part of the learning aims and outcomes of the syllabus/ programme?
• Do schemes of work/ units enable the use of non-English/international sources and recourses in the curriculum?
The Evaluation, Feedback and Actions
History
In the process of reviewing the curriculum the History department felt that the profile of the current curriculum was very much contingent on the fact that they are in a British curriculum school, as a result and due to staffing specialisms, they have traditionally had a weighting towards British/European/Western topics, especially at KS4 and KS5, due to the necessity and restrictions imposed by teaching to exam board curricula. The department have diversified where possible, this is especially the case at KS3, which is not subject to the same restrictions, where they have brought in units on migration, empire, slavery and civil rights; these units seek to de prioritise the viewpoint/ agency of Europe/Europeans, where this is possible and will lead to a richer, more multifaceted understanding of the these chapters of history. For example, a relatively newly integrated unit on the transatlantic slave trade begins by studying pre colonial African civilisations and transitions into focusing on the involvement and impact of the trade on Europe, the Americas and Africa. This view of the curriculum being Eurocentric was mirrored in the discussions that took place with the student groups. A range of year groups came together to hear the changes that had already taken place; whilst there was an appreciation of work that had taken place to date, there were some consistent changes that all year groups still wanted to see. The department have taken steps to avoid teaching in a way that designates certain national, ethnic or civilisational groups as the ‘Other’ e.g. looking at the Islamic World as a counter balance to the traditional Western bias implied in concepts like the ‘Dark Ages’; studying a range of migrant groups over time when looking at the history of migration in Year 8, and looking at the experiences of empire from the perspective of Indians and not just the British colonisers. The department have systematically gone through schemes of work to ensure that primary source material is used in a way that ensures a range of voices are heard from diverse backgrounds in the different topics taught.
It was acknowledged that much of the local UAE historical content is now covered within the Social Studies curriculum, which is also taught by members of the department. The department have also used a local history unit in Year 7 focused on Dubai Creek. Beyond that, at KS3 the department cover topics based in Britain, France, Germany, India, Mongolia and the expanding medieval Islamic World, as well as looking beyond national borders when considering the impact of the transatlantic slave trade, including African nations before slavery. Some of the units of work are tied to specific national contexts e.g. Medicine in Britain, (GCSE), the Russian Revolutions (GCSE) or Life in Nazi Germany (Year 9).
At Politics A Level the exam specification is focused on the UK in Year 12 and Global Politics in Year 13. However, teachers encourage wider engagement with current affairs through their extra curricular programme, e.g. the Politics Magazine. The History and Politics department felt as if they had taken steps to look across a range of national contexts. Again, they felt similarly confined by exam board curricula at KS4/5, however students study the history of the Cold War in Year 11, which is one big international case study, although it does prioritise the view from Washington DC and to a lesser extent Moscow. Where possible they try to extend beyond the restrictions of the exam board, for example, in the study of Elizabethan England at GCSE, they try to bring in broader perspectives on topics such as colonisation and slavery than the textbook’s narrow content suggests.
When considering the term ‘international cultural perspectives’ in the evaluative discussions, the department understood it to mean the cultivation of empathy and the ability to view historical and political problems from multiple cultural vantage points. They have alluded to relevant units at KS3 above, however at KS4/5 this is trickier, but still possible. For example, discussions of complex problems like when, if ever, to conduct ‘humanitarian military interventions’ in global politics, can when handled sensitively, elicit from our diverse student body a wide range of perspectives; this kind of discussion takes place too in the Sixth Form History and Politics Society, History and Politics Top Up, Early Entrants (Oxbridge) training for future humanities and law undergraduates and other meeting places for students within the department. However, it is not clear that ‘international cultural perspectives’ are always integrated into the curriculum content, especially at KS4/5 History.
Teaching controversies is central to teaching History and this is something the teaching staff felt that they did not shy away from. Looking through their schemes of work, they teach a range of topics that fall into this bracket: discrimination around the campaign for example, the Civil Rights Movement, the range of migrant experiences during the Migration Through Time unit and the use of ethnic science and racial policy during Nazi Germany. At KS4, the Russia course covers a range of difficult topics, such as Holodomor and enforced genocide through starvation and the use of police brutality and extremism to achieve totalitarianism.
The department take the view that such topics should still be taught (and must be taught if part of examined content) but with consideration given by the teacher to the background(s) of the specific
students they are teaching, and suitable adaptations made when necessary. In A Level Politics teachers frequently discuss controversial topics but ensure that the debate remains balanced and that all views and opinions can be voiced. It may be appropriate to make time for discussions in class that contextualise difficult topics in advance to prepare students before they engage with them. This is also the case when discussing Middle Eastern politics, as the department must adhere to and be mindful of the region in which they teach. It was acknowledged that it may be appropriate to make time for discussions in class that contextualise difficult topics in advance to prepare students before they engage with them, sometimes providing content warnings ahead of teaching potentially upsetting material may be appropriate, or in particular cases removing some material if the impact on an individual student(s), for whatever reason, would be so grave as not to be justifiable.
When evaluating the texts and resources the department discussed the range of resources that they utilised to ensure that they gave a balanced view, they have also worked hard to bring their students’ lived experiences into their schemes of work. This helps to broaden their students’ perspectives beyond what is traditionally provided in the textbooks that are published in the UK. In one of the relatively newly designed units, called ‘Migration through time’ (Year 7), there are several activities which encourage students to draw upon family experiences. When teaching the Indian Partition, students, where applicable, are requested to speak to their families and friends about Partition stories. Within the ‘causes of WW1’ unit, they also encourage an awareness of the wide range of reasons why different nations (and individuals) across the world took part, including encouraging students to speak to family members about the involvement of relatives who were of that generation.
The teachers aim to teach a range of historical topics that reflect the international nature of our student body, though this consideration is balanced by the need to work with the grain of our teacher’s prior expertise and to ensure that the units teach history rigorously. Coupled with this, the KS3 History Society actively encourages students to speak on historical topics of personal interest, whilst the Politics magazine and Sixth Form History and Politics Society actively encourage students to engage with topics that are informed by their or their families’ stories and experiences.
Within the Politics A Level, the department encourages students to write articles for the Politics magazine on topics they’re interested in which often link to their national or cultural backgrounds. Students also do this through presentations at the History and Politics Society, which is open to all Sixth Formers. When engaging with historical interpretations, teachers draw on historians from across the globe. Their use of primary sources inherently draws on a wide range of personal perspectives. The reading list for Politics is a little limited in the first half of year Y12 as the course is UK focused, after that it broadens out to cover political ideologies and global politics in Yr13.
Many of the points that were raised by the teachers were mirrored in the student evaluation, there was a fairly widespread feeling amongst the students that everything they covered in history was
essentially through the lens of the West; this could clearly be categorised as ‘othering’, as many of the students have non western backgrounds. There was an appetite for looking at the history of a country separate from any entanglements with the west. The students agreed that it is not just about topic selection but how topics are taught. Whilst some units are western, they are not taught in a manner that celebrates western dominance and they don’t exclusively feature western viewpoints. Some of the Sixth Form students thought that women could be seen at othered. The students suggested there could be more on focus on gender through the civil rights movement in Year 9. Other students suggested that they could integrate the history of the family into lessons. It should be noted that in Nazi Germany course the department do look the impact of the Nazi’s policies on women and in Year 11 they look at the impact of Bolshevik policies on women at certain points. Some students stated that the civil rights movement is only focused on the US. The students suggested it could be extended beyond the US. Some students liked the opportunity provided by an old unit to research history for themselves, for example by exploring the plight of Native Americans. However, some students thought the old unit was a bit scrappy and incoherent. The old ‘fight for rights’ unit presentations allowed students to look at a range of options, e.g., independence movements and women’s rights.
Several of the older students commented that the Key Stage Three curriculum amendments looked very positive; however, students also felt there was too much focus on the impact of the British and too many Eurocentric topics; several of the students have South Asian backgrounds and were keen for more coverage of South Asian history. Others suggested other non-European topics such as South American History.
Other students said that the KS3 curriculum did not allow them to realise that there was meaningful History beyond Europe and there was an appetite for topics that are completely detached from Europe or the West one student liked the idea of a topic on the Silk Road. Another suggested that we look at the history of the Middle East. Other students noted that the Tudors was taught three times: at Primary, at KS3 and in Year 10, repetitive and not very global. The Crime and Punishment unit in Year 8 was singled out as being very European and several students suggested it was boring and repetitive – just endless whippings etc. Several students would like to see the crime and punishment unit taken out from the history curriculum.
The students felt the Civil Rights movement was better in this regard, as there was a focus on a non European country, but they noted that there was still a Western perspective. Some students agreed with Ms Claeys’ suggestion that a unit on an African civilisation or the Silk Road could be integrated. Pre slavery African history was also suggested. Others suggested the Arab Israeli conflict or the war in Afghanistan and bringing politics into History lower down the school to give younger students a taste of what is to come.
The students noted that History and Politics are subjects in which controversial topics are integral. They agreed that how this is handled should depend on the background of the students. Students noted a lack of variety in assessments (essays on many topics), the department acknowledged that they need to take this into account when planning future assessments. Year 8 students in particular felt that there were too many essays and source analysis assignments, the students wanted more project based learning. Historical empathy is important but currently it is not something the department really tries to assess. They are looking at integrating a second and third oracy assessment at KS3 to help address these concerns. The students agreed diversifying pedagogy is as important as diversifying content.
There was an acknowledgement that the new topics (which many of the older students did not experience at KS3) made a difference. However most agreed that the perspective of most units was still too linked to Britain/Europe. It is important to note that that last year (2020 21) they introduced a Year 8 topic on India 1600 1947.
Students noted that a range of primary sources are used to give voice to different experiences. This is an important part of History lessons. For example, when studying the transatlantic slave trade in Year 8 students look at a wide range of experiences and interactions with the trade across the three continents through primary sources. The Renaissance was popular with the students for its conceptual, ideas driven approach to history and it is also the kind of unit that lends itself to the use of non English language sources. Some students requested more cultural history higher up the school. Non English sources are used quite extensively on the Russia course in Year 11. Some of the older students stressed that they loved Politics because it was so discussion based and requested that this be filtered down to other year groups. Others suggested that we bring in ideologies and the history of ideas (features of the Politics course at A Level) further down the school, because students would benefit from exposure to this at an earlier stage.
After a series of consultations with the students and staff the following changes were agreed upon:
• Yr 7 Dark Ages unit broadened to include comparisons with the Arab World at that time (allowing students to question the relevance of the term 'Dark Ages' outside of a European context) and material on the Mongol Empire.
• Yr 7 Migration new unit, students given the opportunity to research their own migration stories in the second half of the unit, after learning about migration in the UK context.
• Yr 8 Empire the focus of this unit moved towards the Indian experience of, and resistance to the British Empire
• Yr 8 Slavery new unit, lots of emphasis given to African perspectives on and the African experience of slavery at the hands of Europeans
•
Yr 9 Fight for Rights new unit, focused on the black civil rights movement in 20th century America.
• Agreement to look seriously at the creation of another new unit at KS3 looking at another area of contemporary history (minimum post 1945) and/or a completely non European and non western unit.
• Agreement that the student body should be surveyed on a much wider basis to help us gain a better perspective as to which KS3 units could be removed to make way for this unit (above).
• Agreement that this new KS3 unit should be introduced no later than 2022 23
• Agreement to look in addition at the adaptation of existing units to create further opportunities for the study of a) history with a non European focus; b) history with a contemporary or near contemporary focus; c) history with a focus on ideas.
• The above were all elements the student evaluation meeting highlighted as areas where it would be desirable to see further change.
English
Whilst the schemes of work and the specifications the department follow are necessarily under the delivery umbrella of a ‘British’ curriculum education, they also work towards International GCSE qualifications. The profile or orientation to the world they presume is that of an international student who will need to negotiate a world in which representations of ethnicity, gender and race will be presented to them and they will have to interpret and decode these representations. The department felt that representations of ‘other’, underrepresentation and bias in texts are considered and explored at all levels in English, although it was felt that this is most explicit in the sixth form when literary theory (post colonialism, feminism, Marxism and challenging the canon) is taught. Nevertheless, because it is a British curriculum, British western values underpin much of what is taught, and this is mostly considered the default position. They acknowledged that some assumptions, contexts and references made in texts often need to be explained, contextualised and explored. When reflecting on the breadth of local, national and global perspectives the department were confident that at Key Stage 3 some (mainly writing and speaking and listening tasks) units are informed by the local, regional and national contexts, but most of the work presents students with British/international contexts that need to be explored to illuminate understanding of the texts, their attitudes and perspectives. Building on this, the ten non fiction texts taught in Year 10 for the IGCSE English Language course are by five female and five male writers. The authors include Nigerian, British, American, Canadian and Chinese American writers. The texts are extracts about Nigeria, Somalia,
America, Mexico, Chile, Britain, Pakistan, Bhutan, Hong Kong. In addition, the prose and poetry texts deal with issues including disability, identity, war, discrimination, gender roles and immigration.
In Key Stage 3, work focusing on folklore and the history of storytelling has explicit links to exploring different cultures. A Year 8 unit of work (‘poems from different cultures’) focuses on understanding culture and tolerance and includes formal presentations based on poetry from the students’ ‘home’ countries. Some teachers encourage the performance of poems in the students' mother tongues (this has also included some parental involvement).
A Level English Literature course texts mainly adhere to the established canon but (for example) the department has also chosen for study AThousandSplendidSunsby Khaled Hosseini, which explores the lives of women under Taliban rule in Afghanistan. Supposedly traditional texts such as Othello also, of course, enable discussion about race, misogyny and the treatment of 'outsiders'.
The aim of study at all ages and Key Stages is to nurture well informed students with a global perspective. Teachers also felt that cultural perspectives were systematically integrated into schemes of work across all key stages. In addition to the above, Key Stage 3 work encourages an awareness of culture and the promotion of empathy, compassion, acceptance (through texts like Wonder). Other texts discuss the plight of refugees in an Australian detention centre (BoneSparrow), focus on four young people from four different European nations fleeing the conflict in World War II in Europe (Salt ToTheSea) or deal with ‘outsiders’ in rural 1940s America (WolfHollow).
Examples of speech, international in scope (Martin Luther King, Obama, Malala, Adichie), are used to illustrate oracy principles and to show that other perspectives should always be considered The Year 7 autobiography unit provides the opportunity to explicitly celebrate the students’ own cultural diversity. A variety of sources, including extracts from Nelson Mandela’s and Malala’s autobiographies are used to support this unit, which encourages them to explore identity, difference and tolerance. Year 13 coursework allows students free choice of texts for study. These choices have included a very wide range of international cultural perspectives from writers such as Arundhati Roy, Amy Tan, Alice Walker, Chimamanda Adichie, Toni Morrison, Zadie Smith. Female writers, African literature and post colonial criticism are all celebrated in the department
Teaching controversies are at the heart of many of the texts within the curriculum. Obviously, the breadth of human experience represented in the texts at all key stages whether it is female infanticide in India (TheDeliverer), bullying, friendships, social injustice or our common mortality is likely to be not just thought provoking but also possibly upsetting. Some texts, such as OfMiceAndMen , present particular problems because of the language and require careful handling. Feedback from students and the parent DEI groups have requested sensitive handling of the n word and agree that context is key. Teachers will ensure that they begin the text by contextualising the era and language and giving
students an opportunity to share their feelings about some of the terminology. Thereafter, teachers will ensure that the students feel comfortable and will adapt their teaching accordingly.
The department aims to highlight those texts/ aspects of texts that are controversial and preface their study with a clear rationale (this might include that it is an examination course text). It is also managed by nurturing a sensitive, trusting and empathetic classroom environment and culture. Texts are chosen to present universal themes that can be read about in any culture and/or time period. OfMiceAnd Menfor example explores what it is to be a human being with compassion and conveys ideas about social conscience during a period of hardship, prejudice and social isolation.
The department has ordered, read and discussed a range of texts that tackle LGBTQ issues and has also considered other texts that address sensitive issues of gender identity and race. Many of these have presented potential problems and so have not been thought suitable, given our local and national socio political and cultural contexts. The texts chosen for study are re assessed each year with all this in mind.
Students’ heritage and lived experiences are a key part of the first unit they study at the college. The curriculum in Year 7 begins with an autobiographical unit of work and a focus on identity, to establish from the outset the importance of diversity and of different, valuable perspectives. The texts studied at all key stages are from a diverse range of contexts and cultures. Whenever possible, students are encouraged to express their personal experiences of a place, events or attitudes represented or referred to in a text. These experiences are drawn upon in lessons and complementary, oppositional or critical views of the perspectives, opinions and ideas in the texts are invited. Very diverse views are offered for study; as evidenced by the range of texts, authors and focus on varying historical periods and different cultures and societies. The aim is to present and explore challenging content whenever possible. Sometimes, for example, our students might find it difficult to identify with texts which present perspectives from socially, financially disadvantaged and difficult backgrounds.
Teachers aim to offer perspectives which challenge the way students view the world and allow them to appreciate others’ perspectives. For example, one teacher uses the play version of CuriousIncident in Year 8, which is about being an outsider, and about seeing the world in a different and revealing way, as a consequence of the central character’s autism spectrum disorder.
A key goal is for students to see the relevance of the work covered to their own lives, views and experiences. Hopefully this will stimulate an interest that will prompt their engagement. Students are also encouraged to voice their opinions and explore issues in more depth. In terms of their further engagement, students are always reminded of their individual right to read and to freely choose what they would like to read. As readers, they are not limited by geographic location, or by time, since reading allows the experiencing of events beyond the confines of their own individual lives. Nevertheless, particular local challenges and course content requirements at KS4 and KS5 restrict texts that can be
offered. It would be ideal to present students with texts that feel familiar and relevant to them and prompt engagement, in addition to more established texts.
The context of production and reception of texts is very much part of the Department’s approach to the exploration of ideas raised by the study of them. As such, the profile of authors is always acknowledged and considered. The use of non English language sources has been limited across all the key stages. Some classes have experimented with poems and prose in languages from students’ home countries, but this is not embedded in the curriculum, nor is there currently an expectation the teachers should do this. For A Level English Literature, the coursework component allows the students to pursue their own choices/interests (which often include international texts). However, the current A level course requirements explicitly prohibit texts not originally written in English. The student evaluation of the curriculum spanned across Key Stage four and five, a range of students from a various perspectives met with the Head of English and the Deputy Head to offer their perspectives on their experience of the English curriculum to date. The students all agreed that sensitive issues appear or feature in several texts and this needs careful attention. Students felt that these sections and texts should be introduced with a preamble that pointed out that upcoming content might be disturbing and upsetting, the example given was the rape in AStreetcarNamedDesire.
It was felt that these texts should not be avoided. It was agreed these texts and subjects are valuable and their study is welcomed. Nevertheless, it was felt that the experience of individual students should be considered. A suggestion was that teachers did not call on students to contribute, and rather than asking them directly, teachers should ask for volunteers to contribute. It was suggested that at the end of lessons, the teacher could invite feedback on the way the issue had been handled and that feedback could be given privately or through email. It was also felt that a ‘warning’ might need to be given not just for such texts, but also prior to some discussions that focus on sensitive or potentially upsetting subjects.
Students felt strongly that in the sixth form English lessons (in the case of those present, it was felt to be more so than in their other subjects) relationships with teachers and with their peers are open, supportive and that there is a high level of trust. It was suggested by one student that there is a self selection (regarding A level choices) at work here that facilitates this. English was felt to be a subject that promoted these qualities and fosters empathetic approaches and as such student interest needed to be carefully nurtured in KS3. For example, TheBoyInTheStripedPyjamas had had a significant impact on several present and that careful attention should be paid towards selection of the KS3 texts to encourage engagement. LordoftheFlieshad been less well received for example. Overall, it was felt that the KS3 texts do offer opportunities to broaden perspectives.
Students all agreed the post 2000 selection the Poems of the Decade (for A level) offered a diverse range of texts; Doshi’sTheDelivererwas cited as an excellent example of relevance and importance. The A level course, all agreed, addresses DEI issues well. This was especially felt to be true by the two students present who had joined the college in Year 12. They had done GCSE (not IGCSE) English and GCSE English Literature. It was agreed that IGCSE English and IGCSE English Literature, designed as it is for ‘international’ study, offers a very diverse range of texts and deals with relevant, universal subjects and issues. While commemorating World War One (and other conflicts) was seen as important it was felt that the British experience of these conflicts was focused on (WWI in both English and history lessons for example) at the expense of other nations/ cultures/ societies experiences. Several felt that African literature of some kind (articles, prose, poetry) should be introduced lower down the school as there is currently a gap and a degree of ignorance in the school about the ‘country’ (sic.) of Africa. The legacy of colonialism and imperialism (addressed in sixth form English literature study) was felt to be an important issue that should be introduced lower down the school also.
After a series of discussions, the following action points were agreed up on with students and staff:
• To offer students a wider variety of texts by exposing them to sections of different genres, their thoughts were that this would whet the appetite of students who were not always engaged by the curriculum texts and in turn encourage more students to read for pleasure.
• To encourage teachers to contextualise the texts by collaborating with other departments such as History and Geography.
• To look at the etymology of some of the more contentious language used in texts and to listen to students who do not feel comfortable using or hearing such language.
• The frequent opportunities to ‘go beyond the curriculum’ in English were welcomed. As were supplementary reading suggestions.
• Applicants to American universities had noticed the stated requirement that their academic writing should use non gender specific pronouns and it was felt that this was something that they wanted the college to consider. Given the very clear guidelines given to schools by the Ministry of Education within the Code of Conduct for all educators, the college will not be providing opportunities to explore such texts.
Geography
The department felt that the curriculum presented a British profile with an international slant, there was an acknowledgement that much work had be done to ensure that the Key Stage 3 curriculum has been broadened to incorporate more global perspectives. Case study choices are drawn from the GCSE and A level specification but where opportunities arise a plethora of examples are used. There was also
an acknowledgement that less economically developed countries or Africa in general across the key stages is ‘othered’ in some respect, this was mirrored by the common use of the words HIC, LIC, NEE, BRICS compared to a country being called a LEDC or MEDC. In department meetings it was acknowledged that there were potential issues around sensitivities when teaching about students’ home countries and how they are represented with the curriculum. When teaching colonialism, neo colonialism and development issues it may present potential problems for students in relation to how their countries are represented. Staff felt that it was important to try and bring in the students’ lived experienced into the curriculum and to understand that there would be different perspectives to those that are presented in the textbooks.
Year 7 to 8 offer a free range and goes beyond the UK curriculum and evidence is drawn from around the world at various scales. Driven by exam specifications, Year 9 to 13 is largely drawn from exam specification points, but they are able to choose areas that are geographical appropriate to the range of pupils that we have at the college. It was agreed that by its very nature, the subject should adopt a global perspective but due to specification restrictions that does not always necessarily mean that they are. Building on Harvey’s (1976) geographical concepts and global perspectives, it is important to note that there is a subtle difference between ‘global’ and ‘international’, although the two terms are often used synonymously and interchangeably. Global implies without borders, whilst international refers to differences between places which may have an inherent geopolitical dimension. Geography as a discipline is naturally internationalised.
Traditionally, international fieldworks opportunities were often associated with outbound mobility, however the assumption that students will return more ‘internationalised’ from their experience is one that has often been contested. Fieldwork destinations have often been focused on the local context; opportunities to look at urban planning, sustainability and coastal processes have all provided our students with an excellent opportunity to strengthen their local and national knowledge and understanding. The recent addition of Iceland as a destination has given students to enhance their understanding of geographical processes and begin to understand less politically pronounced European cultures and processes. The department have discussed at length the possibility to adding another international location; much of the debate has centred around the need to contextualise some less familiar UK concepts around rebranding for those students who are less familiar with UK Geography, juxtaposed with wanting to explore locations in Asia and Africa, to broaden students understanding of places that they study by giving them a sense of place and more importantly igniting a passion for the learning beyond the curriculum.
The way in which the department has promoted the extracurricular has also provided a very central and safe space for students to share their geographical journeys. Having such an international student body has allowed the department to empower students to talk about their countries and backgrounds,
linking to the internationalisation of the curriculum with co production by getting the students to find, research and present about different international issues within the GeogSoc lecture series. The department believes that encouraging our students to share their geographies is important, where different nationalities recognise the cultural and social backgrounds of their peers, allowing them to develop a more nuanced awareness of the world.
In the review lower school students were exceptionally positive about how far the curriculum was internationalised, this was particularly pertinent for students in Year 9. Overall, students in the lower schools regarded the curriculum as both diverse and generally representing their culture and nationality. There is potential to further involve students in the delivery of units specifically relating to locations such as China and the USA. Students did however feel that they had exposure to learning about a variety of different cultures. Perhaps more importantly, students felt comfortable enough to ask questions and explore different cultures within their Geography lessons without the fear of judgement.
The Key Stage Four students generally felt that the physical section of the course that they had just completed was very British based, but they understand that the AQA specification topic is the UK BritishCoastalandRiverlandforms . This is something the teachers felt that they have no control over, a holistic perspective of the course would be helpful as at the end of the course they would cover more global case studies, as they were yet to study global inequalities and changing urban areas in HIC’s. They liked the fact that the Living World and Hazards sections did not use UK examples. Whilst there were no particular controversies that were explicitly taught at KS4, students did discuss the difficulties in identifying the realities of squatter settlements to those that have never experienced the sight and smells.
Some students talked about how the representation of place in certain textbooks did not represent the countries that they originated from and found the way many NICs were represented to be lacking in nuance regarding regional development within a country. Teachers felt that they allow time for discussion when students bring up these issues, however due to the amount of content to get through it is sometimes difficult to make time for more explorative discussions.
One pupil identified that when they looked at Kenya it would be worthwhile looking at the perspectives from a Kenyan viewpoint with regards to a section of the course on food. i.e., what was their viewpoint on exporting food. Some students at Key Stage 5 wanted the department to use a wider range of resources from different countries. Some teachers felt that we had covered this but via a range of online media such as YouTube,due to the difficulties in accessing Kenyan news articles. Language difficulties meant that the department relied on UK based news articles and video clips.
Feedback has been taken on board at Key Stage Five as students often felt that the representation of Empire was still explicitly focused on hegemonic gains of the West. By integrating passages from books like Empirelandand incorporating resources that discussed the atrocities associated with the colonial Scramble for Africa, the department were able to give students a voice and an opportunity to share their own family’s lived experiences of Empire. The opportunity to share is exceptionally important when we are teaching controversies involving different places and cultures; looking ahead there is great potential to bring together students and teachers from widely different backgrounds, cultures and locations to combine global perspectives and local relevance within the interdisciplinary framework that Geography can provide.
Through dialogue with various groups across the department, the following action points were agreed upon:
• To provide a wider range of perspectives and sources throughout the different Key Stages
• To provide more opportunities to weave in the lived experiences of students at Key Stage 3 and 4
• To weave in opportunities for students to challenge the way some HICs are presented in textbooks and allow for discussion around these topics
Economics
The evaluation carried out by the teachers and students focused on Key Stage 4 and 5 as Economics is not explicitly taught as a standalone subject at Key Stage 3. Due there being no prelude to the subject, it is mainly focused on the content from the examination boards. Staff acknowledged that at A level the content specifically focuses on the UK economy and government policy related to the UK. In T4 (year 2), students have an opportunity to expand to more global content, the development
module also highlights those countries at the low end of HDI. In comparison, the iGCSE by definition is more international and teachers felt that there is more scope to examine policies and data from anywhere at any time in the specification. When discussing this with students they acknowledged the same constraints at A level and were aware that students needed to have the knowledge on the UK stance, students were worried that this shouldn’t be diluted (as some have bigger gaps in this area) those who only had iGCSE experience felt the profile of the curriculum was international. Students are given a reading log which allows them the freedom to read anything they choose from whichever sourced they are interested in.
The specification content at A level is predominately focused on the UK, however many students have never visited or lived in the UK. It is important to give students the prior knowledge that they need as without it they would be limited when answering questions, as a result they may need much more support and explanations around systems such as NHS or state education. The department felt that teachers need to have an awareness of this and not assume prior knowledge. The same awareness needs to be extended to how certain countries may continually be referenced as a low economic developed country or a high polluting country. This feedback came directly through the student evaluation where some students said they had felt some anti India and China discourse needed to be addressed when the COP summit took place. Due to the media stance that rhetoric was then present in lessons, which made some of the Indian or Chinese students uncomfortable. It was agreed that teachers need to have an awareness of how topics and current affairs may land and give students the opportunity to explore topics without negatively alienating others; this can be done by ensuring there are clear ‘talk tactics’ and that the teachers themselves always present an apolitical stance. There was also an acknowledgement that there was very little inclusion of local economics, although the department felt that the new Social Studies curriculum allowed them to teach the local economic context. The diversity of our student cohort means that teachers can open discussions to utilise does students’ experiences where possible. It was stated that it was difficult to use the UAE within the GCSE and A level examples as of much of the economic context was different regarding infrastructure spending or balance of payment figures. When discussing this with the GCSE students, they were less aware of this bias due to having studied the local economic context within the Social Studies curriculum. The A level pupils raised the point that there were some groups that were invisible, but these are often addressed with the extracurricular opportunities within the Keynes Society. The wider reading log and research also allows students to explore their own interests. Students and staff found the evaluation both purposeful and useful in deciphering what the next steps were, a series of action points were agreed upon.
Action points:
Immediate to short run:
Where appropriate encourage more independent research where references are explicitly global data and policy decision making; in particular at iGCSE, and in T4 of A level
Utilise global newspapers.
· Enhance displays to give more balance in classrooms.
· Pupils are encouraged to bring into class discussions their own examples from their own world experience (and where possible build up a bank of these for case studies).
· Staff to consciously consider bias and to acknowledge perspective and ensure balance where possible.
· Staff to make more of an effort to reference more diverse thinkers (would potentially be off spec).
More on going/longer term:
Work in some more opportunities in all SoW to specifically cover all areas of the globe at GCSE when pupils are researching (and at A level where possible) throughout the two year courses; e.g. Each pupil could be given a particular region.
Build up a bank of case studies from pupil research.
· Be more specific and ordered in ensuring teachers have greater representation of varying perspectives where possible when references texts/policy stances etc.
· This will take place over time teachers will be discussing how to do this, for example, stating particular focus throughout the year/course to ensure all regions globally where possible are analysed in some way.
Other:
• To continue and increase themed DKS talks. The department’s WomeninEconomics talks were well attended. To ensure this keeps going. (It could also be done more broadly across the school to tie in with Black History Month or Neurodiversity awareness week, for example.)
Modern Foreign Languages
The MFL department worked across French and Spanish to evaluate the profile of the curriculum, they described the profile of the curriculum as focusing the Francophone and Hispanic world. Francophone would appear broader in terms of references within the provision of the textbooks, this was governed
at GCSE and A level by British curriculum as they have a “British slant”. The A level curriculum expects a broader base of the Francophone Hispanic world but with a Eurocentric perspective, the department acknowledged that certain topics needed to be dealt with sensitively as they can be perceived as “culturally inappropriate” within the context of the UAE.
The departments agreed that due to the Francophone and Hispanic nature of the course, international and cultural perspectives are woven in throughout the curriculum. Some of the newer textbooks offer a more global perspective (explicit references that are not Eurocentric acknowledgement of a range of cultures). They are however an integral part of the A level course and independent reading. Consideration of UAE environment and culture is taken into consideration where appropriate e.g., alcohol at GCSE, menus at KS3, celebrations and marriage at GCSE and Diversity in Year 13. There are however other opportunities within the course where certain aspects of the course lend themselves to cultural knowledge particularly focusing on celebrations, travel, family, jobs and global issues that are explicitly taught at GCSE. This is more explicit at A level as it is an integral part of the course. Whilst there are some restrictions to the types of resources teachers can use at A Level, teachers sometimes try to use a wider range of authentic resources which not only reflect the international demographic of the college, but also reflect a more global perspective e.g. music, videos, global issues at GCSE. Students appear to enjoy moving away from the textbook and producing work which they see as more relevant, as is evidenced by the quality of work produced and the enthusiastic responses in discussion and their keenness to share ideas.
Evaluations with students followed a similar thread, with regard to the profile or orientation of our schemes of work to the world, students studying French stated that they felt they were exposed to the French language and culture through Francophone countries other than France and they appreciated these opportunities Students of Spanish stated they felt the perspective they were offered was quite limited to Spain, and at the very least, quite Eurocentric. This changes at A level as students are exposed to a wider range of locations and resources. There was an acknowledgement from teachers that the Spanish students are being presented Spanish language and culture that is very European, as opposed to Latin American. This is a function of the British curriculum. If students were to go on to study Spanish in say, the US, they world perceive some grammatical differences, but these should not rise to the level of a barrier to communication.
Units of work in both French and Spanish include topics that present festivals, cities and cultural material relevant to their age groups. Once again, students of French felt much more exposed to French culture across the world, as opposed to just in France or Europe than students of Spanish did. Students also felt that global perspectives were touched upon but not studied in detail. At A Level there is time and opportunity to broaden this. The students seemed not to see an issue here with regard to MFL. Students said they feel the teaching is separate from yet at the same time sensitive to individuals’ and families’ differences and cultural beliefs. The A level students thought that the
number and choice of authors are limited by the curriculum. A range of texts are set, aside from the set texts every effort is made to use authentic material in the form of YouTubevideos, statistics, and newspaper articles to present relevant thematic material. Students did acknowledge that the broad background, biography, and historical and cultural settings of authors are presented visavisthe work in question and they know they can investigate further if interested and are encouraged to do so by staff. Since the evaluation and the student feedback the department have decided to focus on the following action points:
Action Points
• At GCSE level Theme of education have students research and examine a non European/non Latin American context.
• Teachers will choose one year group KS4 or KS5 and create some lessons around Black History month.
• When creating their own material such as PowerPoints, K.O.s, or sentence builders, teachers will be sure to include a wide variety of images of people, physical, cultural and religious landscapes.
• Spanish Theme of festivals Year 8 ad GCSE broaden from Spain, Mexico and Latin America to increase focus on allowing students to describe their traditions and festivities.
Conclusion
We have learnt so much through evaluating our approach to the curriculum; whilst we are still towards the beginning of this journey it has been powerful to see the changes that have already made and the impact on students’ experiences. So many of our students want to be seen within our curriculum. Their questions, interrogating the knowledge bases we use when building our subject specific curriculums were useful in thinking about just how powerful a tool curriculum construction is in establishing knowledge structures in education. The consistent message from students of wanting to hear multiple narratives and perspectives came through across every subject evaluation. What was perhaps even more interesting was our students’ desire to diversify the way we assess students and to vary the pedagogical approach to ensure inclusivity.
More broadly, modelling inclusive behaviours and attitudes in the classroom is essential to learning; when we find ourselves on the periphery or excluded, we can suffer a sense of imposter syndrome. The cognitive energy used to monitor these threats leads to fewer resources for students to engage in higher cognitive processes. When students feel like they do not belong in an educational setting, the
cognitive energy that should be used in collaborative learning opportunities is used to scan the group for barriers, discrimination and stereotypes.
The process of internationalising and diversifying our curriculum should open our eyes to the importance of creating an inclusive environment where everyone in our community feels like they belong. Much work has already been done to support these areas of development and we look forward to continuing this work with the departments involved. Every international school should take the time to consider how its curriculum connects and speaks to its existing school population. A curriculum with an international orientation in content and form can prepare students for performing (professionally/socially) in an international and multicultural context and build empathy and a broader understanding of people that make up our community.
A huge thank you to all the departments involved in this evaluation, in particular: Anna Claeys, Matthew Rushworth, Mark Donovan, Donna Anderson, Liz John, Noel Thomas, Becki Quigley, Karen Norris and Ben Christopher and all the students involved.
References
Goodson, I. 1995. Themakingofcurriculum:Collectedessays . 2nd ed. London: Falmer.
Leask, B. 2009. Using formal and informal curricula to improve interactions between home and international students. JournalofStudiesinInternationalEducation13(2): 205 221.
Leask, B. 2013. Internationalising the curriculum in the disciplines Imagining new possibilities. Journal of Studies in International Education17(2): 103 118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315312475090. http://jsi.sagepub.com/content/17/2/103.
Marginson, S. 1999, After Globalisation: Emerging politics of education, Journal of Educational Policy, Vol. 14, no.1, pp. 19 31
OECD/CERI. 1995. Educationinanewinternationalsetting:Internationalizationofhighereducation . The Hague: OECD/Centre for Educational Research and Innovation.
Internationalising the Curriculum Research Project
Departmental Self-evaluation Tool
This self-evaluation tool aims to encourage reflections on our current curriculum provision and to collaboratively identify areas for improvement for the school’ Diversity Equity and Inclusion strategy. Please read the statements under each topic. We ask that you use the framework to self assess your department against each statement to the best of your knowledge, indicating whether you think evidence can be provided to show the extent to which these questions have been considered and mapped into the curriculum.
TOPIC STATEMENT NOTES/COMMENTS
Profile and Orientation
To what extent do the content of our schemes of work presume a particular profile or orientation to the world?
What are the characteristics of this profile?
Who is represented as an ‘Other’ in my teaching and how?
Is this potentially problematic and for whom?
Local, National and Global Perspectives
To what extent does the course/unit promote a global perspective?
(Examples could include international case studies, comparative studies, articles or texts.)
Are units of work informed by local, regional or national contexts only?
Do schemes integrates a range of international case studies that progressively promote a global perspective?
How far are international cultural perspectives clearly articulated, and systematically developed throughout units of work?
Rating: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Rating:
1 2 3 4 5 6
Are these an afterthought or more central to the mode of study?
Teaching Controversies
To what extent could particular topics/units or readings on the syllabus/schemes of work be potentially traumatic or painful to students either in general or in particular?
Should this be examined / acknowledged / managed?
If so, how?
Rating:
1 2 3 4 5 6
Heritage and Lived Experience
To what extent do we engage with our students' families and communities on interpreting national curriculum requirements in a way that aligns with their experiences
To what extent does our curricular engage the lives and heritage of our international student body
Rating: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Texts and Resources
(images, videos, films, instruments, books)
To what extent is the demographic profile of authors and resources on
What is the effect of this on the diversity of views with which the students are presented?
the syllabus / schemes of work internationalised?
What is the effect of this on student engagement? How do you know?
Rating: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Is the profile of authors acknowledged and examined as part of the learning aims and outcomes of the syllabus/ programme?
Do schemes of work/ units enable the use of non-English/international sources and recourses in the curriculum?