More
Worldly?
College Students' Views of US Foreign
Policy Before and After Studying
Abroad: An Illustration for Teaching
Qualitative Research
by
Christine A. Wernet
University of
South Carolina Aiken
Introduction
Do college students recognize American
privilege? Do they understand how people
around the world view American foreign
policy? Are they aware of global
inequalities? Are they more worldly? These
are some of the questions that I was
curious about as I set sail on a travel
abroad program called Semester at Sea
(SAS) in August 2008. In order to answer
these questions I queried college students
on SAS regarding their opinions about how
US foreign policy is perceived abroad.
Some of the themes that emerged included:
I don't know about US foreign policy; the
United States interferes when it should
not; negative opinions about the Iraq War
and war in general; US foreign policy is
designed to benefit the United States; and
positive, hopeful opinions in favor of
Obama as a foreign policy leader. This
paper is grounded in theory and it
provides rich quotes which reveal how the
students in the study feel about not only
US foreign policy but international
inequalities as well. Additionally, this
research shows that one benefit of study
abroad programs is that student travelers
tend to have a broader global perspective.
Literature Review
Theoretical perspectives from both
sociology and political science, such as
those outlined by Snow (2005), Schwalbe
(2006), Slimbach (2005), and others, are
used to frame the responses of the
students. Snow's (2005) description of
foreign policy culture explains how
Americans tend to look at US foreign
policy. Snow (2005) delineates five
characteristics of foreign policy culture.
The first characteristic is the American
belief that the US is a "special state
with a special destiny." This belief is
fueled by the fact that the US is a nation
of immigrants, many of whom fled from
tyrannical governments. This, coupled with
the reality that the United States became
the first practicing democracy of the
modern world, supports the view that the
United States is not only a special state,
but that it has a special destiny.
The second characteristic of foreign
policy culture is the idea that the US is
a "role model for the world." This is the
belief that American ideals are universal
and that other countries would want to
emulate these ideals.
The third characteristic of foreign policy
culture is "isolationism," rooted in the
idea that being separate from the rest of
the world is a good thing. This is
reinforced by the abundance of natural
resources and the geography of the United
States. Isolationism took the form of
political aloofness and separateness from
Europe and other international powers,
according to Snow (2005).
The fourth characteristic is "American
ahistoricism." Americans as a group tend
not to have an extensive view of world
history. This is a result of the US's
comparatively short national history. On
one hand, this breeds ambivalence towards
world affairs. On the other hand, in the
United States there is a lower degree of
animosity for foreign enemies. While US
citizens do have grievances against some
groups of people, these grievances do not
date back hundreds or even thousands of
years like they do in some areas of the
world.
The fifth characteristic that Snow (2005)
outlines with regard to the American
foreign policy culture is "American
disdain for power politics." This
characteristic, as mentioned earlier,
relates to the fact that the US was
populated by immigrants who were seeking
refuge from unjust and flawed political
systems. This is connected to the
idea that the US is a special place, a
safe haven from political corruption and
that the US must uphold this ideal not
only at home but in other parts of the
world as well.
While Snow (2005) discusses foreign policy
culture, Schwalbe (2006) looks at why
Americans might not know about US foreign
policy. Schwalbe (2006) points out that
like white privilege and male privilege,
American privilege brings with it the
luxury of obliviousness. When one is
privileged there is typically no awareness
that life is different for others. Some
examples of dominant groups include
whites, men, and Americans; these groups
tend to have more economic and political
power in the world.
Because people in less developed countries
typically have less privilege and power
they are more likely to pay attention to
the policies and politics of the United
States. For example, people all around the
world were closely watching the US
presidential elections during the fall of
2008. On our voyage we witnessed this
first hand: there were Obama posters in
Brazil; bus drivers in the Bahamas were
transfixed by the newspaper articles on
the presidential debates; people in South
Africa wanted to know how we were voting;
Canadians wanted to vote in our elections.
Meanwhile, it is unlikely that the typical
American traveler knows anything about the
political leadership of the country that
he or she is traveling in. This is one
example of American privilege.
Schwalbe (2006) provides a number of other
examples of American privilege, such as
not having to learn about other countries,
and not bothering to learn about how
United States foreign policy affects
people in other countries. When people
from other countries know about the United
States many Americans imagine that other
people study the United States out of
admiration for our way of life, instead of
realizing that this knowledge is
cultivated out of necessity.
Schwalbe (2006) identifies some of the
costs of American privilege, such as being
ignorant about others. This can decrease
our ability to empathize and extend
compassion to others. Having a global
perspective can potentially counter these
costs. Consideration needs to be given to
how a global perspective is developed
(McCabe 1997). There is evidence that a
global perspective can be achieved by
international educational experiences such
those provided by Semester at Sea (McCabe
1994). Transcultural competence (Slimbach
2005) can occur as a result of
international travel and is related to a
global perspective. Students in this study
exhibit a number of characteristics
related to transcultural competence.
Slimbach (2005) outlines six categories
which are indicative of transcultural
competence. He argues that transcultural
competency is important because more
individuals are connected with and making
decisions that influence a global society.
The first category is perspective
consciousness, which refers to the ability
to question one's cultural assumptions and
ethical judgments. The second category is
development of ethnographic skill, the
ability to integrate one's self into
another culture. Global awareness, the
third component of transcultural
competency, is the basic awareness of
international conditions that impact both
human beings and the planet. The
fourth category, world learning, is a
result of direct contact with cultures and
people who have contrasting experiences,
beliefs and political histories. Foreign
language proficiency is the fifth
component of transcultural competency, and
affective development is the final
component. Affective development is
the ability to experience empathy for
other people and cultures.
Bond, Koontand, and Stephenson (2005) find
that students who travel are more likely
to embrace values and attitudes that
reflect a "culture of peace." In order to
develop a culture of peace in the larger
society, Bond et al. (2005) maintain that
external and internal changes need to take
place. External changes include changes in
organizations, laws, and institutions.
These changes can come about more easily
when internal changes occur, such as
changes in values, attitudes, knowledge,
skills and abilities which often occur as
a result of international travel. Student
attitudes in this study reflect a culture
of peace, transcultural competency, the
costs of American privilege, and the
foreign policy culture.
Sample
In the fall of 2008 I queried college
students who were traveling on Semester at
Sea (SAS) about how US foreign policy is
perceived abroad. SAS is a rigorous
academic program which, in the fall of
2008, visited various ports-of-call. The
academic sponsor of Semester at Sea is the
University of Virginia. During the 108 day
voyage students spent half of their time
on the ship taking classes and they earned
between 12 and 15 hours of college credit.
The students traveled to the Bahamas,
Brazil, Namibia, South Africa, India,
Malaysia, Vietnam, China, and Japan. While
in port, students typically spent 5 days
exploring the port-of-call. The students
were required to spend a fair amount of
time on educational field trips which were
led by faculty members. They were also
able to travel on Semester at Sea
organized trips and they were encouraged
to travel independently.
The sample for this study consists of 96
college students who ranged in age from 19
to 24 years. The students were primarily
US citizens from a number of colleges
across the United States. Additionally,
there were two international students
represented in the study, one from Mexico
and another from China. While some of the
students were extremely privileged, a
majority of the students came from upper
middle class families.
A majority of the students were either
juniors (54) or seniors (34). Thirty-seven
of the students were male and fifty-four
were female. Seventy-two of the students
identified as white, eight were Hispanic,
four were Asian, four were of Persian
descent, and two were African American. (A
few of the students did not respond to one
or more of the demographic questions.) A
majority of the students in this study
were either business majors or psychology
majors. Due to the nature of this sample
of 96 privileged college students who are
predominately white and female, one should
be careful not to overgeneralize the
results of this study.
Methods
The surveys were distributed and collected
at the beginning of the voyage before we
docked in Brazil and again at the end of
the voyage after we traveled to Japan. The
surveys were distributed in two Positive
Psychology classes and in three Sociology
classes, including Introduction to
Sociology, Comparative Social
Stratification and Globalization and
Development.
The students were asked to answer the
open-ended question, "What do you think
people around the world (especially in the
countries that we will visit on our
voyage) think about American foreign
policy?" The survey form was a mostly
blank 8 ½ x 11 inch piece of paper which
included the question indicated above, and
a request for basic demographic
information. The survey also included the
following instructions: "Please take the
next 10 minutes to complete this survey.
Your participation is completely voluntary
and anonymous. Once you complete the
survey please return the survey to your
professor."
The coding of the survey was completed
solely by the author without the use of
any statistical packages. While care was
taken to avoid any potential bias it
should be noted that this is possible when
subjective coding measures are
used.
Findings and
Discussion
There were seven major
themes that emerged before international
travel on Semester at Sea and one
additional theme that emerged after the
voyage. The themes include: I don't know
about US foreign policy; some countries
like us, others don't; the United States
interferes when it should not; negative
opinions on the Iraq War and war in
general; US foreign policy is designed to
benefit the United States; other countries
do not like our foreign policy; people in
other countries are more knowledgeable
about US foreign policy. These same themes
emerged after extensive international
travel as well. There was one additional
theme that emerged at the end of the
voyage in December 2008: positive, hopeful
opinions in favor of Obama as a foreign
policy leader.
A number of respondents mentioned more
than one of the themes outlined above.
Each time they mentioned each theme it was
counted. A single respondent may
have mentioned as few as one theme or as
many as eight. A number of the responses
integrate several of the outlined themes.
Some of the responses could have fit into
more than one category, but in these
instances a decision was made as to which
category they fit into best. Before travel
all of the responses, except two, were
negative. After travel a majority of the
responses were still at least somewhat
negative, however, because of the
favorable view of Obama many of the
responses were at least slightly more
hopeful. The eight themes that emerged and
quotes that illustrate them are outlined
in the text below.
I don't know
about US foreign policy
The first theme is "I don't
know about US foreign policy." At the
beginning of the voyage nine students
reported that they were unfamiliar with US
foreign policy. A 21 year old white female
junior stated, "I don't know much about
our foreign policy, so I would not know
much about that ☹ sorry."
At the end of the voyage four students
responded that they were unaware of what
US foreign policy entailed. A 22 year old
white female senior reported, "I have no
idea, but I got a lot of feedback when I
talked about the election. Just that we
need to pull together and vote the right
way."
The lack of knowledge about US foreign
policy reflects American privilege
(Schwalbe 2006). While the number of
students who mentioned this declined after
the voyage, there were still several
students who, after extensive
international travel report that they have
no idea what US foreign policy entails.
According to Schwalbe (2006) these
students are citizens of a dominant
country, the United States, and as a
result it is not imperative for them to
know how or why their country sets the
policies that it does.
Slimbach's (2005) theory on transcultural
competency suggests that the reduction in
the number of students who did not know
about US foreign policy may have resulted
from international travel and the world
learning and global awareness that was a
result. This is likely given that world
learning is defined as a result of direct
contact with cultures and people who have
contrasting experiences, beliefs and
political histories.
Some
countries like us, others don't
At the beginning of the voyage twelve
students had responses that reflected the
theme that some countries like us while
other countries do not. A 20 year old
white female junior states, "Some of them
will support it and agree with it,
thanking us. For example if we were to go
to India where we have sent money to help
with natural disasters we would be
thanked. . . but a majority of the world
probably thinks that our power, has gone
to our American head and we often stick
our foot in doors that we were not meant
to open."
At the end of the voyage nine students had
similar responses. These responses reflect
a level of global awareness, a component
of Slimbach's (2005) transcultural
competency which includes the basic
awareness of international conditions that
impact both human beings and the
planet.
The United States interferes when it
should not
At the beginning of the voyage,
twenty-four students felt that the United
States government, via its foreign policy,
interferes in other countries when it
should not. They felt that "others [other
countries] are fearful of our power." In
addition to the 24 respondents who thought
that the US was intrusive, four thought
that the US engaged in bullying, three
felt that the US was egotistical, two
stated that the US was nosy, two mentioned
the term arrogant, and one student said
that the US acted as if it was the "center
of the universe." There were related
themes such as the US views itself as
superior/powerful/dominant that were
mentioned by fifteen additional
students. Nine respondents referred
to the US as the world police. When
students who mentioned this theme and the
related themes are added together a total
of 68 students out of 96 or 70% mentioned
something in their response that related
to this theme at the beginning of the
voyage.
A 21 year old white male, a junior stated,
"Most people think that the US's ability
to take unilateral action makes us a
threat to world stability." Another 21
year old white male, a junior wrote, "They
feel that we see ourselves as the lord and
saviors of everything and that we do not
let other countries work it out but
instead we make situations worse usually."
A related theme mentioned by five
respondents is that US foreign policy is
used as a "mask" to impose democracy.
Respondents felt that democracy and the
war on terror are used as excuses for the
US to enter sovereign nations. These
responses show that the students on the
ship were questioning a part of foreign
policy culture as defined by Snow (2005)
and Kyle (2001). Here students are
questioning whether or not the US is
really a good role model for the world and
whether or not we should impose democracy
on other countries. A 20 year old male
student of Persian descent wrote, "I am
pretty sure (through my experiences and
travels), people around the world believe
no country should hold that kind of power
and wield that kind of power in the way we
do . . . for America to think they can
just invade any country they want and
impose Democracy (a completely new form of
government) on the people, seems
preposterous, dangerously arrogant and
ignorant." This quote also taps into the
"American disdain for power politics"
mentioned by Snow (2005).
At the end of the voyage twelve students
felt that the United States interferes in
other countries when it should not, and
that the US should mind its own business.
Students again described the US as
intrusive, pushy, controlling, and
invasive. A 20 year old white male, a
college sophomore wrote, "I think people
around the world think that we should not
get involved in so many different places
and that we should sort of mind our own
business." "America tends to jump to
conclusions regarding other countries and
are excited to jump into a country or
forceful situation but do not usually
finish what they start," stated a 20 year
old white female senior.
Negative Opinions on Iraq and War/
Negative about the Bush Administration
At the beginning of the voyage ten
students expressed negative opinions
regarding the Iraq War and war in general.
An additional nine students articulated
negative opinions concerning the George W.
Bush presidency and administration. A 20
year old white female, who was a junior
wrote, "I think that everyone will hate
the fact that the US goes overseas and
encroaches on everyone else's governments.
Everyone that I know who lives in a
foreign country hates Bush because of his
foreign policies."
A related theme which was discussed by
four students at the beginning of the
voyage is that the US is reckless with
human life and causes harm. A 21 year old
white female senior wrote, "People around
the world may think the US is reckless
with the lives of their own people as well
as the lives of the people in other
countries."
At the end of the voyage five students
expressed negative opinions regarding the
Iraq War and an additional thirteen
students articulated negative opinions
concerning the Bush administration. A 21
year old white male, a senior stated,
"Most people hated Bush and loved Obama.
But the general vibe was for sure
negative. Most thought that we were over
aggressive." "The gist I got was that they
were extremely unhappy with Bush's
policies," wrote a 21 year old white
female, who was a senior. Another student,
a 22 year old white male, who was a senior
stated, "They don't like the Iraq War and
hate Bush. However there was a huge
support for Obama, I think his presidency
will make many others like us more."
A 20 year old white male junior wrote, "I
think people around the world hate our
foreign policy. They don't like how we
always mediate wars and how we are in
Iraq." "I think that people thought that
it was aggressive and that waging wars for
no reason is not a good idea" wrote a 21
year old white male, who was a senior.
These comments were quite perceptive and
were actually mirrored in international
polls (Finley and Esposito 2011).
Bond et al. (2005) find that students who
seek out international travel are a
self-selected group. Bond et al. (2005)
discuss UNESCO's initiative to develop "A
Program for a Culture of Peace" in 1990
and point out that the UN continues to
embrace this mission. It appears that a
number of students in this study have
embraced a culture of peace. Students not
only show empathy for people in other
countries, but they expressed a concern
with US foreign policy that promotes war.
US foreign policy
is designed to benefit the United States
At the beginning of the
voyage twenty-two students felt that US
foreign policy is designed with the goal
of benefiting the United States, and in
their responses they described the US as
selfish, exploitive, and greedy. A 22 year
old female, a senior and an American of
Persian descent wrote, "I think People
around the world believe that our foreign
policy serves and meets our own needs to
the detriment of other countries in the
world. That being said, the US is viewed
as a dominating world power who preys and
takes advantage of the weaker countries
around the world for our own benefit. I
also think that people view our foreign
policy as aggressive and self-serving."
A 23 year old female, who is a Mexican
citizen and a senior in college stated,
"That they [the US] are dominating and in
a way they are taking advantage of other
countries resources." A 21 year old white
male senior responded, "They will think
that American foreign policy is
self-serving and serves only to advance
American interests abroad, regardless of
harmful or negative effects incurred as a
result of those interests."
At the end of the voyage seven students
commented on how US foreign policy seemed
to be designed to benefit the United
States. A 22 year old white female senior
wrote, "I think people around the world
see American foreign policy as invasive
and probably a bit selfish. They see the
hidden agendas and all the ways that
American foreign policy is manipulated for
American benefit."A 20 year old white
female junior stated, "They think that we
are generally concerned with money
making." "They think it [US foreign
policy] is self-serving neocolonialism
masquerading as some moral superiority
through democracy," wrote a 21 year old
white female junior.
The idea that US foreign policy is used as
a tool to benefit the United States is a
relatively strong theme in the responses
and it is reflective of the writings of
Schwalbe (2006), Snow (2005) and Slimbach
(2005). A student wrote that US foreign
policy is "the global equivalent of doing
business with Wal-Mart." Schwalbe (2006)
points out that part of American privilege
comes from the ability of US capitalists
to exploit the land and labor of less
developed countries. This theme is also
reflective of Snow's (2005) American
disdain for power politics and the
expectation that the US should be a safe
haven from corruption both at home and
abroad. Finally this theme is reflective
of Slimbach's (2005) theory of
transcultural competency. Students who
mentioned this theme show signs of
affective development, the ability to
experience empathy for other people and
cultures.
Other countries
do not like US foreign policy
At the beginning of the voyage
twenty-seven students expressed a negative
opinion about US foreign policy and felt
that other countries do not like US
foreign policy. A 21 year old white male,
a senior wrote, "I think they disagree
with our actions over the last 8 years
especially the way our leaders have been
attempting to police certain parts of the
world. It's pretty obvious our foreign
policies in Iraq and the rest of the
Middle East reflect only our best economic
interest and not an attempt to spread
freedom or democracy like it has been
claimed."
Thirty students, at the end of the voyage,
stated that other countries do not like US
foreign policy. A 22 year old white male
senior wrote, "Overall, I felt much
resentment towards our current foreign
policy. There was much questioning about
why we run our policies the way that we
do. It is seen as ethnocentric and
selfish. . . I think people feel we could
and should be doing much more than we are
because of our economic power and status
on a global scale." A 20 year old white
female, junior stated, "From nearly
everyone I spoke with, there appears to be
widespread disapproval of the US's
policies as excessively aggressive and
unilateral."
"They hated it! People
in every country asked us to vote for
Obama for them and people in China and
Japan cheered and yelled "OBAMA!!" at
us, even though they didn't speak any
other English. My Indian home-stay
mother explained that people around the
world don't hate Americans, but they do
hate American government in the present
state (under Bush)" wrote a 20 year old
white female junior. A 21 year old white
male junior wrote, "I think that a lot
of the countries think poorly about our
foreign policies. I think many think
that we are bullies and get involved in
everyone's problems. We act like heroes,
but we don't help those truly in
need." Like previous themes this
theme is reflective of Snow's (2005)
American disdain for power politics and
the expectation that the US should be a
safe haven from corruption both at home
and abroad.
People in other
countries are more knowledgeable
At the beginning of the voyage four
students indicated that people in other
countries are likely to have more
information and be more knowledgeable
about US foreign policy than the average
American. At the end of the voyage five
students felt that people in other
countries are more informed and more
knowledgeable about US foreign policy than
the average American. A 21 year old Asian
female senior wrote, "They are very
interested in American foreign policy.
Many, many countries were curious as to
who we were going to vote for and vocal
about how we should [vote, for] (Obama).
It ranged from the drunk man at a South
African township to the director of a
USAID organization."
This theme, that people in other countries
are more knowledgeable about US foreign
policy than the average American, reflects
Schwalbe (2006). Schwalbe (2006) discusses
how American privilege shields people from
having to know what their country's
foreign policy is, and that with American
privilege comes the luxury of
obliviousness, while people in other
countries have to know what US foreign
policy is because it impacts their lives
directly.
Positive, hopeful
opinions in favor of Obama as a foreign
policy leader
At the end of the voyage thirty-eight
students expressed the idea that people
around the world had a more positive
feeling about US foreign policy because
Obama had been elected into office. This
is a new theme that only emerged at the
end of the voyage. This was influenced by
the timing of the surveys, the first
survey was taken in late August 2008 and
the final survey was collected in December
2008, after Obama was elected president of
the United States. Additionally, this
theme may also be prevalent because a
majority of the students on the ship were
Obama supporters. In a mock election held
on the ship Obama won by a landslide; 76%
of the students on the ship voted for
Obama.
A 22 year old white female, who was a
senior wrote, "Everywhere we went people
wanted to talk about the 2008 US
presidential election. Everyone was
excited about Obama. As for current
American foreign policy, it is a subject
of great contention." A 20 year old female
junior commented that, "Overall, people
are not pleased with American foreign
policy, in any way. However, they are
hopeful about the change in
administrations forthcoming."
A 21 year old white female senior wrote,
"Now after one election, many people are
excited for Obama becoming president, and
are hopeful that it will change."
"Especially after Obama was elected I
think the world has a lot of hope for
American foreign policy. They are excited
for 'change' and they like seeing a new
face in charge: an Ethnic Face for once,"
wrote an 18 year old white male, who was a
sophomore. A 21 year old white male senior
noted, "There is a great deal of optimism
with regard to Obama taking office."
As with other themes this theme reflects
the writings of Schwalbe (2006), Slimbach
(2005), and Snow (2005). While Schwalbe
(2006) points out the prevalence of white
privilege in the US the students on the
voyage were able to see firsthand how
people around the world responded to
Obama's candidacy. As is evident in the
quotes there was great excitement about
Obama in The Bahamas, Namibia, South
Africa, India, and other countries as
well. There was excitement that a person
of color could become the leader of the
United States. The quotes show global
awareness and world learning (Slimbach
2005). The students demonstrate an
understanding that what happens in one
country can have a dramatic impact on
another country and that people in other
cultures and of different races have
different experiences. This theme also
reflects part of Snow's (2005) foreign
policy culture, the idea that US is a
special state with a special destiny.
Conclusion
This study looks at attitudes about how US
foreign policy is perceived abroad. Eight
themes emerged. The strongest theme before
the voyage was the idea that the United
States interferes when it should not; 70%
of students expressed this idea or a
concept closely related to it. The theme
that other countries do not like our
foreign policy was prevalent both before
and after the voyage. The strongest theme
after the voyage was positive, hopeful
opinions in favor of Obama as a foreign
policy leader. Watching the US
presidential election play out abroad had
a huge impact on the students and on the
results of the study.
The responses tap into the tensions in
American foreign policy culture that are
being raised at this particular place in
time. In August of 2008 many Americans
were questioning the validity of the Iraq
War. The idea that US is a "role model for
the world" was an underlying justification
for the Iraq War, but the responses show
the students felt that the US was failing
as a role model, and this contradiction
resulted in the overwhelming number of
negative responses at the beginning of the
voyage and a strong "disdain for power
politics." With the historic nature of
Obama's election, a third component of
Snow's (2005) foreign policy culture was
prevalent at the end of the voyage, the
belief that the US is a "special state
with a special destiny."
Responses reflect a culture of peace.
Students not only show empathy for people
in other countries, but they expressed a
concern with US foreign policy that
promotes war. As noted earlier, in order
to develop a culture of peace, Bond et al.
(2005) maintain that external and internal
changes need to take place. It appears
that students who travel abroad may be
more prepared to make these changes.
The students in this study also
demonstrate at least three of the six
components of transcultural competency.
They display global awareness, world
learning, and affective development, thus
showing that they are indeed more worldly.
In other words, they have a global
consciousness or a heightened sense of
humanity for all people around the world
(Ahmad 2003). While it is likely that
these students had at least some of these
characteristics before the voyage, it is
also likely that international travel
abroad, such as travel on Semester at Sea,
can nurture and enhance these abilities. A
number of different factors contributed to
the changing responses before and after
the voyage. The students were visiting new
cultures, taking college classes, and
interacting with other like-minded
individuals on the ship, it is likely that
all of these events converged to influence
the change that resulted in these
citizen-learners.
Slimbach (2005) states that
citizen-learners with the real-world
understandings, will be more likely to
take personal responsibility for making
the world a better place, addressing
problems like poverty, ecology, security,
and ethnic strife. Individuals with
the capacity to see events from a
transcultural perspective will be more
likely to act on behalf of the common
good.
Schwalbe (2006) discusses not only the costs
but also the responsibilities of privilege.
He points out that as Americans, we have
more than enough to survive and we have many
luxuries and rights. The luxuries include
both material and non-material wealth such
as literacy and an education. We also have
liberties such as the freedom of speech. We
need to make use of those luxuries and
rights. We need to learn about our role in
the world and how our governments' policies
impact people in other countries, and we
need to develop our own humanity as well as
our compassion and our empathy for people in
other countries. Finally, we need to speak
out when we think that those policies are
wrong. It appears that a number of the
students queried in this study do have a
global perspective and they may be more
likely to accept the responsibilities of
privilege.
References
Ajzen, Icek, Darroch,
Russell K., Fishbein, Martin, and Hornick,
John A. 1970. "Looking Backward Revisited: A
reply to Deutscher." American Sociologist
5(3): 267-273.
Ahmad, Aqueil. 2003. "Globalization, without
Global Consciousness." Humanity &
Society 27(2): 125-142.
Bond, Lynne, Koontand, Sinan, and
Stephenson, Skye. 2005. "The Power of Being
There: Study Abroad in Cuba and the
Promotion of a 'Culture of Peace.'" Frontiers:
the Interdisciplinary Journal of Study
Abroad 11(8): 99-120.
Eagly, Alice and Chaiken, Shelly. 1993. The
Psychology of Attitudes. New York:
Harcourt Brace.
Finley, Laura L. and Esposito, Luigi. 2011.
"Barack Obama as a Human Rights President:
A Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities
and Threat (SWOT) Analysis." Humanity
& Society 35(1): 100-127.
Kyle, Ken. 2001. "U.S. Nationalism and the
Axis of Evil: U.S. Policy and Rhetoric on
North Korea." Humanity &Society
25(3):239-262.
McCabe, Lester T. 1994. "The development of
a global perspective during participation in
Semester at Sea: A comparative global
education program." Educational Review
46: 275-286.
McCabe, Lester T. 1997. "Global Perspective
Development." Education 118: 41-47.
Rokeach, Milton. 1973. The Nature of
Human Values. New York: Free Press.
Schuman, Howard. 1995. "Attitudes, Beliefs,
and Behavior." Pp. 68-89 in Sociological
Perspectives on Social Psychology,
edited by K. S. Cook, G. A. Fine and J. S.
House. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
Schwalbe, Michael. 2006. "The Costs of
American Privilege." Pp. 603-605 in Beyond
Borders: Thinking Critically About Global
Issues, edited by P.S. Rothenberg. New
York: Worth Publishers.
Slimbach, Richard. 2005. "The Transcultural
Journey." Frontiers: The
Interdisciplinary Journal
of Study Abroad 11(8): 205-230.
Snow, Donald M. 2005. United States
Foreign Policy: Politics Beyond the
Water's Edge. Belmont, CA:
Thompson Wadsworth.