Logic hybridity within the International Baccalaureate: the case of a state school in Poland

Abstract

This article takes a ‘vertical’ comparative case study approach to the study of the human rights logic of the International Baccalaureate. It explores how the global human rights logic is experienced and adhered to by students taking the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme in one state school in Poland. As part of a larger study the article uses the data scores from the Human Rights Competence Development Survey (Parish, 2018) as a measure of the level to which students adhere to the human rights logic of the International Baccalaureate. Semi-structured interviews with a small sample of students and the International Baccalaureate Diploma Coordinator were conducted to explore how those students experience the International Baccalaureate human rights logic in an attempt to understand why they have or have not developed high levels of adherence. The findings indicate that adherence to the human rights logic varies depending on factors both within and beyond the school learning community. What also becomes clear is that there is logic hybridity as the human-rights-promoting logic competes with the more pragmatic concerns of examination success and university ambitions.

Keywords

International education human rights education institutional logics International Baccalaureate

Introduction

This article explores how the global human rights logic of the International Baccalaureate (IB) is experienced and adhered to by students taking the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme (IBDP) in one state school in Poland. Borrowing from the institutional logics perspective, a branch of institutional theory that focuses on how belief systems shape and are shaped by individuals and organisations, this article proposes that the human rights ideals of the IB form an institutional logic that has become embedded in the core of the IB Organization (Powell & Bromley, 2013; Thornton & Ocasio, 2013).

Schools offering IB programmes take their cue from global notions of what it means to be a good citizen as the development of the IB runs parallel to the emergence of global organisations working to promote human rights. In particular, the foundations for the development of the IB began with the creation of post-World War I organisations, including the International Labour Office in 1919 and the League of Nations in 1920 (Hill, 2002; Sylvester, 2002). Employees of the League of Nations opened the International School of Geneva in 1924 to provide for their children. Following World War II there was an increase in the mobility of expatriate families for reasons including the creation of the United Nations (UN) in 1945, decolonization, the emergence of the USA as a world power, the post-World War II economic boom and international expansion of companies, the Fulbright Act (1964), and technological advances (Hill, 2002). However, during the 1950s the following problems were identified:

difficulty of access to universities on a global scale;

lack of appropriate curricula for internationally mobile students;

the need to promote international understanding for world peace;

division of students into national groups to teach the programs of some countries;

financially unviable class sizes stemming from the above (Hill, 2002, p. 193).

Whilst the IB was developed to address pragmatic concerns, the founders of the IB were also concerned with the human rights ideals formulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and promoted by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) (Hill, 2002; Marshall, 2007; Sylvester, 2002, 2007).

The human-rights-promoting ideals of the IB do not manifest themselves as a single discrete subject that forms a part of the IBDP, and they are therefore somewhat vague. However, the IB Learner Profile states that “The aim of all IB programmes is to develop internationally-minded people who, recognizing their common humanity and shared guardianship of the planet, help to create a better and more peaceful world” (International Baccalaureate Organisation, 2013). The human-rights-promoting ideals of the IB are made more explicit in the IB Learner Profile attributes, for example, “caring young people” (IBO, 2013). In particular, the IB seeks to develop ‘principled’ students who “act with integrity and honesty, with a strong sense of fairness, justice and respect for the dignity of the individual, groups and communities. They take responsibility for their own actions and the consequences that accompany them.” (IBO, 2013, p. 5).

The human-rights-promoting ideals of the IB are often referred to in literature as ‘international-mindedness’ or ‘intercultural understanding’ and are discussed with reference to the IB mission aims/statement and Learner Profile. Wilkinson and Hayden (2010) in a comparative study found changes over time as students moved towards the IB mission aims. They focussed on different ‘international attitudes’ relating to six of the main IB aims (Wilkinson & Hayden, 2010, p. 88), attributing the positive changes in attitudes over a two year period to aspects of the school environment such as informal discussions with teachers and other students, and the compulsory Theory of Knowledge course (Wilkinson & Hayden, 2010, p. 95). Adopting a single case study approach, Lineham (2013) explored how student attitudes changed during the course of their IBDP studies, revealing that despite the IB mission statement not having a high profile, students were familiar with the IB Learner Profile attributes. Likewise Hinrichs (2003) explored ‘international understanding’, focusing on human-rights-promoting ideals such as appreciation of diversity, the importance of the need for peace, a cosmopolitan identity, and respect for democracy and human rights, attributing the increased international understanding of students to the IBDP.

Seeking to build on this body of research, this study explores how these human-rights-promoting ideals can be conceptualised as an institutional ‘logic’. To do so the author borrows from the institutional logics perspective, a branch of institutional theory that focuses on how belief systems shape and are shaped by individuals and organisations (Powell & Bromley, 2013; Thornton & Ocasio, 2013). This article proposes that the human-rights-promoting ideals of the IB form an institutional logic that has become embedded in the core of the IB Organization. However, it questions the extent to which this filters down to the individual school organisations, and in particular to the students. The article also explores how the more pragmatic concerns of the IB create logic hybridity within the school organisation that may compete with the human rights logic. The research questions underpinning the study described here are: Does student adherence to the human rights logic of the IB differ within a specific school context? If there are differences between students within a specific school context, why? The article firstly elaborates on how institutional logics as a theoretical approach provide concepts that can be used to analyse students’ experiences of the human rights logic. Secondly, it outlines historically how the human rights logic has become embedded within the IB Organization. Following this, it draws on both quantitative and qualitative data from a larger study to discuss the levels of adherence of a small sample of Polish students and the school IB Diploma Coordinator (hereinafter referred to as the IB Coordinator) to the human rights logic of the IB in one state school in Poland. The findings suggest that co-existing logics both within and outside of the school learning community compete, and that this may contribute to the varying human rights competence that students have.

Institutional Logics

In the field of institutional logics, as introduced by Alford and Friedland (1985), a ‘logic’ is defined as “a set of practices – behaviours, institutional forms, ideologies – that have social functions and are defined by politically organised interests” (Alford & Friedland, 1985, p. 11). Developed from this definition was a focus on the inter-institutional system and the contradictions within it, e.g. between market and family logics (Friedland & Alford, 1991). However, Jackall (1988) focussed on the normative dimensions of institutions and the intra-institutional moral contradictions within organisations. Building on these works Thornton and Ocasio (2012) defined institutional logics as the “socially constructed, historical patterns of cultural symbols and material practices, including assumptions, values, beliefs by which individuals and organisations provide meaning to their daily activity, organise time and space, and reproduce their lives and experiences” (Thornton et al., 2012, p. 2). This more recent definition of institutional logics will be adopted for the purposes of this article. The concept of ‘logics’, as defined above, is applied to human rights which it can be argued are “socially constructed … assumptions, values, beliefs … which influence individuals and organisations both symbolically and materially” (Thornton et al., 2012).

“A core premise of the institutional logics perspective is that the interests, identities, values and assumptions of individuals and organisations are embedded within prevailing institutional logics” (Thornton et al., 2012, p. 6). This perspective is therefore particularly suited to the study described here as it explores how the global logic of human rights (as a prevailing institutional logic) is embedded at the macro level of the IB (the symbolic – assumptions, values and beliefs), the meso level of the school organisations (the material – daily activity and organisation of time and space), and the micro level as it impacts the experiences and actions of students.

The term human rights logic is not used by the IB itself or its commentators, although research that draws on institutional theory is in evidence within the field (Bunnell, Fertig, & James, 2016, 2017a, 2017b). Institutional theory has been used to explore the legitimacy of international schools, using the concept of the primary task (Bunnell et al., 2017a). The institutional logics perspective contributes to this as it explores the institutional pluralism of organisations such as the IB as they become embedded in sometimes competing and conflicting logics (Kraatz & Block, 2008; Pache & Santos, 2013).

Research that adopts an institutional logics approach within education research more generally is an emerging field, with work to date that focuses on higher education, medical education, competing logics within the field of inclusive education and shifting logics in kindergartens (Bastedo, 2009; Dunn & Jones, 2010; Kiuppis, 2018; Russell, 2011; Thornton & Ocasio, 1999). Building on the research within education, this study borrows concepts developed by Pache and Santos (2013) to use as an analytical tool. Pache and Santos (2013) start with the premise that within an organisation individual responses to a given logic are dependent on the extent to which they adhere to that logic. The levels of adherence described by Pache and Santos (2013) are to be seen as steps on a continuum - novice, familiar or identified. Based on the level of adherence individuals may respond in one of the following ways; ignorance, compliance, resistance, combination or compartmentalisation (Pache & Santos, 2013, p. 3). Pache and Santos (2013) argue that the relationship between adherence to a particular logic and the way in which an individual responds to that logic is moderated by the degree to which an organisation experiences logic hybridity. They also note that whilst at the organisational level adherence to a particular logic may be needed to satisfy institutional referents, the level of response by an individual may be influenced by concerns related to social acceptance, status and identity that are external to the organisation (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Pache & Santos, 2013, p. 12). The concepts of adherence, response, experience and logic hybridity are used as analytical tools with which to explore how the human rights logic filters down from the global to the local.

The next section will explore how a human rights logic has become embedded within the IB – though the logic of human rights co-exists in tension with a pragmatic logic, creating logic hybridity.

Human Rights As An Embedded Logic Within The IB Context

As discussed in the introduction to this article, the IBDP emerged both from pragmatic concerns in the face of increasing mobility and from the ideals emerging from international human rights agreements at that time (Hill, 2002; Tarc, 2009a). Following the introduction to institutional logics above, the article will proceed to make the case that a logic of human rights has become embedded within the IB. It also argues that this human rights logic co-exists alongside a pragmatic logic. This section explores briefly the historical construction of “cultural symbols and material practices, including assumptions, values and beliefs” in the development of the IB, influenced by human rights and pragmatic concerns (Thornton et al., 2012, p. 2). These are in evidence at the organisational level historically, and in current IB documents, as discussed above.

At the Conference of Principals of Internationally-Minded Schools in 1949 (later known as the Conference of Internationally-Minded Schools (CIS)) the establishment of an international diploma was first mooted (Hill, 2002). Subsequently the CIS held a course in Geneva for teachers with an interest in international education (Hill, 2002). This event, attended by fifty participants from seventeen countries, saw the first blueprint for international education which included notions of a common heritage, a basic attitude of respect for all human beings as persons, and freedom from fear or prejudice (Hill, 2002, p. 194).The CIS conference set the stage for the ideological foundations of the IB. In 1951 the International Schools Association (ISA) was founded by parents of students in international schools with the purpose of addressing pragmatic and ideological concerns, and to provide support and networking opportunities for the emerging international schools (Hill, 2002). During this stage of policy formulation the ISA executive, the International School of Geneva school board and the school staff were in agreement that international education should meet the following aims: the ideological aim of creating a world free from conflict, a cultural concern for intercultural understanding and appreciation, demographic and family concerns for university access for students, and educational concerns for an international curriculum for mobile families (Hill, 2002; Tarc, 2009a). The first two aims reflect the social construction of a ‘logic’ that is in support of human rights. This is largely based on the belief that intercultural understanding is important, linked to striving for peace. However, the human rights logic at that time remained vague and undefined, while the pragmatic concerns of the third and fourth aims were being addressed.

What continued to emerge throughout this historical period were structuring tensions between pragmatic concerns and weakly formulated human rights ideals (Tarc, 2009b). Tensions lay in the development of a programme of study that promoted international understanding at a time when the purpose of schooling was to produce national subjects (Tarc, 2009a). At the same time the ideals of a progressive education of the whole person were in competition with the creation of a diploma that was internationally accepted for university entrance (Tarc, 2009a). The human rights ideals of the IB also became strained at a time when the IB was primarily the domain of the socially elite (Tarc, 2009a, p. 23). However, whilst these tensions persist, a human rights logic that focuses on intercultural understanding, tolerance and actions that promote a better world has gradually become more clearly defined through the IB Learner Profile (introduced in 2006) as “the IBO mission statement [was] translated into a set of learning outcomes for the 21^st century.” (Tarc, 2009a, p. 96). Attributes such as ‘caring’, ‘reflective’, ‘principled’, and ‘open-minded’ become defined as part of the human rights logic with guidance on implementation (IBO, 2013). Documents such as the IB Learner Profile and the IB mission statement provide a veneer of organisational homogeneity at the global level of the IB (Green, 1997; Tarc, 2009a). At the same time it has been argued that the growth and development of the IB global brand has been in part due to the demand from parents for ‘high quality’ international programmes that offer a competitive edge for their children in a competitive global market (Bunnell, 2014; Doherty, Mu, & Shield, 2009). The success of the IB, it could be argued, is evidence of the continuing place of the pragmatic logic of the IB as it strives to maintain its place in a global neo-liberal educational marketplace (Bunnell, 2014).

This section has provided a brief overview of the ongoing tension between a human-rights-promoting logic and pragmatic concerns within the IB Organization, with the suggestion that these tensions can be explored through the theoretical lens of institutional logics. For a more in-depth study of the historical development of these tensions see Tarc (2009a). The next section will outline the methodological approach to the study.

Methodology

The study adopted a ‘vertical’ case study approach using multiple methods to better answer the research questions (Creswell, 2013, p. 16; Vavrus & Bartlett, 2012). The theoretical lens of institutional logics was used as an analytical tool, and the study was divided into two phases corresponding to the two research questions, as follows.

Phase 1 – Does student adherence to the human rights logic of the IB differ within a specific school context?

Participants

Discussions about how to define an ‘international’ school abound and are somewhat contested (Bunnell, 2014; Bunnell et al., 2017a; Hayden & Thompson, 2016). Whilst the focus of this article is on IB schools and not ‘international’ schools per se, it could be argued that by offering an international curriculum such as the IB a school has a legitimate claim to be called ‘international’ (Bunnell et al., 2016, 2017a). The author therefore takes the position that schools offering the IB are legitimate ‘international schools’. For the purposes of this article, the schools in this study will thus be defined broadly, adopting the three categories for international schools laid out by Hayden and Thompson (2013):

Type A international schools are seen as ‘traditional’, in the sense that they were the first international schools to be created with a view to supporting a globally mobile expatriate community.

Type B schools, classed as ‘ideological’, are international schools that are established to bring young people together from different parts of the world with a view to promoting global peace and understanding.

Type C ‘non-traditional’ international schools are those established largely to cater for socially and economically advantaged elite ‘host country nationals’ (Hayden & Thompson, 2013). These schools started to emerge towards the end of the 20^th century as investors and entrepreneurs identified a market for this form of education. The growth of Type C schools has in large part accounted for the growth in the numbers of international schools worldwide in recent years (Hayden & Thompson, 2013).

It is suggested by this author that another form of ‘international school’ could be considered to exist that does not fit into the three categories above: those that are state-funded and offer an international curriculum such as the IBDP. It is a school such as this on which the present article is based.

The larger study of which this article is a part has nine participating schools within Norway and Poland that offer the IBDP, including Type A, B and C schools. Students within these nine schools were asked to participate in a quantitative survey, which is described in the next section. The total number of respondents from these nine schools was 149. For the purposes of this article only the data collected from School 1 of this larger sample is used. School 1 is a fully funded state school that caters to academically elite students in one of the larger cities in Poland. Whilst the school originally incorporated the IBDP with a view to providing an international education for expatriate families moving in and out of the area, it had at the time of data collection (2016) an entirely Polish student and staff body. In this school students are enrolled onto the IBDP following a successful examination taken in English. The school presents an interesting case as it is a far cry from the original Type A and Type B international schools described above that were not necessarily academically elite, but represented ethnic diversity within the student and staff body.

Findings

Adherence in this case is taken to mean the level of commitment students have to the IB human rights logic. This question was addressed using a quantitative approach to measuring human rights competence that has been developed and tested by the author (Parish, 2018). The IB human rights logic has a particular focus on intercultural understanding and tolerance as a way to counteract discrimination and prejudice as expressed in the IB mission statement: ‘The IB aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect’ (IBO, 2013; International Baccalaureate Organization, 2018c).

In this study an electronic three-part survey was used as a measure of the extent to which the students adhere to the human rights logic that is embedded in the IB. The Human Rights Attitudes and Behavioural (HRAB) survey included three scales and biographical data, and was distributed to 16-19 year olds who are enrolled on the IBDP in nine different schools within Norway and Poland. 149 students responded. The first part of the survey focused on the IB’s aims for students to ‘create a better and more peaceful world’, implying the need for action (IBO, 2018). Inspired by the work of Ajzen and Fishbein (1979; 1975, 1980), this first part consisted of the Scale of Human Rights Attitudes and Behavioural Intentions (HRAB) constructed by the author. The HRAB has 24 items measured on a 7 point Likert scale, and has six sub-scales that measure attitudes towards the following, for which results emerged as noted: human rights values (HRV: M = 6.2, SD = 0.90), human rights specific behaviours (HRB: M = 5.6, SD = 0.84), the attitudes of significant others towards those specific behaviours (ASO: M = 5.6, SD = 0.89), attitudes towards self-efficacy to complete the specific behaviours (SE: M = 5.6, SD = 0.90), attitudes towards the worthwhileness of the specific behaviours (WO: M = 5.3, SD = 1.06) and the intention to act (IA: M = 4.6, SD = 1.02).

The second part of the survey related to the IB’s aims to develop ‘caring young people’ for which empathy is necessary (IBO, 2013). The author used the ‘Scale of ethno-cultural empathy’ (SEE) developed by Wang et al. (2003) to measure empathy irrespective of ethnicity. The SEE has 31 items measured on a 6 point Likert scale. Four factors emerged: empathic feeling and expression (EFE: M = 4.3, SD = 0.86), empathic perspective taking (EP: M = 3.4, SD = 1.0), acceptance of cultural differences (AC: M = 4.6, SD = 0.89) and empathic awareness (EA: M = 4.6, SD = 0.99). Estimates of internal consistency for the SEE total and subscales are measured by the alpha coefficients as follows: SEE total .91; EFE .89; EP .75; AC .73; and EA .76 (Wang et al., 2003, p. 228).

In the third part of the survey, the ‘Identification with All Humanity Scale’ (IWAH), as developed by McFarland et al. (2012), was used to measure the extent to which students identify with all human beings as opposed to those within their local community or to those within their nation. The IWAH has nine items measured on a 5 point Likert scale. Three sub-scales measure identification with community (IWC), identification with one’s own nation (IWN) and identification with all humanity (IWH). The assumption made by this scale is that those who regard all humanity as one in-group should be low in bias against others seen as out-groups (McFarland et al., 2012, p. 831). In their 2012 study across four different groups McFarland et al. (2012) report means for the 9 items ranging between 2.76 and 4.05, and standard deviations for the whole scale ranged between 3.17 and 7.01 across the four groups (McFarland et al., 2012, p. 835).

Figure 1 shows the distribution of the dataset from the Polish school. The responses have been sorted from least to greatest and then illustrated with a box-and-whisker graph. The top 50% of the group are represented by everything above the median (the black line in the middle of each box), while the bottom 50% are represented by everything below the median. Those in the top 25% are shown by the top “whisker” (black line protruding out of the top of the box). Those in the bottom 25% are shown by the bottom “whisker”. Small circles represent those with more extreme scores than normal (outliers), while stars represent extreme outliers.

Analysis shows that within the school there is a broad range of student scores for the different components of the HRAB survey. This reflects differing levels of adherence to the human rights logic of the IB. In response to research question one, therefore, it is clear that student adherence to the human rights logic of the IB does indeed differ within a specific school context. With this in mind the study proceeded to Phase 2 as discussed in the following section.

Phase 2: If there are differences between students within a specific school context, why?

Participants

The sample for Phase 2 of the study was taken from school 1, the Polish state school also used in Phase 1. It consisted of the school’s IB Coordinator, as a person who is able to discuss an overview of the school and its human rights education, and 12 students between the ages of 16-19. Students were selected to represent a range of levels of adherence based on their human rights competence development survey scores, as shown in Table 1. Level of adherence was assigned based on the human rights competence scores, ranging from 4 to 28 and based on the categories identified by Pache and Santos (2013). Pseudonyms have been used to protect the anonymity of students.

Table 1.

HRCD scores and levels of adherence for the interview sample.

Participant	Human rights competence score	Level of adherence
Kasia	5	familiar
Mateusz	8	familiar
Karolina	10	familiar
Kamil	11	familiar
Ola	14	familiar
Szymon	17	identified
Julia	18	identified
Bartek	19	identified
Aleksandra	19	identified
Patryk	21	identified
Natalia	25	identified
Marcin	25	identified

In addressing the second research question the author was interested to explore if students with varying levels of adherence to the IB human rights logic had differing experiences of the human rights logic within the school learning community.

The twelve students and the IB Coordinator participated in individual semi-structured interviews, which included some open-ended questions to allow students to lead the direction of the interview. The focus on human rights was established early on in the interview. Participants were asked to define human rights in their own words. We discussed briefly the participant’s definition, before it was explained that for the purposes of the interview the researcher’s understanding of human rights was that “Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination” (United Nations, 2018). It was then explained that the researcher was interested in hearing about the students’ experiences of human rights within the school learning community, particularly ways in which the school learning community promotes learning about human rights, or attitudes towards human rights or action to promote the rights of others. Other questions regarding the students’ experience of the formal curricula and extra-curricular activities, the influence of teachers, and diversity were used as prompts to guide the interviews. Students were also asked to discuss what influences beyond the school learning community may affect their adherence to attributes represented in the survey, i.e. empathy, identity, attitudes. Thematic qualitative text analysis was undertaken to analyse the data from the interview transcripts, using NVivo 10.

Findings

The following subcategories were identified as areas within the school learning community where students experience the human rights logic of the IB (Pache & Santos, 2013): within the formal curriculum and specific subjects taken (e.g. Mathematics), in the extra-curricular activities that students experience, in the influence of teachers as role models, and in the lived experience of diversity. The analysis reflects ‘interstitial learning’ in the school learning community, rather than learning arising only from what takes place in discrete subjects (Thompson, 1998), as supported by Wilkinson & Hayden (2010). Each subcategory will be discussed in turn.

Formal curriculum

Pragmatic choices had been made within the school as to the subjects offered to students. The IB Coordinator explained that “20 years ago English was not as common as it is now. So it was hard to find a Biology or Geography teacher who could teach in English. Last year we were able to add Economics, and next year we have a guy who is coming to teach Global Politics”. At the same time the school must fulfil the IBDP requirements by offering at least one subject from each of the required 6 subject groups (International Baccalaureate Organization, 2018b). The data reveals that students also make pragmatic choices in their selection of subjects within the 6 groups. They were very much driven by personal interest or strategic planning for their futures, which is very much in line with other research in this field (Doherty et al., 2009). Whilst they must select one subject from each of the six academic groups they do not all study the same subjects. This is an important point as it became apparent that in certain subjects students had a greater degree of experience of the IB human rights logic than in others. Of the ten students interviewed who had selected to study Geography, nine stated that this was the subject in which they experienced the most human rights-related content. Two of the five students who had selected to study History referred to the incorporation of human rights-related content, as reported by one student who noted that “From a historical point of view we learn about Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia and WWII and WWI and how it affects people and their rights” (Szymon). This suggests that the learning is very much focussed on ‘learning about’ human rights (Tibbitts, 2002). Psychology was referred to by three of the four students who selected to study that subject as focusing a little on respect for rights, from the perspectives of ethics in science. Economics was also mentioned by the only student taking this subject from the sample, Karolina, who said that “In Economics we usually look at how people don’t have human rights rather than praising that they do have them. These are the concepts which are true and we will look at the countries that don’t follow them”. Karolina acknowledged in this statement that ‘human rights’ are ‘true’ and that students discuss countries that don’t follow them. This very much suggests that the learning about human rights is focussed on knowledge about the world beyond Poland, reflecting aspects of what Bajaj refers to as the transformative action approach to human rights education (Bajaj, 2011).

It was only in the subjects offered within the ‘Individuals and Societies’ academic area of the IBDP that students mentioned experiencing any human rights-related content. The data also reveals that the experience of students within these subjects is very uneven; for example, only three of the five students who were taking History claimed to experience human rights content within this subject. Kasia, who had opted to study both History and Geography, in fact claimed that she did not experience human rights learning in the school. She stated “Not at all. Maybe Psychology, but I am not taking that”. In this case Kasia did not have the same experience in Geography as for example Marcin, who stated that “For me it is easy to see because I have taken Geography which is connected to human rights. We try to find solutions to some problems, water shortages, honour killings in some countries”. Marcin’s comment about ‘solutions’ very much suggests that the human rights education in Geography moves beyond ‘values and awareness’ of human rights problems to ‘transformation’ – how to take action (Tibbitts, 2002).

The variation between subjects highlighted here is hardly surprising as subjects such as Geography and History lend themselves to human rights content far more than, for instance, Mathematics and Physics (Lineham, 2013). It could be argued that institutionally the IB safeguards its human rights logic by ensuring that each IBDP student must study at least one subject from ‘Individuals and Societies’. However, the data gathered for this study suggests that the experience of the human rights logic between and within subjects within the ‘Individuals and Societies’ group of subjects can vary.

Extra-curricular activities

During the interviews both the IB Coordinator and students were asked about the ways in which human rights learning were experienced in school. Of the twelve students interviewed, five mentioned the ‘Creativity, Activity, Service’ (CAS) component of the IBDP (International Baccalaureate Organization, 2018a). Whilst CAS is not actually examined, it is a required component of the IBDP (Bryant, Walker, & Lee, 2016). The IB Coordinator and three of the twelve students mentioned participating in the Model UN (MUN) as an example of how human rights are promoted. Kamil elaborated on his experience of the MUN:

“I was on the UN human rights council. It was a way for me to see how really the UN works. How they support the human rights. We discussed the problem of the gender gap in education and also … the support for people who help in the wars. It included participants from Germany and the Czech Republic, but mostly Polish students. It was very interesting because we cannot represent our own country, but have to represent the country we chose. I chose Ghana” (Kamil).

For Kamil the MUN gave him an experience of working with students from two other countries and the opportunity to try to understand the human rights issues facing his chosen country. Again though, the focus was on knowledge acquisition albeit with the addition of understanding the plight of ‘other’ countries, incorporating aspects of HRE for global citizenship and aspects of transformative action (Bajaj, 2011).

Letter writing for Amnesty International was also discussed by the IB Coordinator and two of the twelve students as a way of showing solidarity with those facing violations of human rights: “Every year we organise this event of writing letters for Amnesty International. It is a huge event. This year we ran short of envelopes because the students were so enthusiastic” (IB Coordinator). However, only two of the twelve students mentioned the Amnesty letter writing as a way in which they engage with human rights in the school. Two of the twelve students also referred specifically to a project that they were involved in for CAS that reflects a very positive response to the human rights logic of the IB. Szymon reported that:

“This online group asks foreigners living in the city to tell their own story of what their life is like in Poland, why they are there and what their background is. It provides a platform for the humanising of people. They can be seen as individuals and not just as ‘foreign’. It is not a pleasant topic for everyone and we might face some hate for it [but] it wasn’t so bad. Through doing it we found there are other projects like it for foreigners in Poland. Polish people are not so accepting in most cases and we wanted to show these people that just because someone is different or [has] different colour of skin doesn’t make them a bad person or not to be liked. These are people, who may be part of a group, nation or religion, but they are an individual and a real story”.

This represents an example of student agency within the school (Anderson-Levitt, 2003). All students must complete the CAS requirement. However, some choose to focus on issues related to human rights and work to make the world better. This is, though, a personal choice and not imposed by the school; students do not necessarily all respond in the same way.

As suggested by Kasia, not all students respond enthusiastically to CAS:

“There is a possibility (to do activities that promote human rights). We are supposed to do CAS. We are supposed to do service, help disadvantaged people. Some people in class promote the rights of minorities. We are supposed to choose the way we do CAS”.

Szymon made a related point:

“It all depends on the person. I think you need to grow up to this point where you decide you want to help people. Some people are not really socialising and step out of their comfort zone and help people. But most people are involved in some way in helping the community”.

Whilst CAS is embedded within the IB as an important aspect of the Diploma Programme, students respond to it in different ways. As reflected in the comments by Kasia and Szymon, there is an element of choice which reflects adherence to human rights or other interests. Those with a particular interest in human rights issues experienced encouragement and support from the school to pursue their interest, and responded positively. However, others only did what was required to gain the IB Diploma, despite a reluctant acknowledgement that they are supposed to help people, as seen in the comment by Kasia above.

Influence of teachers

Of the twelve students, five said that the IB teachers influenced them positively in this way. For example, Natalia said: “I can’t think of any specific teacher, they all influence me in a good way”. Three of the twelve students mentioned their Geography teacher as having had a particular influence on them, as expressed in the comments made by Kamil:

“I think that our Geography teacher [influences us] as we are looking at all the issues from very different perspectives. When we think about the issues of the Middle East we think from our own European perspective, but for these people who are born there then it is normal, a different mentality. He tries to help us to see this different perspective”.

A particular mention was also made by one student of the IB Coordinator as the person who “tells us the reality and how to avoid stereotypes” (Julia). These comments suggest that teachers in the school try to promote perspective taking, and aspects of ethno-cultural empathy (Wang et al., 2003). Whilst teachers do have an influence in some cases, this is not the case for all students interviewed.

Lived experience of diversity

The school is 100% Polish and in some of the interviews it was suggested that as human rights abuses really aren’t much of an issue in Poland, students learn about human rights abuses in other places. Some made the point that much of what they learnt about ethnic diversity and rights was from a textbook. Whilst they talked about their experience of school as being a place of tolerance and openness, this was largely experienced with regards to gender identity difference or feeling a sense of belonging after not fitting in at previous schools. Students did not ‘experience’ ethnic diversity in the school and were therefore not given the opportunity to respond to it. What appears to have had more of an influence on students was their experience of diversity from elsewhere. Some students had very positive experiences of ethnic diversity within their family. Five of the twelve cited the family as influencing their attitudes towards people who are ethnically different and human rights. Szymon referred here to:

“The community you grow up in. I lived on the border and was always related to another community. There was the Polish community and the German community and a lot of stereotypes. In school we did a lot of projects in cooperation with German students and [students] from the Czech Republic. It is not like they are all super different nations and of course we differed”.

Szymon attributed the community he grew up in as a factor in why he had such a positive view of those who were ethnically different; much work was done in his home town to promote intercultural dialogue. For others, negative experience of diversity was cited as influencing their attitudes towards those who are ethnically different. However, when asked whether they had opportunities to come in contact with those who were ethnically different, one responded: “No, it is more about like whatever I can get from the internet and other people’s opinions” (Kamil). This student along with one other student felt that the media had contributed to them forming negative views of diversity. Julia said:

“I think always it is from the media as in Poland we don’t have immigrants and different religions. On CNN and BBC news and YouTube there are many videos showing people fighting, or there are articles showing a woman has been raped. I don’t really know what to believe or where the truth is”.

However, four students said that the media positively influences their attitudes. Friends were also considered to be an influence for two of the twelve students. Others who had experienced discrimination in other areas of their life felt they could empathise with those who were different. So whilst some may have been influenced positively by the school learning community, at the same time they experienced both positive and negative influences from other areas of their social world that impact the degree to which they adhere to the IB human rights logic. Within literature there is support for the finding that exposure to diversity positively impacts attitudes towards those who are ethnically different (Hayden & Thompson, 1998; van Oord, 2007).

Logic hybridity

The students’ primary focus in joining the IBDP was to gain a good qualification that is internationally recognised so that they could pursue their future plans. For the most part this involved university study in another country and a good job, which is consistent with other research in the field (Doherty et al., 2009; Hill & Saxton, 2014). The IB Coordinator acknowledged that whilst for her the human rights logic of the school was essential and what makes the IBDP special, at the same time the school was preparing the students to go out into the world to pursue their dreams. As a school that selects based on an academic examination, she was very proud of the high scores that graduates from the programme achieve. The school is very committed to the students succeeding academically by maintaining their high examination scores (top scores in the city). Summing up the motivation of the IBDP students, the IB Coordinator commented “When I look at them, the IB students work so [hard], they spend the whole day here. Sometimes they come in at 7am and leave at 6pm. They look and are tired”.

One student summarised the sentiments expressed by all twelve of the interviewees when she said that:

“The IB as a programme is a great thing as it encourages thinking and develops ourselves. But we can’t forget that we are doing it to promote ourselves to make ourselves a good valuable, to sell to universities and get a good job and so on” (Ola).

What is apparent is that in this particular school the IBDP acts as a form of differentiation within the national education system of Poland. It provides the students not only with a more challenging internationally recognised programme of study, but also with a learning community whose student body is made up of like-minded and equally motivated student peers. This suggests that students are active agents in the strategic decisions that they make and not passive recipients (Anderson-Levitt, 2012). This very pragmatic logic was also expressed by the IB Coordinator:

“I would think that the specific situation that we have here is not typical of other IB schools, in the fact that we select the students through the exam. This guarantees us better student material. When we look at the results the average [IB Diploma result] in the world is 29 and we have 37 points”.

This quotation draws our focus to the pragmatic concern of marketization within education - the need for schools to compete and perform (Gleeson & Husbands, 2004).

Discussion

An institutional logic of human rights that develops “inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect” has been identified within the IB (IBO, 2018c). By taking the case of a state funded school in Poland, this article has presented findings from a multiple methods study that explores the ways in which the institutional logic of human rights is experienced and adhered to by students completing the IBDP.

The tension between the human-rights-promoting ideals and pragmatic concerns of the IB as discussed by Tarc (2009a) are evident within the Polish school learning community. The school as an organisation, whilst adhering to the human rights logic of the IB to satisfy institutional referents, also adheres to the more pragmatic logic of the IB (Pache & Santos, 2013; Tarc, 2009a). The focus both at an organisational level and at the level of the individual student is very much on an internationally recognised qualification as a way for students to promote themselves in a global marketplace (Doherty et al., 2009; Gardner-McTaggart, 2016; Hill & Saxton, 2014; Lineham, 2013). However, to achieve Diploma Programme authorisation from the IB, the school must offer CAS and the Theory of Knowledge course, and be seen to be promoting human rights ideals. Therefore, it can be argued that the school experiences logic hybridity. These findings are consistent with the work of Cambridge and Thompson (2004) in their distinction between the ‘global’ and ‘internationalist’ understandings of the IB. This is also in agreement with Gardner-McTaggart’s (2016) discussion of the ‘cultural capital’ that the IBDP offers by way of distinction in the global marketplace. This hybridity of logics moderates the ways in which students experience and respond to the human rights logic (Pache & Santos, 2013). This is illustrated in the following two cases.

Kasia, with a low adherence to the human rights logic (HRCD score of 5) does not acknowledge the human rights logic to be something that she particularly experiences in the school learning community. She does not consider that the teachers influence her attitudes towards those who are ethnically different or towards human rights. Whilst being aware of others who participate in human-rights-promoting activities in CAS, she considers this to be something that they are encouraged but not required to do by teachers. Students can for example choose to focus on sporting activities instead of human-rights-promoting activities. For her part, she resists the ways in which the school promotes the IB human rights logic and attributes this to negative experiences that she has had of those who are ethnically different from outside the school learning community. Her motivation for choosing the IBDP is to further her chances to go abroad for university and to gain success in the job market.

On the other hand, Patryk has a fairly high adherence to the human rights logic of the IB (HRCD score of 21). He considers himself very open to the influence of IBDP teachers, but is also very affected by his own experiences of facing discrimination in wider society. He experiences the IB human rights logic within two of his subjects, Geography and History, and responds very positively to the human rights logic within the school community by participating in CAS. However, at the same time he is focussed on his future career plans and considers the IBDP as the way for him to realise these ambitions. It can therefore be argued that he combines both of the logics, with adherence to both human rights and more pragmatic concerns.

These two students provide case studies of the extremes found within this sample of twelve students. Overall, however, it can be summarised that of the twelve students, ten responded to the co-existing logics found within the school organisation by combining the two (Pache & Santos, 2013). They varied in the degree to which they combined them, with most prioritising more pragmatic concerns. However, all ten students adhered to the human rights logic to a certain extent. Two of the twelve, on the other hand, who also had the lowest HRCD scores, met the school’s human rights logic with a certain degree of resistance or at best indifference (Pache & Santos, 2013). They prioritised the pragmatic concerns of gaining academic qualifications and had no interest in promoting human rights. Therefore within the school community they did not respond to the human rights logic positively, either in their subjects or in extra-curricular activities.

Conclusion

The hard work and commitment of the staff and students of the IBDP school participating in this study was very evident, and this article in no way seeks to criticise the school or the importance of the very pragmatic aims of education. After all, as discussed by Bunnell, Fertig and James (2016), the institutional primary task of an ‘international’ school is provision of an international curriculum such as the IBDP. However, as a human rights logic is a part of the mission aims and Learner Profile of the IB, a question could be asked as to whether the quite extreme differences in the level of adherence to the human rights IB logic is acceptable. Is the human rights logic that incorporates attributes such as ‘caring’ and ‘principled’, and promotes action for ‘justice and respect’, a veneer of homogeneity at the IB organisational level only to be found in documents such as the IB Learner Profile (IBO, 2013)? Is the school going far enough in its work to promote the human rights logic of the IB, or is the focus too much on the pragmatic concerns of academic qualifications and students’ future success in the global economy? At the same time is the IB providing enough training, support and opportunities to help schools to develop the human rights logic? Or is the human rights logic too weakly formulated and reinforced by the IB?

Beyond the scope of this article and requiring further investigation is an exploration of how and why individuals develop adherence to a particular logic. Why do some students begin the IBDP already identified with the human rights logic, when others after five years of IB schooling still appear only to be familiar with the logic? Findings of this study hint at reasons for this including the broader social context such as family, community and media, but further investigation is needed (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Pache & Santos, 2013, p. 12). One limitation of this study is that it takes a snapshot at one point in time rather than considering how an individual’s adherence to a particular logic evolves over time (Wilkinson & Hayden, 2010). As suggested in the literature, a prolonged period of time in an IB school may develop greater adherence to the human rights logic (Bryant et al., 2016; Wilkinson & Hayden, 2010). It was also beyond the scope of this study to question the commitment of teaching staff within the school to the human rights logic of the IB. Are all the teaching staff as committed to the human rights logic as is the IB Coordinator? Likewise, it is acknowledged that evidence for the commitment to a human rights logic could have been strengthened by analysis of IB and school syllabi. At the same time this article does not explore how the tension between the idealistic and pragmatic goals of the IB are revealed with reference to the school’s official stance; for example, from published statements on the school website. This would have required expertise in Polish or the help of a translator. However, this very fact is of interest as one might wonder at a school offering an international qualification that is only publicised in Polish. The intentions of the school and the purposes of the school in offering the IBDP would be of interest to explore further. Also, for the purposes of this article human rights have been explored specifically with relation to ethnic diversity. It would be of interest in further study to explore human rights in relation to wealth, gender and age, particularly in ethnically homogenous populations.

At the same time the study raises questions about the diversity of the school learning community. Can a school organisation that is 100% Polish in what remains a very homogenous society be expected to meet the demands of a mission statement embedded in a human rights logic that promotes intercultural understanding, tolerance and care for the world? Literature suggests that diversity is a key aspect both of being an international school and of the development of human-rights-promoting attributes (Belal, 2017; Cole & Zhou, 2014). Here a comparison between IB schools such as the United World Colleges (with their prioritisation of ethnic diversity) and state schools such as this one would be invaluable. However, this study has contributed to a new theoretical approach to understanding the way in which a global ideal such as human rights impacts the experiences and levels of adherence that students have. In so doing it gives “credence to a conceptualisation of logics as networks of learned knowledge structures that are unevenly distributed across a population as a result of differences in social interactions and socialisation” (Pache & Santos, 2013, p. 32; Thornton et al., 2012). It allows us to see that there is complexity in the relationship between individuals and their institutional environment. A student may be studying the IBDP, with its apparent focus on a human rights logic at the organisational level, but this does not mean that the student will develop adherence to this human rights logic. The implications of this study are that the context of the school and its purpose, interstitial learning and the lived experiences of students do matter and must be considered when policy and practice are being developed. It is hoped that the many questions raised in this article will lead to further investigation into this growing field of study.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank colleagues at the Comparative and International Education Conference in Vancouver, as well as Florian Kiuppis and Audrey Osler, for the valuable feedback received on an earlier draft, and Stefan Sütterlin and Ricardo Lugo for their technical support. Insightful comments from two anonymous reviewers and the journal editor are also acknowledged.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author biography

Karen Parish (MA in Comparative Education) is a PhD candidate at the Research Centre for Child and Youth Competence Development, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Norway.

References

Alford

Friedland

(1985) Powers of theory: Capitalism, the state, and democracy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Anderson-Levitt

(2003) Local meanings, global schooling: Anthropology and world culture theory. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Anderson-Levitt

(2012) Complicating the concept of culture. Comparative Education, 48(4), 441–454.

Bajaj

(2011) Human rights education: Ideology, location, and approaches. Human Rights Quarterly, 33(2), 481–508.

Bastedo

(2009) Convergent institutional logics in public higher education: State policymaking and governing board activism. The Review of Higher Education, 32(2), 209–234.

Belal

(2017) Participating in the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme: Developing international mindedness and engagement with local communities. Journal of Research in International Education, 16(1), 18–35.

Bryant

Walker

Lee

(2016) A review of the linkage between student participation in the International Baccalaureate Continuum and student learning attributes. Journal of Research in International Education, 15(2), 87–105.

Bunnell

(2014) The changing landscape of international schooling: Implications for theory and practice. Oxford, England: Routledge.

Bunnell

Fertig

James

(2016) What is international about International Schools? An institutional legitimacy perspective. Oxford Review of Education, 42(4), 408–423.

10.

Bunnell

Fertig

James

(2017a) Establishing the legitimacy of a school’s claim to be “International”: the provision of an international curriculum as the institutional primary task. Educational Review, 69(3), 303–317.

11.

Bunnell

Fertig

James

(2017b) The institutionalisation of teachers and the implications for teacher identity: The case of teachers in International Baccalaureate ‘World Schools’. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of European Conference on Educational Research, Copenhagen, Denmark. http://opus.bath.ac.uk/56966/3/ECER_2017.pdf

12.

Cambridge

Thompson

(2004) Internationalism and globalization as contexts for international education. Compare, 34(2), 161–175.

13.

Cole

Zhou

(2014) Do diversity experiences help college students become more civically minded? Applying Banks’ multicultural education framework. Innovative Higher Education, 39(2), 109–121.

14.

Creswell

(2013) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

15.

DiMaggio

Powell

(1983) The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. doi:10.2307/2095101

16.

Doherty

Shield

(2009) Planning mobile futures: the border artistry of International Baccalaureate Diploma choosers. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 30(6), 757–771.

17.

Dunn

Jones

(2010) Institutional logics and institutional pluralism: The contestation of care and science logics in medical education, 1967–2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1), 114–149.

18.

Fishbein

(1979) A theory of reasoned action: some applications and implications. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 27, 65–116.

19.

Fishbein

Ajzen

(1975) Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.

20.

Fishbein

Ajzen

(1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

21.

Friedland

Alford

(1991) Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices and institutional contradictions. In Powell

DiMaggio

(Eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (pp. 232–263). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.

22.

Gardner-McTaggart

(2016) International elite, or global citizens? Equity, distinction and power: the International Baccalaureate and the rise of the South. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 14(1), 1–29.

23.

Gleeson

Husbands

(2004) The performing school: Managing teaching and learning in a performance culture. Oxford, England: Routledge.

24.

Green

(1997) Education, Globalization and the Nation State. Palgrave Macmillan: New York, NY.

25.

Hayden

Thompson

(1998) International education: Perceptions of teachers in international schools. International Review of Education, 44(5–6), 549–568.

26.

Hayden

Thompson

(2013) International Schools: Antecedents, Current Issues and Metaphors for the Future. In Pearce

(Ed.), International Education and Schools: Moving Beyond the First 40 Years. London, England: A&C Black.

27.

Hayden

Thompson

(eds) (2016) International Schools: Current Issues and Future Prospects. Oxford, England: Symposium Books Ltd.

28.

Hill

(2002) The International Baccalaureate Policy Process in Education. Journal of Research in International Education, 1(2), 183–211.

29.

Hill

Saxton

(2014) The International Baccalaureate (IB) programme: An international gateway to higher education and beyond. Higher Learning Research Communications, 4(3), 42.

30.

Hinrichs

(2003) A comparison of levels of international understanding among students of the International Baccalaureate Diploma and advanced placement programs in the USA. Journal of Research in International Education, 2(3), 331–348.

31.

International Baccalaureate Organization (2013) IB Learner Profile. Retrieved from http://www.ibo.org/contentassets/fd82f70643ef4086b7d3f292cc214962/learner-profile-en.pdf

32.

International Baccalaureate Organization (2018a) CAS projects. Retrieved from http://www.ibo.org/programmes/diploma-programme/curriculum/creativity-activity-and-service/cas-projects/

33.

International Baccalaureate Organization (2018b) Curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.ibo.org/programmes/diploma-programme/curriculum/

34.

International Baccalaureate Organization (2018c) Mission. Retrieved from http://www.ibo.org/about-the-ib/mission/

35.

Jackall

(1988) The Moral Maze. In: Oxford: Oxford University Press.

36.

Kiuppis

(2018) Inclusion in sport: disability and participation. Sport in Society, 21(1), 4–21.

37.

Kraatz

Block

(2008) Organizational implications of institutional pluralism. In Greenwood

Oliver

Sahlin-Andersson

Suddaby

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (Vol. 840, pp. 243–275). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

38.

Lineham

(2013) Is the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme effective at delivering the International Baccalaureate mission statement? Journal of Research in International Education, 12(3), 259–282.

39.

Marshall

(2007) The global education terminology debate: Exploring some of the issues. In Hayden

Levy

Thompson

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of research in international education (pp. 38–50). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

40.

McFarland

Webb

Brown

(2012) All humanity is my ingroup: A measure and studies of identification with all humanity. Journal of personality and social psychology, 103(5), 830.

41.

Pache

A-C

Santos

(2013) Embedded in hybrid contexts: How individuals in organizations respond to competing institutional logics. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 39, 3–35.

42.

Parish

(2018) A measure of human rights competence in students enrolled on the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme. Unpublished paper.

43.

Powell

Bromley

(2013) New Institutionalism in the Analysis of Complex Organizations. In Wright

(Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 764–769). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.

44.

Russell

(2011) From Child’s Garden to Academic Press. The Role of Shifting Institutional Logics in Redefining Kindergarten Education. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 236–267.

45.

Sylvester

(2002) Mapping International Education. A Historical Survey 1893–1944. Journal of Research in International Education, 1(1), 90–125.

46.

Sylvester

(2007) Historical resources for research in international education (1851–1950). In Hayden

Levy

Thompson

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of research in international education (pp. 11–24). New York, NY: SAGE.

47.

Tarc

(2009a) Global dreams, enduring tensions: International Baccalaureate in a changing world. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

48.

Tarc

(2009b) What is the ‘International’in the International Baccalaureate? Three structuring tensions of the early years (1962–1973). Journal of Research in International Education, 8(3), 235–261.

49.

Thompson

(1998) Towards a model for international education. In Thompson

Hayden

(Eds.), International education: principles and practice (pp. 276–290). Oxford, England: Routledge.

50.

Thornton

Ocasio

(1999) Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843.

51.

Thornton

Ocasio

(2013) Institutional logics. In Putnam

Mumby

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 99–129): SAGE.

52.

Thornton

Ocasio

Lounsbury

(2012) The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press

53.

Tibbitts

(2002) Understanding what we do: Emerging models for human rights education. International Review of Education, 48(3–4), 159–171.

54.

United Nations (2018) What are human rights? Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx

55.

van Oord

(2007) To westernize the nations? An analysis of the International Baccalaureate’s philosophy of education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 37(3), 375–390.

56.

Vavrus

Bartlett

(2012) Comparative pedagogies and epistemological diversity: Social and materials contexts of teaching in Tanzania. Comparative Education Review, 56(4), 634–658.

57.

Wang

Davidson

Yakushko

Savoy

Tan

Bleier

(2003) The scale of ethnocultural empathy: development, validation, and reliability. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50(2), 221.

58.

Wilkinson

Hayden

(2010) The International Baccalaureate Diploma and student attitudes: An exploratory study. Journal of Research in International Education, 9(1), 85–96.