Katy (left) with Morocco Exchange Students, Couscous Association, Amzmiz, Morocco, 2010

Today’s guest post is by Katy Rosenbaum.  Katy holds the rank of “almost a Melibee intern” – which is a story for another blog post! Our recent conversation sparked the following reflection. When she shared it with me, I simply had no choice but to share it with Melibee readers.  You’ll understand why when you find yourself nodding your head and thinking that you too need to share this piece. 

As a program leader for Morocco Exchange, I worked extensively with university students who were studying abroad in Spain and came to Morocco on a four to five day cultural immersion program. The days were long and carefully programmed, and the experience—though short—was quite intense.

On the last night in Morocco, we would always have an integration or reflection session where students shared and began processing the experience. Inevitably, the topic of re-entry came up often.

“It’s been such an amazing experience! I don’t know how to cope with going back to Spain and the normalcy of classes there.”

“This has been so powerful that I don’t know how I can explain it to people when I go back to the States. They won’t GET it.”

“I’m worried that I’ll forget things when I go home and don’t know how to deal when things go back to normal.”

My responses became almost habitual. I’d encourage them to use each other as resources to keep processing their experiences in Morocco. I’d nearly beg them to keep in touch with the Moroccan students or homestay families that made such an impression on them.  I’d give them handouts with ideas about other opportunities like volunteering abroad, joining the Peace Corps, or even traveling with Hospitality Club or Servas. We’d discuss that re-entry can be harder than the culture shock process when they first came to Spain or Morocco, and I’d do my best to encourage them to use their resources and make a plan.

But I knew that that probably wasn’t enough. There are many orientations and resources for how to cope with the stressful parts of going abroad, but it can be much harder to support students and prepare them for re-entry.

When I reflect back my own powerful and transformative experiences abroad, it becomes clear that I developed a variety of positive and negative coping mechanisms for re-entry.

My first meaningful experience abroad was a three-week program with People to People Student Ambassadors to Western Europe. I was 16, and had just finished tenth grade. The whirlwind experience was mind blowing. I had my first homestay with an amazingly generous family in the small village of Samoens, France; a few of us got lost in Paris during the Bastille Day celebration on the Seine, my friends and I tried unsuccessfully to hand wash laundry in a Barcelona hotel with disastrous results, I proudly managed to have a few limited conversations in a language other than English, and I felt like each day was more incredible and amazing then the day before.

1999: Young Katy and friends washing clothes in their Barcelona hotel tub.

The crash coming home was inevitable, and it was rough.  To combat my longing to be back in such an invigorating atmosphere, I made a scrapbook: I typed up the journal I had kept every day, printed all my photographs, copied maps, and put everything from museum and train tickets to used candy wrappers and receipts in two large books. I probably spent several hours a day for over a month pouring over it all, trying to capture the moments, the tastes, the experiences, and the exhilaration.  I played the same four CDs I had bought in Spain and France non-stop for over six months, and memorized an entire French musical… even though I had never studied French!

I also threw myself into learning French over the next year, since the homestay family and the kind people in Paris had burst every stereotype about the French I had ever heard. Their hospitality and understanding of my limited vocabulary made quite an impression, and I delved in, devouring French movies, French music, and anything I could get my hands on involving French culture.

My first coping mechanism as a teenager was to funnel my energy into creating a way to preserve the memories that were so important, and to immerse myself in the language and culture as a way to connect back to those few amazing weeks.

A few years later, I studied in China for a semester during my junior year of college. Towards the end of the semester, I began to feel anxious just thinking about re-entry. I knew it would be hard.

About two weeks before flying back to the States, I called my mom.

“Mom?”

“Yes, dear?”

“Well… I decided to do something. And you’re going to think I’m crazy, but, trust me. I need to do it.”

Silence. “Um… okay.”

“The day after my flight lands… I’m going on a road trip to follow my favorite band for four days. Alone.”

Silence.

“You’re… taking a road trip… ALONE… to follow a band? The DAY after you come back from a SEMESTER in CHINA??!”

“Yeah! It’s going to be great!”

It was great.

Rather than focus on China, I pushed myself to the limit with something that I enjoyed and loved, but was out of my comfort zone. I was able to take the experience of constantly challenging my norms and what made me comfortable in China, and bring it to the States. I suppose to some people, road-tripping to follow a band might not be all that odd, but for me, it was quite out of character and that made it exhilarating.

And that exhilaration made coming home a little easier.

Katy serving as a health education volunteer in the Peace Corps, Morocco, 2009

Today, I am still stuck somewhere in the re-entry phase after living abroad. I returned to my hometown after four years in Morocco last July, and though it’s been almost a year, I still haven’t quite processed everything. Because of life circumstances, I’ve had to hit the ground running—applying for jobs, starting a new job, living in my parents’ basement, moving to an apartment, marriage, adjusting to married life, adjusting to cross-cultural married life, buying two cars, dealing with my husband’s immigration journey, supporting my husband through culture shock process, and creating a social network—all in the period of eight months! Needless to say, I haven’t had the time to really understand how being back in the States is effecting me.

Katy introducing her husband to the joys of American culture in Raleigh, N. Carolina.

I forget about the need to process until it hits me when I least expect it. I forget not to throw in an Arabic word that doesn’t have an exact equivalent in English. I try to talk about events or moments that have so much unfamiliar context that I can’t really tell the stories effectively.  I forget that not everyone wants to hear any more than the 30-second elevator spiel about Morocco. I struggle to not become preachy when I see things here that use excessive resources.

But the hardest part of processing are the struggles I have with defining and understanding my own identity: when I don’t feel comfortable with situations, attitudes, or philosophies that were ingrained in me since I was a child, but can’t outright reject them either because they are learned, ingrained, and a part of my history.

And that’s when it hits me. Re-entry is a process, but also a revealing journey.

Sometimes the journey is fast and relatively easy, and some of the typical coping mechanisms are enough. For many people, doing presentations to groups of interested people, keeping in touch with new friends abroad, talking with students who were on the same program and are processing at the same time, journaling, writing articles or blogs, or using the energy to volunteer, create, or learn things related to the experience are all important and helpful ways of integrating back into American life.

But when these mechanisms didn’t make it any easier to work through re-entry, I found it helpful to embrace the challenges of the journey as a true learning experience about myself.

I’ve learned to be grateful for the awkward and uncomfortable moments in my home country.  By questioning and examining these moments and struggles, I’m able to learn more about who I am and what I believe and can break away from who I have been socially conditioned to be.

And that’s what I want in my re-entry process. I don’t want to distract myself, or to try to recreate the highs or intensities of being abroad.  If going abroad is about an intense experience or a prolonged high, I may as well save time and money and find an adrenaline rush in the States.

I want to struggle with what it means to be an American who has lived outside American norms and doesn’t quite feel comfortable in either place. I want to discover what I believe when freed from a few things that my home society has conditioned me to believe.

When I see my re-entry in that light, the journey can take as long as it needs to. I can be comfortable knowing that for every awkward moment I have and every time I feel conflicted, I will learn about myself and have a small glimpse of who I am at my core.

About the Author: Kathryn (Katy) Rosenbaum’s love of exploring cultures and language stemmed from an early age when she kept a “foreign treasures” drawer under her bed with maps, stamps, coins, and even candy wrappers in foreign languages. This interest in knowing “The Other” continued as an adult, and after working with immigrants and refugees in Atlanta at a women’s health clinic, Kathryn joined Peace Corps Morocco as a health education volunteer. She stayed in-country with Morocco Exchange, where she developed, managed, and led short-term cultural immersion programs for U.S. university students. Kathryn recently moved back to Raleigh, North Carolina and is currently working on a grant project out of N.C. State that partners with local communities to improve access to healthy, affordable foods and places to be active. She is constantly seeking opportunities to encourage students and young adults to experience studying, volunteering, or working abroad.

Today’s guest post is by Dr. Sam Turner.  I asked him to reflect upon a piece in the Wall Street Journal entitled “What’s wrong with the teenage mind?” referenced below.  I hope you enjoy his reflection on this subject as much as I did!

Teenagers have notoriously done “bad” things. They congregate in public places; they stay up late at night texting friends and chatting on IM; they have car accidents and tell lies; and they struggle to find their place in life. They come into our lives and leave so quickly.

One of the best documented cases is the actress Lindsay Lohan. On top of posing nude in this month’s issue of Playboy magazine, her record includes two drunken-driving arrests, five jail sentences, and five rehab stints. Despite her fame and wealth, she has demonstrated perpetual reckless and self-defeating behaviors.

In a recent essay in the Wall Street Journal, UC Berkeley psychology professor Alison Gopnik asked the question, “What’s wrong with the teenage mind?”  According to Dr. Gopnik, even good kids make inconsistent mistakes—committing actions that they had previously suggested were wrong. This includes the child who rejects drinking and driving, only to end up in a drunken accident or a daughter who knows about birth control, only to become pregnant with a guy she doesn’t even like.

So, given all these risks, who would even fathom sending their child abroad? Clearly, the freedom to sunbathe on the topless beaches of the French Riviera or the temptation to hitch hike through the Swiss Alps combined with budding pubescence, must be a recipe for disaster.

The mysteries of teen behaviors are further complicated by the variety of teens and their behaviors. John Hughes’s 1985 portrayal of teens in the movie the Breakfast Club included five different kids representing many of the common stereotypes—the popular girl, Claire; the study geek, Brian; the alternative goth-like character, Allison; the jock, Andrew; and the thug, John. The common theme among these characters was generalizable to many teens—uncertainty, ambiguity, and struggling to find the future.

Increasingly, neuroscience, medicine, and psychology are starting to fill in some of the gaps we have in understanding the development of adolescents and have contributed to cracking the mystery of inconsistent teen behavior. Between the ages of 10 and 18, our bodies undergo a variety of physical, cognitive, behavioral, and psychosocial transitions. These changes lead teens to favor risky behavior, prone to emotionality, and sensitive to rewards, novelty, and stimulation.

Since the mid to late 19^th century, researchers have observed an earlier onset of physical development (e.g., menarche) in the Western world while we postpone starting careers, getting married, and having children. This means we have an increasing lag between our physical development and the acceptance of adult roles. Yet, adolescents crave new experiences, greater freedom and independence, and responsibility. Teens score higher on sensation seeking than adults, exhibit more impulsiveness, and suffer from a striking inability to delay rewards for personal gain.

The intuitive response to teenage weirdness is a lack of worldly experience. And indeed, this is partially true. But in addition, neuroscientists have discovered dramatic changes in gross morphology in the brain—reductions in gray matter, growth in white matter, and myelination in the frontal areas associated with executive function, planning, and self-control.

The impact of the volatility at this age is clear. The question then naturally presents itself, what is the ideal thing for teens to be doing during this time period of growth to satisfy their need for independence and exploration while they await the rewards of adulthood? Can you hear the interculturalist in the room raising their hand wildly while exclaiming, “Oh, I know! I know!”

The case for study abroad

Studying abroad involves prolonged periods away from home and the comforts of a well worn social network. Sometimes it involves second language acquisition; and almost always exposure to cultural differences that challenge, yet broaden the repertoire of knowledge, attitudes, and behavior of a budding adolescent.

Satiating the intellectual growth, I would propose, is the beauty of studying abroad. This allows the freedom of easy travel without the burden of house payments or job commitments and capitalizes on a teenager’s yearning to know the world and its curiosities. “Cosmophiles”, a term coined by Park in the 1920s captures the essence of multiculturalism that results from studying abroad. People are wiser from their experiences and the challenges to the closely held cultural paradigms they grow up with.

Students living abroad develop dual reference points that help them interpret rich cultural symbols that their fellow students who opt not to study abroad wouldn’t necessarily develop. In fact, this extracultural cognition, a fancy term researchers use to denote this cultural problem-solving, doesn’t come from just travel—rather digesting the day-to-day issues associated with learning the norms, values, and customs of a new culture.

The question should then be, why are there not more teenagers studying abroad?

About the author: Dr. Sam Turner is a social psychologist specializing in organizational, leadership, talent development, organizational change, team-building, executive coaching, and cultural consulting. His talents are built on ten years of entrepreneurial experience from managing a family-owned business, study and extensive travel abroad, and advanced degrees in psychology. He has taught a number of undergraduate courses, including group dynamics and interpersonal processes as well as social psychology. As an executive coach, Sam develops a plan that capitalizes on strengths and works on weaknesses. He has an unwavering commitment to developing the best employee and organization. Sam has lived abroad and has traveled to more than twenty countries. Feel free to visit his website, Piedmont Leadership, LLC.

A few weeks ago, I googled “shit study abroad students say” after seeing the brilliant “Shit New Yorkers Say” video sensation.  I was hoping someone would do a version of this for study abroad – and today, in my inbox, it magically appeared!

(Side note: The students who made this video did call it “Stuff Study Abroad Students Say.” I am honoring the “Shit People Say” series by renaming this video with the appropriate “bad” word.)

Now watch this clever video! Laugh. Roll your eyes. Be sad. Smile.  Do whatever feels right for you.  Then read the rest of this post:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Did you enjoy that? Was it hard to watch? Did any of this sound familiar?

It sure did to me.  Four colleges under my belt and I cannot begin to tell you how many times I’ve heard these statements. They come from the young voices of (US) Americans from an incredibly ethnocentric country (see this previous Melibee post), one that is slapping together study abroad programs faster than many would like to admit.  Many are revenue driven and poorly designed, leading to students belting out statements like the ones in the video.  (Please don’t get me wrong – there are plenty of schools and 3rd party providers that put great care into study abroad program design and learning outcomes.  But many – let’s face it – don’t. )

The timing of this video really struck me. Yesterday I had the honor of facilitating an online workshop with Dr. Eric Hartman on Global Service Learning: Design/Reflection/Connection – and it couldn’t have been more timely.  Dr. Hartman spoke of the importance of partnership, culture, careful learning outcomes, mutual respect, addressing our ethnocentricity prior to departure., etc.  The gap between great global service learning program delivery and the “run of the mill” study abroad experience is clear.  These students, in my opinion, did a remarkable job of capturing that delta in this video.

This video will serve as a beautiful new resource for pre-departure, orientation, re-entry programs, classroom discussions and academic programs (international education administration/intercultural studies.)  It has so many applications!

What are your thoughts about this video?  How might you envision it being utilized? What did you appreciate about it? What frustrated you about it?  Let’s get some dialogue going about this subject.

Let me close by extending my heartfelt thanks to the Amizade students for creating not only this video, but the opportunity for all of us to reflect on how we contribute to the statements you have highlighted.  Once again, students are providing teaching opportunities.  Does it get any better than that?

DAAD webinars are targeted at faculty and administrators in the U.S. and Canada who advise on study and research abroad, as well as students and scholars in Canada and the U.S. interested in applying for DAAD funding themselves.  You must register for the webinars below in advance (all times are EST).

DAAD Grants for Graduate Students - Wed. October 19, 2pm
DAAD Chat on Studying Computer Science in Germany.  You may submit and discuss your questions in English or German. Chat will take place on Wednesday, Oct. 19th at 9:45pm EDT.

DAAD Funding Programs (all) – Wed. October 26, 12:30pm

Internships in Germany – Wed. November 2, 2pm

Undergraduate Grants for Germany – Wed. November 9, 12:30pm

While the book is enjoyable, playful, informative and engaging, there was one page that really resonated with me. That was page 113.

Page 113 spoke of the phenomenon of realizing, for the first time in your life, that you are a visible minority abroad. This page is a terrific discussion tool for pre-departure and re-entry.  Here is the quote from Ferguson who is attending a popular public event in Japan:

“I wended my way through and the crowds parted like the sea before Moses…Schoolchildren openly gawked, jaws gaping…Men watched my every move as if I might pull out a handgun and start shooting at any moment…

“A foreigner, look!” A flock of high-school girls burst past in a flurry of nervous laughter, and boys, brave after the fact, whispered “Harro!” to the back of my head. “Ah, we have a guest from American here today,” said the disembodied voice of the P.A. system, the voice of a decidedly tinny god. Maybe he will sing a song for us later.”

…That I, so very average and unexceptional, should cause a stir among these bright crowds of costumes gives a new perspective on the idea of exotic. I remember a trip to a Japanese zoo, and how the children turned their backs on the caged wildebeest and watched me instead. ‘More interesting than a wildebeest’ became my personal motto after that.  It was oppressive at times. What I wouldn’t give to be a Japanese-American, to be able to blend in without a ripple, to attend a spectacle without becoming one, to be able to relax.  When your face doesn’t fit the national dimensions you find yourself in an observer-affected universe; your presence alters actions, and the very act of observing changes that which is observed. You cannot slip by unnoticed.  You cannot forget the pigment that you present to the world. If nothing else, Japan has taught me what it is like to be a visible minority, and it is a hard lesson to learn.”

I read this and stopped in my tracks. I was immediately transported back to India, to a day that I had looked forward to for my entire life. I was in Agra, taking time off during a business trip, to see the Taj Mahal.  I started my day at the Red Fort, where I caught my first glimpse of the Taj Mahal.  It took my breath away. The light was so soft, the colors so perfect, it almost appeared to be floating.  I was in awe. Speechless.  Gazing.

And then it happened.

A group of school children approached me with cameras.  They were smiling and giggling.  They pointed.  I looked around, wondering what they were pointing at.  Was I missing something? Perhaps there was someone famous here – maybe a Bollywood star or politician? I glanced to my left, to my right.  I looked in the distance, wondering if something was going on at the Taj that I had missed?  And then I realized.

They were looking. At. me. The foreigner.  The lady who wasn’t with a group of children or her husband.  The lady with the light skin and a lavender backpack.

I suddenly became more interesting than the Red Fort or the Taj Mahal.  My presence altered actions.  I could not slip by unnoticed.  It felt strange, unsettling.  And as Ferguson said, it was a hard lesson to learn.

When one is preparing to go abroad to a place where they will stand out, simply because of their skin, hair or eye color, size or shape, how does one truly prepare?  And when one returns home, how does one take that hard lesson and relate it back to the home country? How does this lesson change the lens that one sees the world through?

I hope that this discussion takes place in both pre-departure and re-entry gatherings.  Being more interesting that a wildebeest or the Taj Mahal is a challenge, to say the least.  So today, I ask Melibee readers:  How are you making these visible minority experiences teachable moments? What did you learn when it happened to you the first time?

(If you have a visible minority lesson to share – please click on “comment.” You do not need to register to comment on the blog nor will you be added to a mailing list. But if you do sign up for the Melibee newsletter in the upper right hand column of the home page, you may win a book by one of the Melibee  speakers – Ibrahim Abdul-Matin!)

Here is a link to Will Ferguson’s book about his experience in Japan:

See larger image Hokkaido Highway Blues: Hitchhiking Japan (Hardcover) By (author) Will Ferguson List Price: $25.00 USD New From: $46.42 In Stock Used from: $4.52 In Stock Release date July 1, 2003.

It’s an anguished cry we hear too often on the news. But it’s a cry even more heart-rending than simply the chilling screams of a victim. It’s a cry that causes us all to examine what is right and wrong, and what is good within us all and what is evil. It’s a cry that shakes us to the very core. The cry?

“They just stood by and did nothing! They saw it happening and didn’t lift a finger to help!” 

“They just stood by and did nothing….” While a woman was beaten and gang-raped in New York. As looters demolished stores in London. When a teenage girl was abducted in Tennessee. While a man drowned near San Francisco. Somehow, the fact that nobody intervened in these incidents didn’t just add to the evil, it multiplied it.

The excuse given by the “watchers” is so simple, obvious and native to all of us that we understand it innately:

“I could have been killed!”

We all instinctively understand the fear of losing our own lives. But even with that completely understandable excuse, we somehow expect more. We expect that for once, the individual will be treated as more valuable than the group. That risk to many will be trumped by the value of that single, usually nameless victim. And we hope to God that we would not stand by and watch, too fearful to act.

It is somehow instinctive to people in every culture to hope for this type of unselfish behavior, to laud it. It somehow makes us all greater. It somehow brightens the world and creates a glimmer of hope in the goodness of our fellow men and women. That inexplicable need to save the helpless individual even at risk to one’s self, or even many, makes our world more tolerable.

Navy Commander Jesse Taylor is the father of a close friend of mine. Commander Taylor was a high-ranking officer on the aircraft carrier Oriskany in the Gulf of Tonkin during the Viet Nam War. He had several children and was on his way to the rank of Admiral in the Navy. On November 17, 1965, Commander Taylor was informed that one of his pilots had been shot down in North Viet Nam. The pilot appeared to have ejected very low, and was hanging lifeless from a tree in his parachute. Rather than declare the pilot dead, Commander Taylor saddled-up an A-1H Skyraider, a propeller relic designed during World War II, and flew out to check on “his” pilot.

Why the Skyraider when Taylor was checked out on Phantoms and other jet aircraft? Because the Skyraider would allow him fly past the scene low and slow to determine whether the pilot was alive or not. With the vicious anti-aircraft fire present in the area, Taylor would not ask another pilot to do this. And he would not leave anyone behind, even if some believed him to be dead. He could have decided from the safety of the deck of the carrier that the pilot was probably dead, and it wasn’t worth risking other pilots or planes to rescue him. But it was not in him to leave a man behind, or put others at risk doing something he felt was his duty. Upon arrival, Commander Taylor made repeated passes attacking anti-aircraft positions, then made a pass below tree-top level under withering enemy fire to check on the pilot. But he didn’t get a clear look at him. He told his wingman that he was going down again.  This time, he was even lower, mere feet off the grass and well below the trees. He saw clear evidence that the pilot had died, and pulled up sharply at the end of the clearing. But it was too late; his plane had been hit.

A small fire began to grow on his wing. The pilots around him advised, then pleaded for him to get out of the aircraft. He did not. He continued out toward the ocean and the carrier as the growing fire raged on the wing near his fuel tanks. He never made it to the sea. The burning wing crumpled, and Commander Taylor was unable to get out of the plummeting aircraft. No one knows for sure why Jesse Taylor didn’t bail out when he could have. Some have speculated (I think correctly) that he did not want to become the next pilot on the ground which would mean his friends would have to risk their lives to save him. Commander Taylor lived by the belief that others were of more value than himself, and died demonstrating that belief. I admire him. I am in awe of him. In my wildest dreams I would have his courage and his honor.

Military men regard it as unforgivable to leave a man behind, and honor those who refuse to do so. Taylor was posthumously awarded the Navy Cross, the nation’s second-highest award for bravery. Today, a U.S. Navy Frigate bears the name “Jesse Taylor.” They don’t name ships after people who let others perish in order to save their own lives.

Tragically, Americans throughout the world have been left behind by the U.S. government in the last few years, and it continues to this day. The reason is again understandable, maybe even innately so. But somehow, we expected more.

In Italy in November, 2007, Amanda Knox, a U.S. student from the University of Washington, was arrested for the “rape and murder” of her female roommate. Though the DNA of a known burglar was found inside the victim, and no credible evidence of any kind linked Knox (who was not even at home the night of the murder) to the crime, she was held a full year before charges were levied against her (by an unstable prosecutor who has since been sentenced to prison for malfeasance.) She was the victim of heinous acts and illegal interview tactics including deprivation of food, sleep and water during an all-night interrogation during which she was repeatedly struck.  She then underwent what journalists and observers called “a kangaroo trial,” “a framing,” and “a railroading.” A fair evaluation of all the evidence proves that she had nothing to do with the crime. But she was convicted of course, and sentenced to 26 years in an Italian prison.

And the State Department stood by and watched.

They sent cable after cable to Washington describing the trial, but not once did they intervene in any way. Asked about Amanda’s case the week after the conviction, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claimed that she was not familiar with the case. Knox has now been in prison for four years, and the State Department is still watching. And if they have done anything to help Amanda, it has apparently been both ineffectual and hidden.  I want to make a clear differentiation here: There are many, many good career men and women in the Department of State. I know them, I admire them, and I respect them. I have worked with them for weeks and months at a time, even serving a term position as an Assistant Legal Attaché at a U.S. Embassy. It is not the State Department career staffers who are largely responsible for this; it is the policy-makers, political appointees.

Like the bystanders in New York that watched the woman nearly beaten to death, the State Department has a valid, legal, understandable excuse for not intervening in the Knox case: “It is not in our best interest.”

To be fair, the State Department represents ALL Americans, and has a responsibility not to let a single American life negatively impact the entire country. In every single movie about submarines, a flooding compartment (with living men in it) has to be sealed off to save the rest of the boat. The concept is obvious. I understand that. But I’m glad I will never have to give that order, or be the one to close the hatch. Essentially, the State Department “closed the hatch” on Amanda Knox.

In Knox’s case, it’s simple math. The U.S. needs the world to believe that our continuing actions in Iraq and Afghanistan are widely endorsed by the community of nations. The U.S. military is large enough to successfully complete the two operations alone, but it is crucial to the U.S. for other nations to participate if only (and it is only) to show that the U.S. is not acting unilaterally. One of these nations, not coincidentally, is Italy. They are not militarily necessary, but they are necessary from a public policy standpoint. Italians have lost sons in Afghanistan, and the sentiment in Italy is against their continued involvement.

It is the State Department’s job to keep Italian soldiers in Afghanistan. How then, would going toe-to-toe with their counterparts in the Italian Foreign Ministry over Amanda Knox benefit the U.S., and by extension, you and me? It wouldn’t. In fact, it would drastically hurt the relationship between the two countries and quite possibly put the Italian participation in Afghanistan in jeopardy. “Close the hatch!”

So instead of doing something, or even commenting on the victimization of Knox, (including her denial of access to U.S. Consular Officials,) the State Department simply says that the Italian judicial system meets western standards and should be allowed to proceed to its conclusion. (This would take an estimated 8 years.) Not once did the State Department comment on any allegations of mistreatment or abuse of Amanda. They would say only, “We are closely monitoring the trial and have confidence in the Italian judicial system.” Which, of course is another way of saying, “We’re standing by watching, yet doing nothing.”

But the Knox case is not an aberration, sadly.  Two hikers are still being held in an Iranian prison, and were recently sentenced to 8 years for “violating Iran’s borders.” The State Department has so far written some really super-nasty letters to Iran, which inexplicably have not resulted in the freedom of the hikers. Then, just a few days ago, Jason Puracal, an American citizen living in Nicaragua, was convicted of “drug-trafficking” in Nicaragua on absolutely no evidence, and in fact, much evidence that proved his innocence was simply disallowed by “the judge,” a man who never attended law school and who was assigned to this one case for inexplicable and suspicious reasons. The State Department, of course, dutifully stood by and watched. From working in Embassies, I know that the State Department staff and officers feel hamstrung by Washington’s policy decisions.

The U.S. Department of State’s very mission statement explains why Americans are being “hung out to dry” in front of kangaroo courts around the world. The mission statement goes for more than 2,300 words, but it starts with just 10. The mission of the State Department, it says, is to:

“…Create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community.”

It’s a great statement, but in the room created by the statement, this is the elephant in the corner. Nowhere in the 2,300 word statement are “individual” American’s mentioned.  The only time the words “protect the innocent” are used is in the context of motivating the United Nations to protect the innocent people of the world.

I don’t disagree with much in the State Department’s mission statement. But it completely ignores its responsibility to protect individual Americans. Imagine that your local fire department would only respond to “big” fires. What if they refused to respond to house fires because it could impact their ability to respond to a possible high-rise fire? I know from hard experience that diplomats and diplomatic staffers are evaluated, graded, and performance reviews based on their ability to engender cooperation and agreement with their “host” governments. They are NOT evaluated (at least positively) on whether they rescued an American victimized by the “host” government’s courts. That’s viewed as “meddling.”

As an example, during my time as an Assistant Legal Attaché, my performance was judged by how well I was able to maintain a cordial working relationship with the police of the host-country. I served a short stint at an Embassy in a country which was a tourist destination. When an American got drunk and combative with police, was arrested and then missed his cruise ship sailing, where do you think my priorities were? To get him bailed out and on his way as fast as I could, damn the locals? No. My job was to “get-along with the locals,” not rescue Americans from their own folly. The inference was clear: There was no incentive at all to help Americans at odds with the host government. Not for me, not for my career, not for the Ambassador or his career, and not for the State Department.

Again, let me point out that there are individual heroes in State, but it’s in spite of, not because of the political appointees. Ambassadors are appointed politicians, not career diplomats.

The message is clear. When overseas, American’s had better take care of themselves. The Embassy isn’t going to go one step beyond what they are required by law to do, because it’s a bad career move. As an example, I give you the situation involving one of their own.

In January 2011, “Raymond Davis,” a technician at the U.S. Consulate in Lahore, Pakistan, felt that he was being set up for an armed robbery by suspects following him around town on two motorcycles. This is a common crime in Pakistan. Eventually, Davis stopped the car and confronted the four armed men on the motorcycles and a gun-battle ensued. Two of the Pakistanis were killed. I’m not going to comment on what purpose Davis actually served in Lahore, whether that was his real name, or why he was armed. Anyone is free to speculate. But regardless, the evidence supports the suspected robbery theory. I served several times in Pakistan—armed—and I am familiar with the dangers.

After the shooting, a mob formed, and Consular personnel literally rescued “Davis” and brought him back to the Consulate. Davis was immediately labeled by the Pakistanis as a CIA Agent and charged with murder. In order to calm tensions between Pakistan and the U.S., the State Department ordered the Consulate in Lahore to turn Davis over to the Pakistanis. Can you imagine his sense of betrayal?

Then, the U.S. government immediately demanded his release. You can’t make this stuff up.

One wonders what kind of treatment that the State Department expected Davis to receive at the hands of the Pakistani ISI intelligence services, who would immediately take custody of Davis. It is inconceivable that the State Department would do this to one of their own, knowing that a fair trial was not possible. Can you imagine the effect this has had on State Department morale? In the “big picture,” it was more important to the State Department to turn over one of their own to the Pakistanis than it was to ensure his safety. Frankly, had I been in Davis’ situation, I would have made sure that it was in the best interest of the U.S. government to keep me, even if it meant shooting one of the bastards who were trying to hand me over to the Pakistanis. At least then State would feel the need to have me tried in the U.S., and I’d get a fair trial.

If the State Department does that to their own people, what are they going to do for your children when they get arrested overseas on trumped-up charges overseas?  Exactly.

The cavalry isn’t coming.

Edmund Burke was an Irishman elected to Parliament in the late 1700s. His life was marked by fights against capital punishment and religious prejudice, and even advocated against the tax laws that caused the American Revolution. But he is most famous for his statement, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” Edmund Burke would not have gotten good performance reviews at the State Department.

In the “big picture,” abandoning individual Americans for the “greater good” really destroys its own argument. Other countries see it as weakness, it undermines America’s integrity in front of foreign governments, and it makes individual Americans feel less safe and insignificant to their own government. As long as individual Americans are sacrificed to small-time thugs and tyrants to appease the gods of diplomacy, American foreign policy will be impotent and will be perceived as immoral and cowardly—by other nations and by their own people. If you don’t care about an individual American with a name and a family, how can the public believe you care about a vast, nameless, impersonal mass of Americans who can be easily dismissed? The siren song of sacrificing an individual for the good of the group works well on submarine and lifeboat movies, but in real life, it always fails. Ask the Mayans.

We understand why the administration feels the need to do what they’re doing. It’s logical. It’s diplomatic. It’s dispassionate. But somehow, we thought that the greatest nation in the world might have somewhere, someone with the talent to both advocate for innocent Americans and still achieve the goals of the country. Americans seem to excel in every area of life. We are told that nothing is impossible. Yet we don’t have the statesmanlike talent in this entire nation to save an innocent life without shipwrecking all of our diplomatic efforts? You kind of expect that in the world of diplomacy, the U.S. would have the “All Star Team.”  But apparently not. We understand the reasoning; we just expected more from the home team.

But whether it is negligence, diligence or impotence, the U.S. Government’s care and protection of its own citizens abroad remains in a State of failure.

About the Author: In an FBI career that spanned 25 years, Special Agent Steve Moore rose to supervise the Los Angeles Al Qaeda squad, and later, the LA FBI Extra-Territorial Investigations squad which was charged with the investigation of acts of terrorism against U.S. persons or interests for all of Asia and parts of Pakistan. He was the case agent on many high-profile FBI cases including the bombing of the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan; the bombing of the JW Marriott Hotel in Jakarta, Indonesia; the white supremacist shooting/murder spree at the Jewish Community Center in Los Angeles in 1998; as well as the Los Angeles component of the attacks of 9/11, after which he testified before the congressional 9/11 Commission.

In conjunction with the United States Attorney’s Office, in 1999, he obtained the first conviction of a threatened Anthrax attack in United States History. Steve was awarded the 2001 ‘Outstanding Counterterrorism Investigation’ award by the Los Angeles FBI office, and nominated for the FBI’s national ‘Outstanding Terrorism Investigation’ award the same year. Three years in a row he was presented with the United States Attorney’s award for excellence in investigation. As an FBI undercover Agent, Steve conducted covert surveillance of white supremacist organizations and conducted classified foreign intelligence-related undercover operations.   As a member of the FBI’s Rapid Deployment Team, he was assigned as lead investigator on the FBI’s terrorism response team at the Athens Olympics in 2004. He has served as (term) Assistant Legal Attaché, and has lectured on investigative techniques and terrorism at the International Law Enforcement Academy in Bangkok, Thailand, as well as the Pacific Training Institute in the Philippines. Additionally, he has taught and organized counter-terrorism training and investigation conferences around the world.

Following his retirement from the FBI in 2008, Steve was selected as the Deputy Director of Public Safety for Pepperdine University in Malibu, California and served there for two and a half years.  Steve was responsible for security on the Malibu campus, all U.S. campuses, and the safety of the students at Pepperdine’s six overseas campuses in Europe, South America and Asia.  He developed programs to monitor international situations of concern, and served on university threat assessment teams.  He worked closely with the International Programs department at Pepperdine, and worked to create innovative security and safety programs.

Steve is currently a private investigator, and is on the board of advisers for the “Special Investigative University,” SIU.  He is also involved in pro-bono advocacy for innocent persons accused of crimes in U.S. and foreign courts.  He has recently appeared on the “Today” show, “Good Morning America”, and “Anderson Cooper 360”.

Steve is the son of a United Airlines executive and by the age of 18 had traveled through most of the world, seeing it through the eyes of a teenager.

One can argue that the United States’ approach to higher education is resulting in higher costs for study abroad. Obviously, there are exceptions to the examples that I provide below and I applaud those schools that lead, for the right reasons, in creating affordable and academically meaningful experiences abroad for students. Nevertheless, here is how higher education may be sending us down a path that is becoming increasingly difficult to reverse:

1) Many U.S. higher education institutions recruit international students as a revenue source to offset ongoing budget issues, as evidenced by the recent discussions on the ethics of paying overseas recruiters based on headcount.  These non-immigrants are at risk of being treated, in a worse case scenario, predominantly as a revenue stream rather than as part of a larger strategy to internationalize a campus. In addition, many larger institutions will recruit international students to teach lower level courses, in some cases providing little to no training regarding the differences in teaching methods across cultures. Unfortunately, using international education as a financial tactic has spilled over into study abroad.  Many institutions send their students abroad, yet the message, whether directly communicated or not, is to “make money.”  Faculty and administrators are under tremendous pressure to drive revenue as a priority, as opposed to driving a critical need to develop global citizens first and foremost.  Let’s face it – academia is a business and these issues are often the result of challenging budgets and indifferent leadership.

2) Tenure can be very harmful to study abroad. Why?  Because the cost of tenured or tenure track faculty typically contribute to the hike in tuition at any institution (hence the nearly 70% part time faculty teaching rate in the US.) This is not to criticize tenured or tenure track faculty or their academic achievements and commitment to educating others. It is simply a fact of the business of academia. When tenured faculty don’t retire in a time frame that allows for new faculty to join the institution (at a lower wage), the result is often a tuition increase. Tuition is a direct costs to our students, and for many, this cost plus travel, insurance, accommodation, and all the other necessary fees required in study abroad can propel potential participants into a financial arena that they simply cannot handle.

3) Our nation’s intense focus insurance and risk management results in increasing dollars being spent in this area. This is an American phenomenon and one that costs us all more, including our study abroad students. Despite the economic challenges, we are being asked to do more with less.  For many, this results in more financial risk for institutions and greater risk of personal safety abroad, because many are cutting corners to ensure enrollment. I do not see this changing anytime soon and therefore suggest that true partnerships with these third parties be part of any study abroad program’s planning process.

4)  We fail to remind ourselves that study abroad is an academic experience, first and foremost! It is not uncommon to see inflated program fees that are a result of padding the program with non-essential activities that could be offered during free time abroad (at the student’s own personal and financial discretion.)  The competitive nature of “Keeping Up With the Study Abroad Joneses” pushes institutions to focus on program enhancement versus a strong academic experience at a cost effective price.

I realize that this is a touchy subject. I would love to hear your thoughts on how the structure of US higher education can harm (or boost) study abroad.

Here is the book that prompted this post.  I’d highly recommend it!

See larger image Higher Education?: How Colleges Are Wasting Our Money and Failing Our Kids—and What We Can Do About It (Hardcover) By (author) Andrew Hacker, Claudia Dreifus List Price: $26.00 USD New From: $7.95 In Stock Used from: $4.89 In Stock Release date August 3, 2010.

Boomerangs and frisbees?  I know, this seems very odd.  Bear with me.

The main character in this film, Gil (played by Owen Wilson), is visiting Paris, France with his fiancé Ines (played by Rachel McAdams) and her parents. Gil is a writer who is attempting his first novel.  While he walks the streets of Paris for inspiration each evening, his wife is otherwise engaged with more traditional sightseeing and other distractions. One evening, Gil stumbles into the Parisian 1920s, his favorite time period. He is so inspired by the genius of this period of time, he returns to the 1920s each evening, seeking more.

But what is his search really about?

Like so many who sojourn, we travel to learn about other ways of life, history, people, and language.  What we often don’t realize is that by leaving home, we have the ability to see “the self” in a very different light.  As an international educator, “Midnight in Paris” was much less about Woody Allen’s quirky humor and much more about Gil’s exploration of the “shift in self” that often happens when we study, live and travel abroad.

This film raised this question for me:  Why do some see study abroad in terms of what I’ll call the “boomerang effect?” (By this, I do not mean these definitions related to social psychology and marketing. Melibee Global’s version of the boomerang effect is not surprisingly related to study abroad.) The boomerang effect describes students who typically go abroad and in most cases, loop back to their country of origin.

What drives some to return to the safety net of home after a period of time abroad while others study abroad and then never want to return to what they’ve known as “home” for decades? For those who defy the boomerang effect, home begins to feels more normal abroad. Abroad is now the new norm, requiring one to relocate, or to attempt to do so.

Ironically, the boomerang was often used in hunting. Today, perhaps the boomerang is a metaphor for crossing cultures. One is sent airborne to see a bird’s eye view of another place and its people.  And in most cases, one returns to the point of origin and shares that 30,000 foot view with friends, family and neighbors.

Over the years, I have met many international students who have come to the US and planned to return home, yet found themselves pursuing multiple degrees to remain in status so that they do not have to depart the country. I’ve also met a handful of US study abroad students who have also needed to create their home abroad. Perhaps this can be called the “frisbee effect.”  You toss a frisbee, it lands somewhere and it does not fly (depart) again unless someone throws it (or forces it from its place.)

Needless to say, I thought I’d be seeing a typical Woody Allen film, having a good laugh and moving on.  It sparked all these ideas between the humor, wisdom and great acting.  I would definitely recommend that you share Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” with your students.  It is a really playful tool for creating dialogue about Americans abroad and both the “boomerang”/”frisbee” effects.

Whether we are study abroad offices, faculty, 3rd party providers or consultants, we have an interest in marketing the study abroad experience.  Clearly, we think it has value.

I recently presented about some of the missteps in short term study abroad programming - and one of the top 5 was the lack of creativity in marketing.  Simply put: We forget to think like the students.  Yes, they’re on Facebook, Twitter and Youtube/Vimeo. But where ELSE are they?

They’re at 8tracks.com. And now, so am I!

Check out my first study abroad/international music mix:

8tracks.com is a music website that allows you to create your own music mixes.  You create a profile, add your photo and link to your website and then you can create music mixes from your own (legally purchased) music collection.  You pick your tracks, upload them to the site, describe them with a tag like “world music”,” chill”, “instrumental”, “study”, etc and then you make your mix “live.”  I created my first mix this weekend – selecting music from different cultures (American, Germany, Algeria, England, Egypt, Jamaica, Ireland and Native American.) I described the mix by artist but also mentioned that it is great mix for those interested in study abroad.  People will select my mix through a category search, but they can also search study abroad and find my mix.  Regardless of how they find my mix, they find Melibee Global.

I searched study abroad on 8tracks.com and two mixes quickly appeared. Both were loaded, not surprisingly, by students. One had studied abroad and shared her ipod mix, the other is preparing to study abroad this fall in Rome and describes her mix as music she knows she will be listening to when she steps off the plane in Italy.

You can also embed your mix into your website (as I did above), which allows students to listen to enticing music while perusing over the facts and figures of your study abroad program.

8tracks.com is a relatively new site. Twitter and Facebook were too, once.  Last fall, 8tracks.com has over 130K unique visitors per day.  Yes, you heard me correctly  – per DAY. And the number is growing, daily.

We know that music is very tied to memories.  We hear a song, we think of a place, person or experience.  Songs “get stuck” in our heads for hours.  Music is a very powerful marketing tool and we should be thinking about how often our students are walking across campus listening to ipods.  If we’re thinking like our students and marketing our programs well, they’ll be listening to our program specific mixes.  If you have a program in Spain – create a mix of songs by the Gipsy Kings and Alejandro Sanz. If you want to have students connect with your program in Kenya – create a mix that includes Kenge Kenge and Suzanna Owiyo.  And if you’re promoting your program in Brazil, you must include music by the legendary Caetano Veloso .

Just hearing Caetano Veloso makes me want to jump on a plane and return to Brazil. I was particularly inspired to visit Brazil after hearing him perform in the U.S. with some Brazilian friends. At that performance, I could feel Brazil all around me. When I listen to my own mix on 8tracks.com, I am inspired to pack my bags again, especially while grooving to DiDi by Cheb Khaled!

On that note, I’ll leave you with the brilliant Mr. Veloso, one of my all time favorites:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Part 1:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Part 2:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Part 3:

Click here to view the embedded video.

(Please note that the photo that she used was from my website. The hand gesture, in the US, is a symbol of peace. I note this because I realize that it is not a peaceful gesture is some countries! My apologies for anyone who is thrown off by this! The photo was actually taken on September 11, 2010 when I was photographing the annual blue lights memorial at Ground Zero in New York City.)