Paper presented at International Conference on Teaching and Learning, Jacksonville, FL., 2016

1. 1 | P a g e
CARA E CARO: OVERCOMING UNFOUNDED FEARS ONLINE
Katherine Watson
Coastline Community College
Introduction
Commitment, Accountability, Responsibility, and Action comprise four elements of CARA,
a program conceived by the United Nations as part of its initiatives to achieve measurable,
worldwide progress in education, economics, and human rights before 2030. The Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (ohchr.org) devised this acronymic plan
as an outgrowth of an “inter-governmental and unlimited” pledge “to achieve dynamic inclusion”
among the world’s peoples in education for the activation of human rights.
Indeed, as Rainmaker Digital online “Copyblogger” Brian Clark (2010), among others,
has suggested, creating and then exploiting acronyms can render complicated projects more
palatable to the public and certainly easier to discuss, so that they may be more effectively
addressed. If a complex notion is said to be not much more than an effortlessly pronounceable,
simple acronym, the argument goes, then it will be less overwhelming, less threatening, more
easily accepted. For Clark, the nec plus ultra of modern acronyms is FEAR: False Evidence
Appearing Real.
This paper will demonstrate how much of what hobbles the progress of modern higher
education can be overcome by at once recognizing the falsity that Clark-style FEAR warns
against and adhering to the principles and practices of the CARA program. First, the notion of
FEAR as an acronym will be presented, followed by a breakdown of the four elements
comprising CARA, supported by exemplary applications of CARA in educational institutions
around the world. Ultimately, it will be proposed that an abandonment of FEAR in favor of
CARA will lead to an enriched perspective for educators and learners alike.
FEAR as an acronym
Online activist and blogger Brian Clark (2010), of Rainmaker Digital, is one of numerous
twenty-first century writers to have suggested that common concepts can be non-threateningly
understood best, and their “real” meanings most effectively addressed, if those ideas are said to
be not much more than easily pronounceable, guileless acronyms, ensembles of letters that each
stand for something that is part of a sensible whole. Further, and in like manner, self-help
journalist and teacher Dan Clark (2007) points out exemplarily that the notion of all-too-
common, usually ineffable, fear can and should be rendered into an acronym, so that it may more
easily be faced, understood, and then overcome.
The FEAR acronym, according to both Clarks, comprises False Evidence Appearing
Real, what B. Clark states to be “performance-sapping unfounded worries….forty per cent of
(which) never happen, and…a mere eight per cent (of which) are real.” B. Clark begins his
argument about these “false fears” by reminding audiences that not all fears are false. The animal
kingdom has made good use of “genuine fear”, he notes; fear of predators or of natural disasters
has kept life going. Indeed, this genuine fear is patently useful to survival. But it also has a
definable foundation, unlike the fear comprising the FEAR acronym. The latter is unfounded,

2. 2 | P a g e
without basis in fact, lacking any evidence to sustain itself. And it is this FEAR that is,
unfortunately and all too often, that which immobilizes.
D. Clark, for his part, points out that this immobilizing, worrisome fear lacks credible
“story lines”; it derives from no fact-based examples, illustrative tales, or support. As those who
follow the Scientific Method might say, this type of FEAR cannot be replicated reliably. It has
no basis, and yet it survives.
And D. Clark reminds his audiences that such fearsome worries—and worries about
worries—are best surmounted through examination of their components and their bases, through
an objective analysis that is best done across cultures and placed in multiple contexts worldwide.
CARA against fear
The United Nations has since its inception called for the world’s countries to join
together for mutual progress. A 1951 “convention”, described as a “post-Second World War
instrument”, cited “well-founded fears” among the refugees from battle and stress, and it aimed
to “lay down basic minimum standards…includ(ing) access to the courts, to primary education,
to work, and the provision for documentation”, all of which were to be “accounted for” as they
were put into action.
A worldwide promoter of peace through education and understanding, the United Nations
High Commission for Human Rights (ohchr.org) has noted that persistent “fear and want”
comprise “legitimate concerns” that must be addressed promptly, around the world; delay in
taking action will render things only worse.
In order to attend to these concerns, then, the OHCHR has conceived an acronymic
program as part of a Development Agenda. That is, CARA (Commitment, Accountability,
Responsibility, Action) was spawned from an “inter-governmental and unlimited” guarantee of
“dynamic inclusion” among the world’s peoples in education. Indeed, United Nations Secretary
General Ban Ki-Moon has stated that the literal “leading out of darkness” that defines education
must be in place before fear will ebb and human rights will flow. Education is seen as the key to
the dissipation of fear and want; it is also a guarantor against imaginary thinking.
The OCHCR has noted that fear, want, and imaginary thinking encompass the globe; they
cross physical boundaries, as well as demographic, cultural, and socio-economic ones. Ban Ki-
Moon points out that, an increasingly “connected” world, the lifelong education that will best
address these problems will cross borders most easily online.
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), created in 1965, has, since its
formation, retained the “long view” of international progress; since 1990, it has maintained a role
within the UN to “help countries achieve millennial and post-millennial goals.” Typically
designed as 15-year plans, these “goals” comprise part of the Human Rights and Global
Development Agenda that gave birth to the acronymic CARA.
The four elements of CARA can each be described and placed in context for higher
education, in whose realm they have taken on their own varying realizations as parts of the
United Nations Global Initiative on Education’s Academic Initiative (UNAI), exemplifying most
particularly the “A is for Action” part of CARA, fearlessly and through international innovation.
FEARS unfounded, progress grounded
In institutions large and small, efforts to simplify, to regularize, and to streamline are
often accompanied by moves to make the complex and the irregular into an ever-surviving,

3. 3 | P a g e
fearsome enemy. But in a twenty-first century dotted by irregularities and decorated by the
complex, these moves don’t just frustrate; they immobilize. Besides squelching creativity, they
lead to a cycle of increasing fear: Fear of non-acceptance for suggesting the irregular or the
complex, followed by fear of reprisal for trying the irregular or complex, followed by fear of bad
performance reviews, followed by fear of job loss and fear for economic, as well as social,
survival. Fear of trying out the different comprises fear of change, and this often leads to lack of
genuine progress (Peine, 2007).
Commitment
The United Nations’ CARA program began with a clarion call for commitment, made by
Ban Ki- Moon in the early years of our present decade. UN Secretary General Moon feels that
effective action, the final element of CARA, will not occur unless and until prospective actors
have signed on to an agreement, have made a promise in writing, have taken a jointly agreed-
upon “inter-governmental and unlimited” pledge to achieve active inclusion among the world’s
peoples in educational programs, which will, in Moon’s belief, automatically activate human
rights. Indeed, as has been stated, it is education, according to the UN plan, that will best
dissolve “imaginary thinking”, fear, and want.
CARA commitment encompasses engagement, as United Nations and European Union
writers commonly translate the term from English. Commitment embraces persistence, an
insistence to resolve, or, as D. Clark (2010) would have it, “an unshakable retention of purpose.”
In the mind of European Commission Budget Director Kristalina Georgieva, commitment entails
co-participation among various sectors of society to delineate and specify common goals that all
can collaborate to achieve. It is a promise, a pact, conceived by many, agreed upon by all, to be
executed in concert, to be written down and signed. Indeed, the simple action of putting such a
pact out in the open will demonstrate evidence of real purpose; it will constitute a step toward the
dissolution of fear.
CARA comprises a modern iteration of the United Nations’ Dakar Initiative made in
Senegal, Africa, in 2000, when an “Education for All” framework first proposed in 1990 was
crystallized into a mandate holding that “every citizen in every society” must have access to
learning materials and be educated in how to use them. The Dakar Framework proposed six
“collective commitments” or “joint goals” whose achievement would be measured for attainment
by 2015. These “commitments” included:
 Goal 1: Expand early childhood care and education
 Goal 2: Provide free and compulsory primary education for all
 Goal 3: Promote learning and life skills for young people and adults
 Goal 4: Increase adult literacy by 50 percent
 Goal 5: Achieve gender parity by 2005, gender equality by 2015
 Goal 6: Improve the quality of education
A “development index” was agreed upon among the 1100 participants at the Dakar meeting
that would assign objective, numerical values for the attainment of each commitment/goal, such
as the obvious and easily comprehensible one associated with Goal 1: If 100% of children below
the age of 5 were receiving care and education in 2015, then the country in which that percentage

4. 4 | P a g e
held would be cited as having attained the goal perfectly. Naturally, many countries would be
hoping between 2000 and 2015 to arrive at a much lower 12%, it was understood.
Now that the Dakar Initiative’s completion date has passed, the UN Secretary General’s
Global Initiative on Education has created another, more qualitative commitment, this time
aiming for a 2030 finishing point, “to ensure all children in youth have a quality, relevant, and
transformative education” (2015). To this end, the UN has committed itself to forming
partnerships among governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and international
businesses “to provide inclusive and relevant education opportunities and support retention.”
Mobile learning centers, staff training, and community engagement are three of the several
features of this new plan. The United Nations-sponsored international intergovernmental EDU
(not an acronym) has disseminated video, audio, and print materials openly online, with the hope
that leaders at educational institutions in multiple countries and at multiple levels, from
elementary through secondary and beyond, might collaborate with the aforementioned
governments, businesses, and NGOs to conceive concrete, achievable goals, particularly in
education. As EDU documents state, education constitutes a need that follows only those of safe
food and shelter as vital to sustain humankind.
Exemplarily, educators in post-secondary institutions throughout the world are realizing
CARA through a new United Nations Academic Impact (UNAI) “global initiative that aligns
institutions of higher education with the United Nations in furthering the realization of the
purposes and mandate of the Organization through activities and research in a shared culture of
intellectual social responsibility” (unacademicimpact, 2015). Universities and community
colleges from the Black Sea Universities Network (bsun.org) to Vadodara, India to Connecticut
to California, as well as the American Association of Community Colleges, have committed
themselves to the enterprise, signing on to interact globally online to “ensure development”, for
example, promising—committing themselves--to submit “activity reports” generated by students,
faculty, staff, and administrators. Indeed, admission to, and participation in, the UNAI depends
upon signed and received “partner commitments” that must be made by actors from the
administration on down through the ranks.
A prototypical member of the UNAI, New York’s Adelphi University, has since the early
2000’s been working with the United Nations both as an NGO and as an academic institution, as
UN Department of Information documents state. Adelphi’s Levermore Global Scholars program
has made “a commitment to promoting global awareness and bringing salient information about
international issues and the United Nations to the University community and the public.” This
commitment includes “providing a mechanism”, as Adelphi claims, by which students can
“commit themselves to the realization of…United Nations goals,” offering entrées into NGO
international affairs briefings at United Nations headquarters in New York City, for instance.
Another institution, Connecticut’s Norwalk Community College, an initial signatory to the
UNAI, has made “a commitment to cultivating a keen sense of global citizenship,” as its
Recognition documents (2010) state. To that end, the school’s Student World Assembly has
hosted symposia on human rights as they are defined and pursued around the world, and it has
held colloquia on the particular crises in Darfur and Congo. Students have entertained
presentations on climate change and, as a result of what they have learned during those
presentations, have campaigned among themselves for “green” design to be pursued when new
buildings are to be put up.

5. 5 | P a g e
As United Nations CARA documents state, commitments to any/all UN programs entail an
agreement to advance at least one of the Organization’s global initiatives, an inclusion of “time-
bound targets that can be measured for success”, and “an arrangement” to disclose openly and in
public all progress or lack of it. CARA calls upon participants to form partnerships, believing
that strength united is stronger, and promises made by one to another are easier to maintain than
are vows made alone. A real impact will be most effective when co-consultations transpire, when
each participant helps the other ones to “drive impact” for change, and when each can measure
easily and objectively its own and others’ progress. This last comprises evident mutual
accountability, which every promise of commitment demands.
Accountability
As United Nations High Commission on Human Rights’ Pillay (2013) has written, and as
has just been implied, the ultimate element of CARA—action--cannot transpire until all parties
to that action have agreed mutually to take responsibility for what they do, to be “held to
account.” This resultant accountability, Pillay continues, “is often undermined by a lack of
clarity about who should be responsible—who should be held to account--for what” (2013:viii),
and when participants in an endeavor lack clarity about who is accountable and in what way,
“inaccurate assumptions may be made” that commonly and almost naturally lead to fear, as
Hope (2010) points out. In fact, Pillay writes, every human organization must include
interdependent “duty bearers”, to decide such a division of labor, even as they recognize that
they have “an obligation to take responsibility for their actions, to answer for them by explaining
and justifying them to those affected, and to be subject to some sort of enforceable sanction if
their conduct or explanation is found wanting.” When such obligations are put into writings and
specified, given measurable “analytics”, they define accountability, CARA maintains. Pillay
summarizes by stating that definitions of accountability in the social sciences and in the world of
economic development typically comprise “three constituent elements: responsibility,
answerability, and enforceability.” Pillay suggests that a “circle of accountability” should cover
“all stages of a policy cycle”, from initial planning, to budgeting, to implementation, monitoring,
and evaluation, with the last benefiting from clear, “real”, statistical analyses, most easily
rendered conveniently transparent online. Furthermore, “adequate means of redress” must be
made straightforwardly available, Pillay goes on, and a well-defined system for incorporating
recommendations must be understood.
Pillay holds that two principal problems exists in making any organization, institution, or
individual accountable: For one, it is too often unclear who is responsible for what, and second,
“mechanisms are often absent or underused for reviewing and ensuring” that responsibility has
been taken and the proper subsequent action pursued.
The aforementioned United Nations Academic Initiative invites participant colleges and
universities to go beyond an initial, rather idealistic theoretical commitment to UN goals;
institutions are called to account for themselves, too. For example, an annual “World Post Day”
appeals for specific, accountable, interactions among UNAI actors and the countries where they
are based to recognize and reinforce the power of each country’s postal sector in people’s and
businesses’ everyday lives, as well as the sector’s power locally and worldwide to influence
social and economic development. The UNAI activities take place on the ground and through
cyberspace, recognizing that “posting” things in modern times means distributing them
electronically as well as through traditional postal services. Another UNAI activity, “The Global

6. 6 | P a g e
Diplomacy Lab”, summons participants to offer concrete, accountable, plans for international
communication, education, and development to be carried out during the next 70 years, once
again on the ground and through cyberspace.
UNAI participant University of Nairobi, Kenya, has proposed an accountable plan for
“humanity’s interdependence,” starting with what student essay-writing winner Chwala Wallace
has called a co-developed “moral ladder, set of guiding principles” to be conceived among the
world’s peoples as a joint project; when people participate in something, the idea goes, they are
more likely to attend to its progress and product. UNAI offers a healthy forum for such
participation.
UNAI institutions can most easily share accountability, as the April, 2013, UNAI
monthly newsletter has stated, through active publication of institutional work and through
interactive communication done online. “Joint action…leading and coordinating” through
Webcasts, synchronous, and asynchronous connections among international members of the
UNAI provide Classroom Conversations, for example, “an ongoing interactive discussion
forum” rich in teachable moments.
As Pillay has pointed out, all UNAI endeavors must specify objective, replicable methods
of accountability and name the names of those responsible for conception and execution, as well.
Responsibility
Responsibility means answerability, the capacity to explain, to inform, to educate. While
accountability requires data collection, usually in the form of statistical analyses, responsibility
demands clear answers to questions. Indeed, as Hope (2010) has stated, “when nobody is clear
about who is responsible for what, and therefore who is going to take what action… fear of
having to take on responsibilities (often arises).”
Thus, after making commitments to perform some sort of action, and after setting up
mechanisms to make people, organizations, and institutions accountable to take on those
commitments, CARA would have all participants in its program be trained in multiple ways, at
least in the basics, with a table of organization defining actions and actors. The table must be
made openly available, citing experts and their expertises that may be called upon as necessary to
respond to popular, “end-user” needs. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has stated that
“deepening synergies and partnerships” can broaden both the platform of response and the circle
of respondents; that is, decision-making must be open, and all participants in an enterprise must
each take part. Responsibility cannot be sloughed off because of “communication obstacles” or
“institutional difficulties”; it must be both respected and reinforced.
The United Nations Academic Impact (UNAI) program cites a “shared culture of
intellectual social responsibility” as a mandate. Professor Pedro Basualdo (2010), of UNAI
participating institution The University of Buenos Aires, defines CARA responsibility as “an
attitude, a sense of duty”, a “feeling (of) an intense ethical and moral obligation to take action”.
Basualdo reminds educators that responsibility does well to result from research, particularly
demographic, and from “beta-testing.” He cites the example of making people aware of how the
combat against AIDS around the world must be waged in a context of “culturally responsible
awareness”: “To be effective, antiretroviral compliance therapy should be administered several
doses per day, at certain times. In many African countries, however, the people have not the
concept of time we have in our western culture: many of them have not seen a clock in their
lives…and it is the world’s poorest communities—many of them in Africa—that actually bear
the brunt of the fight against HIV/AIDS” (2010:02). Western medical staff must themselves be

7. 7 | P a g e
educated in alternative world views, Basualdo points out, if they are to educate others in how to
shake off affliction. As Basualdo suggests, interacting with people of varying worldviews
requires continuous questioning-answering, or responsibility, in its literal sense.
United Kingdom mental health expert and UNAI activist Hope (2010) writes that
responsibility operates on a two-way street; those who have the responsibility to deliver
something must indeed deliver it, and those who receive that something must indicate both that
they have received it and that they know what to do with it. “Practitioners take responsibility,”
Hope states, “…and “those in receipt of advice are responsible for what they do with it.” Hope
asserts that responsibility-taking is choice-making; responsibility should not be taken lightly,
without full awareness. Indeed, as UNAI Senegalese information sciences professor Alex
Corenthin emphasizes, in the twenty-first century environment of “free information for all”, it is
the People with a capital P who must remain ever diligent in the matter of responsibility,
demanding that those who claim ownership of information or its routes of transmission not shut
users out.
As employes at institutions of higher education know, generating a sense of responsibility
on campus requires that faculty, staff, and students all walk both ways on Hope’s two-way street.
School personnel must do more than simply transmit information, course materials, and the like;
they must ensure that what is transmitted is understood. And for their part, students must interact
with institutional personnel, asking questions, submitting reports, reporting confusion and “de-
confusion.”
UNAI participant Independence Community College, in Kansas, has signed on to the
Initiative to pursue commitments and to take responsibility “as part of a whole…as problem
solvers”, according to Communication Studies associate professor Konye Ori. The school’s
activities in “addressing issues of poverty” and “promoting inter-cultural dialogue” take place on
campus, in the community, and online, with responsibility having the sense of one-to-one-to-
many communication.
Palmer (2015) holds that the UNAI has proven to be a crucible for CARA, and that
responsibility has come ever more often to be generated from within: “students indicate a strong
interest to learn more about concepts such as social entrepreneurship, environmental
sustainability, and corporate social responsibility.” Too, Palmer continues, “global social
responsibility” is cited by nearly two thirds of students whose campuses participate in UNAI as
their number one “feeling” that they would like to exploit and explore through the UNAI. UNAI
students at Canada’s Polytechnique Montréal have reported taking charge of entrepreneurship
and responsibility with their fellows and have been asked by local businesses in Canada, as well
as by other UNAI participants outside the country, to share their experience: “By examining user
flows and consumption projections related to on-campus escalator use”, the Montréalais UNAI
participants found ways to “promote energy savings and sustainability…in a relatively
straightforward way.” By taking responsibility for their learning and executing a study locally
that could be exploited internationally, they have been able to produce a plan of simple replicable
action.
Action
Neither purpose nor desire nor economics can trump action. Beyond the promises that
define commitment, the statistical analyses comprising theoretical accountability, and the naming
of names to establish responsibility, CARA’s ultimate goal is action. As a United Nations
program, CARA would have action be truly global in at least two senses: Global, in the

8. 8 | P a g e
worldwide international sense, on the one hand, and global in the complete, across-the-board,
transdisciplinary sense, on the other hand.
For the European Union, an initial CARA action has included the institution of a single,
pan-European “marketplace and platform” for everything digital. Having noted that only 2 in 3
European households have regular access to the Internet, and that only 1 in 5 are able to use the
Internet at least once a day for 15 minutes, the online journal Toute l’Europe has indicated that
many Europeans have been suffering not just from frustration born from failing connectivity but
more importantly from the “anti-competitive” practices of large corporations, often American
ones, each demanding that its subscribers deploy systems that are incompatible with those of the
next and each bulking up its data flow with unwieldy advertising. France’s Minister of Economy,
Industry, and Digital Relations has proposed that Europe “take action” to make itself “a
propitious provider of the pragmatic”, offering places and spaces, typically in old buildings
whose façades recall centuries past but whose interiors gleam with the bright blue eyes of WiFi.
An “investment program of risk-capital, adapted to the needs of small and medium-sized
enterprises with strong potential for return on investment”, has been launched, integrated into the
European Union’s Juncker Plan. Harmony with the Americans is proposed, and mutual respect
called for.
France, in particular, has set forth its own plan of action to attain five Internet-related
goals; the idea is that the modern era of rapid change—the continuous movement and mutation
of people, things, and ideas-- demands fast, effective information technology. The five goals
include: development of pan-European 5G, the Internet of objects (things), cloud computing, big
data, and cybersecurity.
The first line of action defined in all United Nations programs entails “ratification and
implementation” of program agendas. France has called for “European champions” to unite to
pursue its five goals actively in an area “whose domestic market is at least the size of that of the
United States.”
Noting that connectivity, interactivity, intellectual, economic, and social problems and
progress are all “interconnected”, the UNAI points out that “progress on all fronts” must take
place simultaneously. Each institutional member of the UNAI “(is) expected to show support of
one of ten United Nations principles by undertaking one activity per year which tangibly
supports and furthers the realization of the principles.” For example, South Carolina’s UNAI
member Benedict College has joined the United Nations Youth Assembly to promote and
provide opportunities for students to travel abroad, learn in foreign institutions, and return to
South Carolina to integrate their learned experiences into their home curriculum. Environmental
engineering and computer sciences majors traveled to Africa, for example, to see how their
chosen fields of study can be put into genuine action in places of need. Connecticut’s Norwalk
Community College administration has responded to its UNAI student group suggestions “to add
‘green’ elements to new building designs”: Ncc’s new Center for Science, Health and Wellness,
built by Mitchell/Giurgola Architects and Dirtworks, has been LEED Gold certified, made in
“the vernacular of this area of Connecticut.” And Newark, New Jersey’s Essex County College
has responded to the Sierra Leone expatriates who make up the largest community outside their
own African nation to push for improved development, education, and communication,
beginning with a New Jersey-Sierra Leone joint publishing venture of the online version of
Cocorioko, a forty-two year old populist newspaper venture to educate Africans everywhere by
starting with headlines. “Social mobilization will bring victory (over the Ebola virus) within
reach,” states a recent article in Cocorioko, reminding readers that “adhering to the health

9. 9 | P a g e
protocols and medical regulations” of the United Nations and of Doctors without Borders entails
continued, attentive action, taken without fear.
And like Cocorioko, other transnationally oriented but non-United Nations-sponsored
organizations have been sponsoring CARA-style action as well. The international ONE Campus
has recruited students and faculty in a free-access, non-governmental, online-based set of
activities germinating from the grassroots and aiming up through societies and their governments
and out into the world. For instance, ONE’s “Poverty is Sexist” and “Electrify Africa”
campaigns have, in the first case, attracted international medical worker interest to reduce infant
death while improving women’s health and, in the second case, caught the attention of the
United States Congress to “plug in” the many countries making up the all-too-Dark Continent.
Yet another ONE campaign, Uganda’s Dwelling Places, has found thousands of homes for those
rendered homeless through poverty and strife, while also giving education and life skills.
CARA actions seem to have triggered a fortunate chain reaction, spurring (inter)action
across boundaries.
FEARless care: CARA everywhere
CARA, like FEAR, is a pronounceable word; it can mean “dear” as an adjective, or it can
mean “a caress”, in both cases a tender expression guaranteed to eliminate fear.
The United Nations’ CARA program incorporates educational endeavors cited by Unesco
and the UNAI that have become most accessible, exploitable, and productive online. For
instance, a free Unesco-originated “Global Civics Academy”, hosted by the Brookings
Institution’s Hakan Altinay and uniting seminar presenters from around the world who have
posted lectures asynchronously and always accessible online, exemplifies the “global”
perspective that the UNAI fosters: Global Trade, Global Finance, Global Public Health, Global
Public Goods, and the Values in/for an International World comprise some of the topics covered.
And the France-based UNAI International Association of Universities (IAU) provides an “open
portal” inviting institutions to post online programs in sustainable development for free access: A
“Professional training programme on education for sustainable development” (developed in
Zurich, Switzerland), a “World Education Forum” (hosted in Korea), and “Carbon Footprint
Calculator” (initiated in Italy) are just three IAU ongoing projects. The IAU wishes to “offer an
opportunity to gain knowledge, share work with others, and talk to others from around the
world,” aiming to make all participants into student learners. Education, as the IAU states, plays
a crucial role in enlightening areas where suspicion and ignorance have squelched the human
spirit into fear and silence.
As Sierra Leone’s Cocorioko newspaper has written, “when the patience of students
(runs) out for the archaic and non-performing, …(awareness), knowledge, and news must give
birth to a new spirit.” And as UNAI Classroom Conversations state, “silence, invisibility, and
fear will not go away unless we talk…and provide students with knowledge and tools.” From the
aforementioned IAU consortium to Norway’s University of Bergen, where an online-enriched
international program has been launched to “Save Aramaic Languages” that are falling into
disuse as relics of liturgy and ancient texts but that remain alive in the Turoyo tongue of the
Middle East and Europe, to a technologically advanced technique to save Holy Land cultural
heritage through QR technology-enhanced tourist guides created by Bethlehem’s Birzeit
University, UNAI participant schools are supplanting False Evidence with real, well-
communicated, transparently available data. And in these ways, what appears real is clearly
becoming real.

10. 10 | P a g e
It is demonstrably evident that the FEAR immobilizing countries, cultures, and even our
own community colleges can be addressed and overcome through the application of CARA, in
person, face-to-face, with walls of brick and mortar, and across boundaries, through cyberspace,
online.
REFERENCES
Basualdo, P. (2010). Individual global responsibility. Retrieved 8 October, 2015
http://home.econ.uba.ar/economicas/sites/default/files/u61/Global_%20Individual_Responsibilit
y%202.pdf
Clark, B. (2010). Is F.E.A.R. holding you back? Copyblogger.
Clark, D. (2007). The thrill of teaching. Springville, UT: Cedar Fort, Inc.
Clark, D. (2010). Four steps on the stairway to heaven. Brigham Young University
https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/dan-clark_four-steps-stairway-heaven/
Corenthin, A. (2013). Faire de la souveraineté numérique. Retrieved http://osiris.sn/Faire-de-la-
souverainete-numerique.html
EDU. (2015). EDU Intergovernmental Organization. Retrieved http://www.edu.int/
Georgieva, K. (2015). Nous allons battre les Etats-Unis. http://www.onmap-
visual.com/index.php/fr/plateforme-onmap/serious-games-campus
Hope, R. (2010). Responsibility and accountability best practice guide. Mental Health Division,
Department of Health, United Kingdom. London: Department of Health. Retrieved 9 October,
2015
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/Responsibility%20and%20Accountability%20Moving%20on%20
for%20New%20Ways%20of%20Working%20to%20a%20Creative,%20Capable%20Workforce.
pdf
Norwalk Community College. (2010). NCC joins United Nations Academic Impact. Recognition
document. Retrieved http://norwalk.edu/about/recognition/un.asp
Palmer, D. (2015). Handbook of research on business ethics and corporate responsibilities. IGI
Global. Retrieved
https://books.google.fr/books?id=mivhBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA208&lpg=PA208&dq=united+natio
ns,+taking+responsibility,+UNAI&source=bl&ots=L2-
Xlbb2pD&sig=V0D3d4VZZiM5xkHw0rQKTVEbcrY&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAmo
VChMI2OTi4LbDyAIVjTyICh237guC#v=onepage&q=united%20nations%2C%20taking%20re
sponsibility%2C%20UNAI&f=false
Peine, J. (2007). The Educator’s Professional Growth Plan. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, Sage
Publications.

11. 11 | P a g e
Pillay, N. (2013). Who will be accountable? United Nations High Commission for Human
Rights. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/WhoWillBeAccountable.pdf
Toute l’Europe (2015). http://www.touteleurope.eu/actualite/numerique-comment-la-france-
souhaite-changer-l-europe.html
UNAI. (2015). https://academicimpact.un.org/
UNAI Newsletter. (2013). UNAI observes international day of happiness. April, 2013. Retrieved
http://www.unic.org.in/items/Publications_UnitedNationsAcademicImpactNewsletterApril2013.
pdf
UNAI Prezi. (2015). Prezi presentation. https://prezi.com/edbccd403eao/unai-presentation-2015/
United Nations Business (2015). Commitments.
https://business.un.org/en/documents/commitments