We truly appreciate the very thoughtful comments prepared in response to our initial position paper (Lunetta & van den Berg, 1995), and we also appreciate the opportunity to continue the dialogue with some brief, additional commentary. It is impressive that comments were prepared in so many "distant" parts of the world and that sensitive people supported by new technologies have enabled a published response in a relatively short time. Responding on such a limited time frame, much of it by electronic mail, would not have been possible even a few years ago, offering evidence of an emerging "global village."
A basic assumption behind our position was that science educators from low income countries (LCs), or the South, to use the terminology suggested by Jegede, will continue to enroll in science education graduate programs in high income countries (HCs), or the North. We elected not to comment on the appropriateness of that practice in order to focus upon more central goals. The article's purpose was to inform graduate advisors in high income countries, sponsoring governments, and donor agencies about the special needs of LC students and about ways in which such students can enhance the quality of graduate program experiences for students in the host country. We felt there was little reason to suggest an "ideal" program for LC students that was substantially different from conventional programs since we believed that few, if any, institutions would adopt such a program. Thus, we focused on suggestions which could be accommodated in current graduate programs. We elected to provide a broad array of suggestions, anticipating that most programs or advisors would try to implement some but not all suggestions. Implementing all suggestions would require more "credits" than would be possible in a master's program and could demand unreasonable quantities of time, energy, and resources. It was interesting for