10.3: Education

Chapter Learning Objectives

1. Understand the role of culture in education.
2. Understand the expectations that different cultural groups have about education.
3. Understand how cultural identities are formed through the educational process.
4. Explain how power differences can influence communication within the educational context.
5. Be able to describe various social issues are reflected in education.

Study Abroad

Large numbers of students internationally go to study at a university in a different country for a time ranging from a short-term summer or winter program (4 to 6 weeks) to a semester or longer. Students may participate as part of a group, through an exchange program, or independently. The European Erasmus Exchange Program has enabled large numbers of students from European countries to study and receive university credit at other universities in Europe. The kind of experience one has through study abroad varies considerably depending on the manner in which it is organized. Going abroad with a group from one's own culture, and attending special university classes together, limits the exposure to the target culture and its language. Organizing an independent study abroad experience is more difficult, as one must arrange oneself for university registration, selection of courses, and housing. In the process, however, one is likely to gain greater socio-cultural competence and more integration into the target culture and language. On the other hand, independent students lack the support system available to groups.

Whether one engages in study abroad independently or as a member of a group, individual disposition/personality, and the local context will determine the degree of success and personal satisfaction. Hua (2013) points out that many study-abroad experiences result in an increase in oral proficiency in the target language and in intercultural understanding and competence. However, that varies tremendously depending on the individual. One might have the kind of limited exposure described here: "Her daily routine included attendance at required classes, after which she would go immediately to the study abroad center sponsored by her home university where she would stay until closing time, surfing the English language Internet and exchanging emails and Instant Messages with her friends and family in the U.S. Outside of service encounters, framed in various ways in her journal as threats to her well-being, she made little effort to engage speakers of French, limiting her use of the language to her courses (Kinginger & Belz, 2005, p. 411)".

In fact, the issue of technology in study abroad is controversial. Some have advocated a restricted use of technology while abroad, so as to maximize real-life contact with the members of the target culture (Doerr, 2013). Some programs go so far as to forbid use of phones while participating in the program (Godwin-Jones, 2016). On the other hand, online access to home communities can be a tremendous help in psychological adjustment and in recovering from culture shock. Maintaining a blog, diary, or reflective journal provides a mechanism for sharing the experience and reflecting on what one discovers, as described in the last section of this chapter.

In addition to studying abroad, there are other avenues for university-age students to have meaningful longer-term encounters with a foreign culture. There are opportunities to engage in volunteer services abroad, through government agencies, NGOs, or religious groups. One method that has a long history, particularly in Europe, is to serve as an "au pair", living with a host family and helping with childcare and other light domestic work. Working abroad in other capacities is possible as well, although finding appropriate jobs and obtaining necessary work permits, depending on the country, may be difficult. All these options carry with them the advantage over being a tourist or student in that they tend to offer more complete integration into everyday life in the foreign country. Living with a host family or entering into a working environment automatically supplies contact with members of the culture. Particularly attractive are internships abroad, which, in addition to supplying cultural and work experience, offer the possibility of future employment.

Challenges in the Intercultural Educational Context

The effects of education reverberate across generations because once languages, customs, traditions, and religions are lost, it is difficult to recover them. Education, then, is very influential in maintaining or altering cultural communities.

Individualism and Collectivism

Underlying the many differences between cultures, and the educational systems that have emerged from them, is individualism and collectivism. Collectivism is marked by structured relationships where individual needs are subservient to the group. Solidarity, harmony, and equal distribution of rewards among students is expected. Modesty is valued, norms are set by the average student, and failure is seen as unfortunate but not dire. Success is seen as something linked to family, classmates, and society as a whole (Rubenstein, 2001; Dimmick & Walker, 2005; Watkins, 2000).

Conversely, individualism is marked by loose relationships and ties that are forged according to self-interest. Status and grades are based on individual success. Competition is encouraged, norms are set by the best students, and failure is perceived as fairly significant (Rubenstein, 2001; Dimmick & Walker, 2005; Watkins, 2000).

These basic values impact everything from the atmosphere in the classroom, to teaching styles, and attitudes about dishonesty and plagiarism. In collectivistic classrooms, for instance, education is seen as a tool for strengthening the country rather than for the betterment of an individual. This fundamental premise has implications for the teacher-student relationship where working together is not cheating, but rather a happy by-product of good relations. The collectivistic mentality may also account for the absence of sorting students by ability, and the lack of teasing of less gifted students. Fast learners are expected to help slow learners (Rubenstein, 2001).

In individualistic classrooms, education is seen as a tool for getting ahead. Students are responsible for their own learning. Academic progress is measured through individual assessment and reported as individual grades. The learning relationship is primarily between the teacher and the student, not the classmate group. If a student needs help, they ask the teacher questions. Students are taught to be more engaged in discussions and arguments. Schools encourage students to become independent thinkers (Faitar, 2006)). An academic task has value in and of itself so getting one’s work done is important. Relationships with other students is secondary. In certain situations, helping others could be cheating (Rosenberg, Westling, & McLeskey, 2010).

Even concepts of intelligence are culture-based. Individualistic cultures have a tendency to think of intelligence as a “gift” and relatively fixed, although somewhat impacted by environmental influences. Collectivistic cultures view intelligence as something that can be improved by hard work rather than a lack of ability (Henderson, 1990; Watkins, 2000).

Teaching and Learning Styles

Much of our communication behavior and our expectations for the educational process are deeply embedded parts of our culture. What happens in the classroom is primarily reflective of the values of the dominant culture (Evertson & Randolph, 1995; Hofstede, 1980, 2005). For example, “what teachers consider to be ‘discipline problems’ are determined by their own culture, filtered through personal values and teaching style” (Johns & Espinoza, 1996). For this reason, “teachers from non-dominant cultural groups have often learned to suppress their intuitive cultural knowledge in favor of the ‘best practices’ that they learned in school” (Hollins, 2008; Lipka, 1998; Trumbull et al., 2001).

Teachers generally use one of the two types of teaching styles: teacher-centered or student-centered (Prosser & Trigwell, 2010). Encouraging students to become independent thinkers, focusing on individual needs, being assertive and expressing opinions, criticism as a strategy for improvement, and trying to bring about conceptual change in students’ understanding of the world are all considered student-centered strategies (Faitar, 2006). The knowledge that is always transferred from an expert to a learner, with conformity and group needs as a focus, are considered more teacher-centered strategies (Staub & Stern, 2002). Students used to teacher-centered instruction may be puzzled, or even offended, by the more informal student-centered approach. They may perceive the teacher as being poorly prepared or lazy (McGroaty & Scott, 1993).

In individualistic settings, the teacher’s role in the classroom is to share ideas and provide practice time to develop further knowledge and/or skills. In collectivistic settings, the teacher is viewed as a moral guide, and friend or parent figure with valuable knowledge that it is a student’s duty to learn (Husen & Postlethwaite, 1991). Researchers Cortazzi & Jinn (1998) compared British and Chinese student/teacher relationships and noted that in Britain good students obeyed and paid attention to the teacher, but in China, students and teachers assumed that all students would behave in this way. Consequently, Chinese teachers spend little time and effort on discipline. In Norway and Russia, students often spend their first 5 or 6 years of school with the same teacher (Cogan et al., 2001).

The ways that student learn in different cultures is called learning styles. For many individualistic students, the use of repetition in the classroom is a test of memory. Understanding results from sudden insight, but for many collectivistic students, repetition helps to deepen or develop an understanding. Memorizing and understanding are interlocking processes, not separate activities.

How students communicate is also part of the learning style. In the US, direct eye contact is interpreted as a sign of interest and honesty. The lack of eye contact is a sign of dishonesty or lack of interest so teachers adjust their styles accordingly. Looking a teacher in the eye in many Asian countries would the height of disrespect.

Group work is also approached differently in different places. In the US, the class is often split into pairs, or small groups to work on a task or to discuss a topic. Watkins calls this “simultaneous pupil talk. In a Chinese classroom, you would more likely view “sequential pupil talk” where two students at a time stand and engage in dialogue while the others listen and think.

The ideas of testing and evaluation also vary widely from culture to culture. Students in many countries are accustomed to very rigorous high-stakes testing. Multiple choice tests, common in the US, are rare outside of the US.

What are your assumptions?

• Instructors should set time aside for lectures.
• Instructors should let students discuss the material.
• Students should be allowed to say what they want about the material.
• Students should be allowed to ask questions.
• Students should be assigned readings at the beginning of the term, and only take one exam at the end of the term?
• Students are assigned a structured list of readings and assignments are created along the way?
• Grading should be done “on a curve?”
• Everyone should be allowed to flunk the class.

Grading and Power

Cultures can have very different expectations about grades and the grading process. There may always be power distance issues in the communication between instructors and students, but these differences will be greater or lesser depending on the culture. Notions of what constitutes being “fair” or “unfair” are cultural embedded as well.

Grading systems are far from universal, making the understanding of what a grade means opaque at best. In the Chinese University system, grades are often based on one final examination. There are no other grades so plagiarism is rarely considered a problem. In the Japanese University system, final grades are based on the mid-term and final. There are no regulations about plagiarism in Japan or Nepal. Students do not need to attend classes in the Nepal University system; they can choose to directly sit for the national exam. Attendance and plagiarism are very important in the university system in India, but students can negotiate with their professors for grades. The Iranian university system also enforces consequences for plagiarism, but considers gift giving an opportunity for extra credit (Smith et al., 2013).

How do you feel about grades?

• What are your assumptions?
• How important are grades?
• Should grades be public or private information?
• What do grades communicate to others?

Communication, Education, and Cultural Identity

We would prefer to think that education provides equal opportunities for all students, but that simply is not true. Many teachers may not have received the kind of training necessary to incorporate materials into the curriculum that reflect the diversity of students in their classrooms nor their learning preferences. While educational institutions can be places of international, interracial, and intercultural contact, these contacts do not necessarily lead to increased intercultural competence. Students “who see culture as a barrier tend to deny, resist, or minimize differences” while “those who see culture as a resource tend to accept and appreciate difference” (Martin & Nakayama, 2011).

Attributions

Adapted from:

Intercultural Communication for the Community College, by Karen Krumrey-Fulks. Provided by LibreTexts. License: CC-BY-NC-SA

Language and Culture in Context: A Primer on Intercultural Communication, by Robert Godwin-Jones. Provided by LibreTexts. License: CC-BY-NC

Image Attributions

Students on a Butte College Study Abroad program learn the art of coffee cultivation in Costa Rica by Tom Grothe is used under a CC-BY license

Reference

Basu, A. (1989). Colonial education a comparative approach. Indian History Congress, 50, 707–736.

Cogan, L. S., Schmidt, W. H., & Wiley, D. E. (2001). Who Takes What Math and in Which Track? Using TIMSS to Characterize U.S. Students’ Eighth-Grade Mathematics Learning Opportunities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(4), 323–341. doi: 10.3102/01623737023004323

Cortazzi, M., & Jinn, L. (1999). Cultural mirrors: Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning, 196–219.

Dimmock, C., & Walker, A. (2005). Educational leadership: culture and diversity. London: Sage Publications.

Ferraro, G. P., & Briody, E. K. (2017). The cultural dimensions of global business(8th ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

Fisch, K., & McLeod, S. (2010). Did You Know? Retrieved from The FIsch Bowl Blog [thefischbowl.blogspot.com]

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture and Organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization, 10(4), 15–41. doi: 10.1080/00208825.1980.11656300

Hofstede, G. (2005). Cultures consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Hollins, E. R. (2008). Culture in school learning: revealing the deep meaning. London: Routledge.

Husen, T., & Postlethwaite, T. N. (1996). A brief history of the evaluation of the international association for the evaluation of educational achievement (TEA). Assessment in Education, 3(2), 129–141.

Johns, K. M., & Espinoza, C. (1996). Management Strategies for Culturally Diverse Classrooms. Fastback 396. Phi Delta Kappa.

Lipka, J. (1998). Transforming the culture of school: Yup’Ik eskimo examples. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Ehrlbaum Associates.

Mcgroarty, M., & Scott, S. (1993). Reading, Writing, and Roles in U.S. Adult Literacy Textbooks. TESOL Quarterly, 27(3), 563. doi: 10.2307/3587491

Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (2010). Understanding learning and teaching the experience in higher education. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Randolph, C. H., & Evertson, C. M. (1995). Managing for learning: Rules, roles, and meaning in a writing class. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 30(2), 17–25.

Rubenstein, R. P. (2001). Dress Codes: Meanings and messages in American culture(2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Staub, F. C., & Stern, E. (2002). The nature of teachers pedagogical content beliefs matters for students achievement gains: Quasi-experimental evidence from elementary mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 344–355. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.94.2.344

Trumbull, E., Rothstein-Fisch, C., Greenfield, P. M., & Quiroz, B. (2001). Bridging cultures between home and school: a guide for teachers: with a special focus on immigrant Latino families. New York: Routledge.

Watkins, D. (2000). Learning and Teaching: A cross-cultural perspective. School Leadership & Management, 20(2), 161–173. doi: 10.1080/13632430050011407