During one of our lectures, R asked us to consider the following questions:
What non-verbal processes do you rely most on? Have these cues ever been misread? If so, how did it resolve itself? How does technological-based communication contribute, complicate or re-shape non-verbal processes?
I have used learning management systems in my teaching practice for the past few years, mostly with WebCT and D2L. Consequently, I have found it necessary to employ textual, contextual and subtextual cues in my communication with learners, being careful to read the subtle signs, to note the responses and also the silences. In much the same way that in a verbal communication, the intended audience will focus on the speaker's body posture and cues, facial expression and tone, in a non-verbal dialogue, the audience also seems to have ways of determining meanings -- direct and subtle.
I rely on instinct, the situation and the purpose of the dialogue to determine the correctness of the non-verbal messages relayed by others that are inherent in this new way of communication in the educational environment. By learning to dissect the meaning between the lines, emotional icons, and sometimes a void instead of a response, on-line communication requires the interpretion of a different set of non-verbal cues. The quotation marks and capitalizations of texts, the font type and style, the length and size of the texts, all possibly convey meaning, but it is equally true that they may not. Therefore, I have learned to be careful in how I treat online communication and have discussed a few online communication practices:
1. Smile. \(^_^)/ . :=) :o)
Use smiles if you feel that your tone may be misconstrued as less than gentle. Smiles can take many forms.:). There is always the fear that I may over use these symbols, and there is the subsequent fear that I may be perceived as frivolous or unprofessional.
There is the additional fear that readers tend to perceive a tone that was not intended by the speaker, or read their own emotional response in another. "WHAT?" someone may type. Is this read as shouting, rejoicing, curiosity, anger, disbelief? Should one then err on the side of caution? Specifying an emotion takes the guesswork out of the communication especially in situations where the communicators are little known to each other.
2. Don’t just walk away.
I would never walk away from an individual during mid-conversation but sometimes people have walked away from me during email conversations. I send emails to individuals and I never hear responses from them acknowledging the receipt of the email.
3. Acknowledge me a year later…or maybe even 5 years later.
Have you sent an email to someone and have them acknowledged it many weeks and even months later? This happens to me to quite a bit in my line of work. At first, I was insulted, considering it a slight on my honour, and then I would start to psychoanalyze my emails. Did I insult someone? Were my remarks misconstrued? I agonize and re-read my email but than I started realizing that some people were uncomfortable navigating the waters of online communication.
4. Netiquette… Please and thank you.
Here is the scenario. I receive a desperate email from a colleague or student. "Help me…I need to locate this resource or I need you to send me this attachment." I burn the midnight oil trying to be helpful, and then I send off the response. Nothing. I hear nothing. Not a word of thank you I appreciated your time and effort. I was raised in an environment where “please and thank you very much” was the norm and when I started teaching in distributed environments I realized that many people did not carry this concept to the virtual world even though it was expected in their homes. The truth was that I was offended at first but now I am not as troubled by this fact.
5. Short and long emails.
I have been trying to dissect long and short emails. I once sent out a long carefully constructed email to a colleague and she sent me an email back asking if I was offended at something. So be careful about the lengths of emails and how that appears. However, also be careful of short emails. Nothing is as abrupt as sending a long email to an individual and receiving a short one sentence response back. I always find myself questioning whether the person is peeved at me or whether the individual is just this way because of other pressing concerns and could not be more verbose online.
6. Hierarchies
There was a time when I assumed that carbon copying was not that important but I am recognizing sadly that it is important for strategic online communications. It is truly sad but there exists hierarchies in email communication as well. This is not always the case but matters of power and authority are quite clear in an online world. I have noticed that some people in positions of authority may not acknowledge the emails of those whose status is below them in the workplace. In these cases, carbon copying another high status individual may increase one’s chance of getting a response. It may also increase one’s chance of being ignored by both individuals, and then one must resort to meeting these individuals in person via their secretaries even though we all work in the same office and see each other on a regular basis. Not all high status individuals choose to ignore their subordinates. Some respond quickly and follow-up with thorough emails, and I am comforted by the fact that some individuals choose to laterize the workplace hierarchy through email communication.
Some of my non-English speaking parents prefer to email me since they can spend time composing a clear communication with me via email. It is worth noting that some of my non-English speaking students will prefer to email me rather than speaking to me via the phone since they feel uncomfortable speaking.
I have worked hard to ensure that I do not inundate people’s inboxes and that I respect their right to a private space, but most importantly, I remember to acknowledge someone who has taken the time to email me. If our belief as educators is in removing barriers rather than erecting them, then we need to bring equality to our online communication practices as well.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Attributes of an Intercultural Educator Exploration
Is there a difference between an Educator and an Intercultural Educator? Is the difference in the cross-cultural communication competency of the individual?
I struggled with the wording of this question because I assumed that an intercultural educator was also an educator and that the difference for these educators was in the audience.
This reflection has me thinking more critically about what it means to be an Intercultural educator and has me re-examining Michael Tucker’s work on the Overseas Assignment Inventory (OAI). The OAI is a written inventory that measures fourteen attitudes and attributes found to be important for successful cross-cultural adaptation (Tucker 46-47). It is only my hypothesis but it may be possible that individuals who do well on the OAI demonstrate cross-cultural awareness that is transferrable to an educational context. Is there an inventory that assesses an educator’s competency as an Intercultural Educator? Have tools been created for this purpose?
Educators are expected to be effective communicators and the OAI seems to focus on the communication skills of the individuals as well. I have outlined areas where I feel that the OAI has connections to a teaching context.
The fourteen dimensions are summarized below:
1. Expectations: Anticipations, positive and negative, about living in a new country
If an educator is able to convey realistic expectations of living in another country then my assumption is that the educator will be able to have an understanding of students who have moved to Canada.
2. Open-mindedness: Receptivity to the ideas, values, and ways of other cultures.
Although, this is a dimension specific to perceiving cultures abroad it is also reflective of how educators can perceive of the diversity of cultures within the classroom context. An individual scoring high on this dimension would certainly be open-minded in the classroom which is an important attribute for an intercultural educator. This is a trait that would be inclusive for all educators but would be highly expected of an Intercultural educator.
3. Respect for Other Beliefs: Ability to be accepting and nonjudgmental of other religious and political beliefs.
Yes. An individual who has respect for Other Beliefs would certainly be an effective educator. It is interesting to note that Tucker’s notion of respect adheres to the principles of teaching and is not specifically connected to individuals teaching within an Intercultural Context.
4. Trust in People: Ability to have trust and faith in other people.
Again, trust is an important factor in relationship building in the classroom, and it seems one that supports the immersion of an individual in another country. Trust is also an important element of the educational environment because a student needs to trust a teacher in order to engage in the learning dynamic.
5. Tolerance: Willingness and ability to adapt to unfamiliar and sometimes uncomfortable surroundings and circumstances.
Tolerance is a factor in both trust, respect and open-mindedness and even others that appear on this list. Looking at it in isolation seems difficult if not impossible. However, this factor is one of those that leads to an environment of inclusivity and understanding for all. Accepting diversity seems less a problem for the students than sometimes the adults. For example, fewer students react to those who have a same-sex orientation that teachers do. It is the adults who seem to emphasis differences rather that similarities.
6. Personal Control (Locus of Control): Internal versus external locus of control over the direction and outcome of one’s life events.
I first believed that this dimension as being important to an educator, not only for an intercultural context, since educators need to feel that they have control over their lives since it affects the classroom dynamic. I do not want to generalize but an individual who has a sense of personal control will feel empowered and to a degree empowered teachers will be able to transfer this sense of power to their students creating a richer environment.
However, after speaking to a colleague abou this topic I realize that some students may come from backgrounds where they have no practice at lining up, sitting in desks, meeting deadlines, not do other things that we would expect of our students by a certain age. My first assumption that is that these students have no control and no understanding of responsible behaviour. Furthermore, viewing the role of the teacher with a high amount of power and in some other cultures as powerless.
7. Flexibility: Willingness to consider new ideas and approaches in dealing with problems and tasks.
This may be a harsh conclusion but educators who are not willing to adapt to new ideas and approaches will find themselves becoming obsolete or irrelevant since this flexibility is fundamental to education in the 21st Century. Perhaps, the term Intercultural Educator is truly the inclusive classification for 21st Century educator who accepts the changing nature of the classroom.
8. Patience: Ability to remain patient in dealing with frustrating situations and unanticipated delays.
I don’t see this dimension as being just important in an intercultural setting. It is a virtue in all personal and social situations so should be a necessary attribute for all educators and professionals.
9. Social Adaptability: Ability to adjust to new, unfamiliar social situations.
Regular classroom teachers are expected to adapt to unfamiliar situations since they are working with others and trying to foster social relationships. This is evident in the constantly evolving duties of the classroom teacher. Over the last decade even, we have faced the rise of the IPP, the reintroduction of special education into mainsteam, the Healthy Minds initiative for mental health -- todays classroom are varied in many ways.
10. Initiatives: Willingness to be the first to take charge of new or challenging situations.
In education there is a sense of shared leadership in certain situations. For example, I am taking the initative with the Intercultural initative at my school but the question is that do teachers see this as taking initaitve or as a function of the school environment.
I believe that teachers see taking initiative as part of their daily practice with some teachers being more open to it than others. We seem to have some teachers in the school who are always on the cutting edge and we have some individuals who seem to be more apathetic but who will be brought into the initiative when it becomes school and district wide.
11. Risk-Taking: Willingness to take risks, meet challenges, and cope with change.
I cannot think of a profession where these traits/attitudes would not be an asset. Going into a building with 1200 hormonal adolecents... how can it not be risk taking?
12. Sense of humour: Ability to use humor in difficult or confusing situations.
A sense of humour is important in any classroom environment. One of my retired colleagues reminded me that learning would be diminished in a classroom for a period if a student was confronted with anger in that course; however, humour enhanced learning because it makes it a positive experience and students are better able to connect to positive emotional experiences for learning. However, there is one caution: what one culture finds humourous may not be funny to another.
13. Interpersonal Interest: Interest and enjoyment in being with other people.
This is a dimension that is strongly aligned with effective educators since educators are placed in social situations on a regular basis. We teach students and not content. A part of the reason why we focus on healthy bodies, time management, and respectfulness, is to develop the whole individual and not just the mind. We teach students how to say "please," and "thank-you," because we are developing them into social beings and how can do this if we do not have the skills ourselves. We undermine our profession when we group in the staffroom ridiculing our students.
14. Spouse Communication: Level and quality of communication between spouses.
I am sure that this is not connected to the skills of an educator and I am still pondering on the significance of its inclusion on the OAI.
This may not be a direct factor but the home situation of a teacher may affect what the teacher brings to the classroom. As well, the home situation also affects student because the student will bring this to the classroom environment.
Resource: Tucker, M. (1999). Self-awareness and development using the overseas assignment inventory. In S. Fowler & M. Mumford’s (Eds.). Intercultural sourcebook: Cross-cultural training methods
I struggled with the wording of this question because I assumed that an intercultural educator was also an educator and that the difference for these educators was in the audience.
This reflection has me thinking more critically about what it means to be an Intercultural educator and has me re-examining Michael Tucker’s work on the Overseas Assignment Inventory (OAI). The OAI is a written inventory that measures fourteen attitudes and attributes found to be important for successful cross-cultural adaptation (Tucker 46-47). It is only my hypothesis but it may be possible that individuals who do well on the OAI demonstrate cross-cultural awareness that is transferrable to an educational context. Is there an inventory that assesses an educator’s competency as an Intercultural Educator? Have tools been created for this purpose?
Educators are expected to be effective communicators and the OAI seems to focus on the communication skills of the individuals as well. I have outlined areas where I feel that the OAI has connections to a teaching context.
The fourteen dimensions are summarized below:
1. Expectations: Anticipations, positive and negative, about living in a new country
If an educator is able to convey realistic expectations of living in another country then my assumption is that the educator will be able to have an understanding of students who have moved to Canada.
2. Open-mindedness: Receptivity to the ideas, values, and ways of other cultures.
Although, this is a dimension specific to perceiving cultures abroad it is also reflective of how educators can perceive of the diversity of cultures within the classroom context. An individual scoring high on this dimension would certainly be open-minded in the classroom which is an important attribute for an intercultural educator. This is a trait that would be inclusive for all educators but would be highly expected of an Intercultural educator.
3. Respect for Other Beliefs: Ability to be accepting and nonjudgmental of other religious and political beliefs.
Yes. An individual who has respect for Other Beliefs would certainly be an effective educator. It is interesting to note that Tucker’s notion of respect adheres to the principles of teaching and is not specifically connected to individuals teaching within an Intercultural Context.
4. Trust in People: Ability to have trust and faith in other people.
Again, trust is an important factor in relationship building in the classroom, and it seems one that supports the immersion of an individual in another country. Trust is also an important element of the educational environment because a student needs to trust a teacher in order to engage in the learning dynamic.
5. Tolerance: Willingness and ability to adapt to unfamiliar and sometimes uncomfortable surroundings and circumstances.
Tolerance is a factor in both trust, respect and open-mindedness and even others that appear on this list. Looking at it in isolation seems difficult if not impossible. However, this factor is one of those that leads to an environment of inclusivity and understanding for all. Accepting diversity seems less a problem for the students than sometimes the adults. For example, fewer students react to those who have a same-sex orientation that teachers do. It is the adults who seem to emphasis differences rather that similarities.
6. Personal Control (Locus of Control): Internal versus external locus of control over the direction and outcome of one’s life events.
I first believed that this dimension as being important to an educator, not only for an intercultural context, since educators need to feel that they have control over their lives since it affects the classroom dynamic. I do not want to generalize but an individual who has a sense of personal control will feel empowered and to a degree empowered teachers will be able to transfer this sense of power to their students creating a richer environment.
However, after speaking to a colleague abou this topic I realize that some students may come from backgrounds where they have no practice at lining up, sitting in desks, meeting deadlines, not do other things that we would expect of our students by a certain age. My first assumption that is that these students have no control and no understanding of responsible behaviour. Furthermore, viewing the role of the teacher with a high amount of power and in some other cultures as powerless.
7. Flexibility: Willingness to consider new ideas and approaches in dealing with problems and tasks.
This may be a harsh conclusion but educators who are not willing to adapt to new ideas and approaches will find themselves becoming obsolete or irrelevant since this flexibility is fundamental to education in the 21st Century. Perhaps, the term Intercultural Educator is truly the inclusive classification for 21st Century educator who accepts the changing nature of the classroom.
8. Patience: Ability to remain patient in dealing with frustrating situations and unanticipated delays.
I don’t see this dimension as being just important in an intercultural setting. It is a virtue in all personal and social situations so should be a necessary attribute for all educators and professionals.
9. Social Adaptability: Ability to adjust to new, unfamiliar social situations.
Regular classroom teachers are expected to adapt to unfamiliar situations since they are working with others and trying to foster social relationships. This is evident in the constantly evolving duties of the classroom teacher. Over the last decade even, we have faced the rise of the IPP, the reintroduction of special education into mainsteam, the Healthy Minds initiative for mental health -- todays classroom are varied in many ways.
10. Initiatives: Willingness to be the first to take charge of new or challenging situations.
In education there is a sense of shared leadership in certain situations. For example, I am taking the initative with the Intercultural initative at my school but the question is that do teachers see this as taking initaitve or as a function of the school environment.
I believe that teachers see taking initiative as part of their daily practice with some teachers being more open to it than others. We seem to have some teachers in the school who are always on the cutting edge and we have some individuals who seem to be more apathetic but who will be brought into the initiative when it becomes school and district wide.
11. Risk-Taking: Willingness to take risks, meet challenges, and cope with change.
I cannot think of a profession where these traits/attitudes would not be an asset. Going into a building with 1200 hormonal adolecents... how can it not be risk taking?
12. Sense of humour: Ability to use humor in difficult or confusing situations.
A sense of humour is important in any classroom environment. One of my retired colleagues reminded me that learning would be diminished in a classroom for a period if a student was confronted with anger in that course; however, humour enhanced learning because it makes it a positive experience and students are better able to connect to positive emotional experiences for learning. However, there is one caution: what one culture finds humourous may not be funny to another.
13. Interpersonal Interest: Interest and enjoyment in being with other people.
This is a dimension that is strongly aligned with effective educators since educators are placed in social situations on a regular basis. We teach students and not content. A part of the reason why we focus on healthy bodies, time management, and respectfulness, is to develop the whole individual and not just the mind. We teach students how to say "please," and "thank-you," because we are developing them into social beings and how can do this if we do not have the skills ourselves. We undermine our profession when we group in the staffroom ridiculing our students.
14. Spouse Communication: Level and quality of communication between spouses.
I am sure that this is not connected to the skills of an educator and I am still pondering on the significance of its inclusion on the OAI.
This may not be a direct factor but the home situation of a teacher may affect what the teacher brings to the classroom. As well, the home situation also affects student because the student will bring this to the classroom environment.
Resource: Tucker, M. (1999). Self-awareness and development using the overseas assignment inventory. In S. Fowler & M. Mumford’s (Eds.). Intercultural sourcebook: Cross-cultural training methods
Compelling Teaching Myths
“It never occurred to me how many faces there are. There are multitudes of people, but there are many more faces, because each person has several of them.” Rainer Maria Rilke
Educators have many faces as well, and different lesson plans and styles of teaching are expressed differently from a day to day basis even if we are examining the teaching practice of one individual. There is something about the lecture on Teaching Myths that I find so compelling. It made me uncomfortable and analyzing the three videos was a struggle for me and I completed the other assignments before attempting that one. I left it until the end. Watching each video was like lifting the layers to my own teaching practice; it was incredibly difficult to comment on teaching techniques that I knew were not ideal in some cases but that I could see myself perpetuating at some point in my life. It made the exercise personal.
I cannot speak for the teachers portrayed in the video but I know why I allow myself to perpetuate these myths. It is sometimes just easier to accept the status quo. I think it is worth examining some of the realities of teaching in this day and age that force teachers to accept teaching myths as a type of reality. I am just hypothesizing but a teacher who allows a certain stereotype to perpetuate may be accepting the fast and efficient way of announcing to the world that this is how they wish to be perceived.
Is it not easier for some teachers to walk into a classroom and convey a certain persona in order to shift the power dynamic when they feel that they don’t have time to foster the relationship necessary? Or maybe these teachers are seeing students as limited participants in the classroom environment.
I have observed schools where teaching loads are quite heavy. Teachers are expected to be many things to many people without the proper training. I suspect that the math teacher in the video accepted the stand and deliver mode of teaching because it was also easier to adhere to the role or motions of being a teacher in this way. I remember many times throughout childhood where I would pretend to be a teacher and would stand in front of a room and write on a blackboard. This was a stereotype of being a teacher. An educator is always connected to the blackboard, a whiteboard, and now a smartboard. Teaching is always connected to the act of writing or presenting something on a physical space.
Excellent educators are considered individuals who have the ability to instill passion into their students. A consequence of this success is a type of public recognition for both the student. Internal growth or exploration must be manifested in a form of outward achievement.
I am having difficulties thinking of a compelling teacher film that does not adhere to some stereotype of teaching even if these films propel educators to a position of demi-gods.
Here are some films that enhance the myth of teaching:
1. Dead Poet’s Society.
2. The Freedom Writers.
3. Mr. Holland’s Opus.
I have a fear that accepting popular culture’s notion of teaching myths will make me forget that sometimes the difference that I make as an educator will be far less significant than what is happening in the movies. There are days when I am just excited when a student has taken the time to work on one essay and it may be her only essay submission of the semester.
As an extension to some of R’s examples, I have included some of my own educator myths:
Educators have many faces as well, and different lesson plans and styles of teaching are expressed differently from a day to day basis even if we are examining the teaching practice of one individual. There is something about the lecture on Teaching Myths that I find so compelling. It made me uncomfortable and analyzing the three videos was a struggle for me and I completed the other assignments before attempting that one. I left it until the end. Watching each video was like lifting the layers to my own teaching practice; it was incredibly difficult to comment on teaching techniques that I knew were not ideal in some cases but that I could see myself perpetuating at some point in my life. It made the exercise personal.
I cannot speak for the teachers portrayed in the video but I know why I allow myself to perpetuate these myths. It is sometimes just easier to accept the status quo. I think it is worth examining some of the realities of teaching in this day and age that force teachers to accept teaching myths as a type of reality. I am just hypothesizing but a teacher who allows a certain stereotype to perpetuate may be accepting the fast and efficient way of announcing to the world that this is how they wish to be perceived.
Is it not easier for some teachers to walk into a classroom and convey a certain persona in order to shift the power dynamic when they feel that they don’t have time to foster the relationship necessary? Or maybe these teachers are seeing students as limited participants in the classroom environment.
I have observed schools where teaching loads are quite heavy. Teachers are expected to be many things to many people without the proper training. I suspect that the math teacher in the video accepted the stand and deliver mode of teaching because it was also easier to adhere to the role or motions of being a teacher in this way. I remember many times throughout childhood where I would pretend to be a teacher and would stand in front of a room and write on a blackboard. This was a stereotype of being a teacher. An educator is always connected to the blackboard, a whiteboard, and now a smartboard. Teaching is always connected to the act of writing or presenting something on a physical space.
Excellent educators are considered individuals who have the ability to instill passion into their students. A consequence of this success is a type of public recognition for both the student. Internal growth or exploration must be manifested in a form of outward achievement.
I am having difficulties thinking of a compelling teacher film that does not adhere to some stereotype of teaching even if these films propel educators to a position of demi-gods.
Here are some films that enhance the myth of teaching:
1. Dead Poet’s Society.
2. The Freedom Writers.
3. Mr. Holland’s Opus.
I have a fear that accepting popular culture’s notion of teaching myths will make me forget that sometimes the difference that I make as an educator will be far less significant than what is happening in the movies. There are days when I am just excited when a student has taken the time to work on one essay and it may be her only essay submission of the semester.
As an extension to some of R’s examples, I have included some of my own educator myths:
Communication Ingredients
Written or Oral; Direct or Indirect
In module 4 we discussed cross-cultural communication strategies. I thought that it would be interesting to share this story from the Canada World Youth Learning Guide. It highlights the different cultural assumptions that we bring into our communication with another individual and that non-verbal communication cues are just as important as the verbal ones.
Many of the cross-cultural communication exercises advocated by the trainers such as Kraemer and Storti focus on dialogue as an initial part of cross-cultural interaction and communication but the soup story illustrates the fact that we need to examine how our visual responses affect our understanding of other individuals as well. I would be interested in examining how images of another culture are perceived by individuals of a certain culture. What happens when we remove dialogue from the training? I fully acknowledge that I make assumptions about cultural situations based on the visual elements of a particular scenario and would like to understand how it influences or affects our stereotypes and generalizations. The way an individual dresses, moves, or gestures can also affect my communication regarding that individual. I believe that developing deep cultural awareness can certainly be aided by formal training but it is also the responsibility of the intercultural educator to move from the theory to practice by questioning her every day situation. This involves questioning non-textual, and non-verbal situations. What can silence tell us about each other?
These are some of the questions that I consider important for us to question when we read the soup story in our quest for greater cross-cultural understanding.
What perception does each individual have of the other?
Have we ever made one or more errors of perception?
The Soup Story
The scene unfolds in Bern, Switzerland.
In a buffet-style restaurant, a 75-year- old white woman chooses a bowl of soup and goes to sit down at a table.
"Shoot!" she says, "I forgot to get a slice of bread."
She gets up, takes her bread and returns to her table...only to find a black man seated in front of her bowl of soup.
And he is in the process of eating it!
All right, she says to herself, isn't this the best! Of course, he's probably a poor man. I won't say anything, but nevertheless, I can’t let this go by without doing anything at all.
She grabs a spoon, sits across from the man and without saying a word, eats the soup.
And so the man and the woman eat together, in silence.
Then the man gets up.
He goes to get an ample plate of spaghetti à la Bolognaise and he puts it in front of the kind woman. Along with two forks!
And so the two continue to eat together, still in silence. Finally they take leave of each other.
"Good- bye" says the woman gently.
"Good- bye" says the man with a soft glow in his eyes. He gives the impression of someone who is happy to have helped his fellow man.
And so he leaves and the woman follows him with her eyes.
At that moment, the woman sees, on the table next to hers, a bowl of soup that appears to have been forgotten.
"The Soup Story" is from “Canada World Youth Learning Guide."
Further exploration:
A website that provides a similar important exercise is called In the Mind of the Beholder. The website activity highlights our generalizations and stereotypes of another culture. It asks the participant to consider how their assumptions are affected by their own circumstances and from the position of the Other.
http://www2.pacific.edu/sis/culture/pub/1.2.2-_Activity-_Inthe_Mind_.htm
Stereotypes and Generalizations
Two Day Workshops?
Alfred J. Kraemer succinctly summarizes Kalevi J. Holsti’s ideas when he says that even the most objective of scholars are partly prisoners of their experiences, the values predominant in their society, and the myths, traditions, and stereotypes that permeate their nation and environment” (Kraemer 225). Kraemer developed an intercultural training program consisting of 15 hours which could be broken into two days of training.
As I read his article, I was troubled by the importance and relevance of a two day workshop on intercultural communication. He asks us to question why it is acceptable for management/human resources to accept that it takes at least two weeks to train a bartender and several weeks to train a baker but only a few hours for an intercultural educator to develop the ability to work with people from another culture. This is a perspective that is still quite pervasive when we accept the two day workshop model. Kraemer notes that shortcomings in intercultural training will manifest itself to the participants when they have experienced another culture.
I know that such programs are certainly not comprehensive but I would certainly advocate that intercultural educators be given the opportunity to take this training even if it is limited since it will provide a starting point for discussion. It is an initial opportunity for dialogue and the engaged amongst us will certainly seek opportunities for further learning.
Conceptual Framework of Internal Projections:
It is virtually impossible for anyone to communicate with anyone without making assumptions about each other; although, in the case of the soup story it seems that the communications are quite subtle.
We make projections which are assumptions based on a variety of factors that influence our thinking and behaviour, such as age, gender, occupation, level of intelligence and education, situational constraints, and cultural background. Kraemer defines these assumptions as intercultural projections.
I believe that in order to be culturally sensitive educators, it is important that we are able to define some of these stereotypes and generalizations.
Do I know the difference between a stereotype and a generalization?
Do stereotypes help or inhibit an understanding of other cultures?
Do generalizations help or inhibit an understanding of other cultures?
This is a chart that I have used to ask my students to consider the difference between stereotypes and generalizations.
Here are some examples that I heard of stereotypes and generalizations:
All Parisians are rude. (Generalization that people in Paris are rude. Everything was over-priced in Price.
Paris is not a city for love; it's dirty.)
Alfred J. Kraemer succinctly summarizes Kalevi J. Holsti’s ideas when he says that even the most objective of scholars are partly prisoners of their experiences, the values predominant in their society, and the myths, traditions, and stereotypes that permeate their nation and environment” (Kraemer 225). Kraemer developed an intercultural training program consisting of 15 hours which could be broken into two days of training.
As I read his article, I was troubled by the importance and relevance of a two day workshop on intercultural communication. He asks us to question why it is acceptable for management/human resources to accept that it takes at least two weeks to train a bartender and several weeks to train a baker but only a few hours for an intercultural educator to develop the ability to work with people from another culture. This is a perspective that is still quite pervasive when we accept the two day workshop model. Kraemer notes that shortcomings in intercultural training will manifest itself to the participants when they have experienced another culture.
I know that such programs are certainly not comprehensive but I would certainly advocate that intercultural educators be given the opportunity to take this training even if it is limited since it will provide a starting point for discussion. It is an initial opportunity for dialogue and the engaged amongst us will certainly seek opportunities for further learning.
Conceptual Framework of Internal Projections:
It is virtually impossible for anyone to communicate with anyone without making assumptions about each other; although, in the case of the soup story it seems that the communications are quite subtle.
We make projections which are assumptions based on a variety of factors that influence our thinking and behaviour, such as age, gender, occupation, level of intelligence and education, situational constraints, and cultural background. Kraemer defines these assumptions as intercultural projections.
I believe that in order to be culturally sensitive educators, it is important that we are able to define some of these stereotypes and generalizations.
Do I know the difference between a stereotype and a generalization?
Do stereotypes help or inhibit an understanding of other cultures?
Do generalizations help or inhibit an understanding of other cultures?
This is a chart that I have used to ask my students to consider the difference between stereotypes and generalizations.
Here are some examples that I heard of stereotypes and generalizations:
All Parisians are rude. (Generalization that people in Paris are rude. Everything was over-priced in Price.
Paris is not a city for love; it's dirty.)
Kraemer, A. (1999). A method for developing deep cultural self-awareness through intensive practice: A retrospective. In S. Fowler & M. Mumford’s (Eds.). Intercultural sourcebook: Cross-cultural training methods, vol. 2. Yarmouth, USA: Intercultural Press, p 225-239.
The End and the Beginning
On the occasion of the end of this course, I would like to share the following conclusions with you:
The minimum timeframe that R has suggested is particularly helpful: it keeps the work load (relatively) manageable and allows me to say it is time to move on to the next unit.
There is a clear relationship between the lectures, the readings, and the discussions. I have found the open discussion and assignment sharing format very informative and the detailed feedback particularly engaging since it compels me to re-examine my own perceptions.
This blog is a desire on my part to challenge myself to move into different forms of expression. I have used PowerPoint extensively in the past, and I have also written quite a few papers as well, and I believe that learning only happens when I remove myself from a point of complacency. It is a feeling of some discomfort. Convenience has nothing to do with my reasons for creating this blog.
“Any change, even a change for the better, is always accompanied by drawbacks and discomforts.” Arnold Bennett (novelist and playwright)
As Satterlee captures so succinctly in her writing, the adult learner has many conflicting commitments in her daily life, and sometimes it means that there is a compromise in other areas of her life. I truly appreciate the fact that R has indicated the timeframe necessary to complete each component; although, I must confess that I actually spend more time working on these modules rather than the standard 10 hours. In a busy life, it is difficult to have time to meditate and mull over new ideas, to find time for challenging discussions, and to push yourself into a new mindset.
Have I learned a lot in this course? The answer is a resounding yes; however, I have not been satisfied with my own expression of that learning within the timeframe of this course. In other words, I believe that I have not been able to convey the depth of and shifts in my understanding of what it means to teach in an Intercultural context in a way that truly captures my personal and professional growth. Consequently, I have decided to continue with a blog to capture the growth in my learning well after the course has ended.
Have I become metacognitive? Maybe, maybe not. But I think I am on the journey in that direction.
Resource:
Satterlee, A. (2002). Conflict resolution strategies for the adult higher education student. Report for the United States Army War College. Carlisle, PA.
The minimum timeframe that R has suggested is particularly helpful: it keeps the work load (relatively) manageable and allows me to say it is time to move on to the next unit.
There is a clear relationship between the lectures, the readings, and the discussions. I have found the open discussion and assignment sharing format very informative and the detailed feedback particularly engaging since it compels me to re-examine my own perceptions.
This blog is a desire on my part to challenge myself to move into different forms of expression. I have used PowerPoint extensively in the past, and I have also written quite a few papers as well, and I believe that learning only happens when I remove myself from a point of complacency. It is a feeling of some discomfort. Convenience has nothing to do with my reasons for creating this blog.
“Any change, even a change for the better, is always accompanied by drawbacks and discomforts.” Arnold Bennett (novelist and playwright)
As Satterlee captures so succinctly in her writing, the adult learner has many conflicting commitments in her daily life, and sometimes it means that there is a compromise in other areas of her life. I truly appreciate the fact that R has indicated the timeframe necessary to complete each component; although, I must confess that I actually spend more time working on these modules rather than the standard 10 hours. In a busy life, it is difficult to have time to meditate and mull over new ideas, to find time for challenging discussions, and to push yourself into a new mindset.
Have I learned a lot in this course? The answer is a resounding yes; however, I have not been satisfied with my own expression of that learning within the timeframe of this course. In other words, I believe that I have not been able to convey the depth of and shifts in my understanding of what it means to teach in an Intercultural context in a way that truly captures my personal and professional growth. Consequently, I have decided to continue with a blog to capture the growth in my learning well after the course has ended.
Have I become metacognitive? Maybe, maybe not. But I think I am on the journey in that direction.
Resource:
Satterlee, A. (2002). Conflict resolution strategies for the adult higher education student. Report for the United States Army War College. Carlisle, PA.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)