Cedarville University’s own Sandi Harner published an article about the Service-Learning project she developed as part of her TPC class.  She titled the article Technical and Professional Communication Majors Use Their Skills to Help Poverty-Stricken People. She writes the following:

During the Spring semester in 2010, a group of Cedarville University students majoring in technical and professional communication (TPC) partnered with a nonprofit organization [Opportunity International] to help poverty-stricken people in developing countries…. The goal of OI is that each client in these developing countries be able to have a web site that would advertise their services…The TPC students were asked to use their skills to bridge the [language] gap in this endeavor” by creating and publishing a content management system user manual for all the clients so they would be able to publish their own websites. Read the full article

I spoke with the Mrs. Harner about her experience and asked her if she had any advice for other Cedarville University professors as they meet the 21^st century global expectations.  She provided the following suggestions:

• Select your cooperating organization carefully.  It is important they understand this is an educational/ learning experience for the students, not an opportunity for free services/labor.
• Articulate limitations and reasonable timelines
• Expect active and sustained commitment; Create and Sign Contracts
• Provide training for everyone involved
  • Help the organization understand the academic process
  • Help the students understand the mission and rules of engagement of the organization
• Front load necessary content so students are able to apply what they have learned, but also allow students to learn as they apply.
• Reflect and Assess regularly

For more information about Service Learning see this month’s CTL Spotlight.  http://ctl.cedarville.edu/resources/

…now colleges and universities are seeing the work of the
world as inextricable from the life of the mind.

Caryn McTighe Musil, senior vice president of Diversity, Equity, and Global Initiatives, AACU

Letters of recommendation are an indispensable component of many selection procedures. They are required for almost all undergraduate and graduate school applications, academic award and fellowship applications, and job applications. The purpose of these letters is to provide information about an applicant that helps decision makers ascertain whether the candidate’s background fits an available position and whether the candidate is likely to be successful in fulfilling the expectations of the role. Letters of recommendation allow consideration of personal, relevant information that may otherwise be difficult to acquire (McCarthy & Goffin, 2001).

Liu, O., Minsky, J., Guangming, L., & Kyllonen, P. (2009) Found 11/17/10 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=39760624&site=ehost-live&scope=site

It is difficult to believe that there could be controversy surrounding letters of recommendation. On the other hand, tasks such as writing letters of recommendation were destined to be the subject of analysis sooner or later. With the growing popularity of academic assessment and SoTL (the scholarship of teaching and learning) on college campuses, professors are encouraged to analyze what they do, why they do it, and what affect it has on student success. These practices have transformed the higher education profession. Consequently, questions are being raised regarding letters of recommendation and student success. The questions the academy is asking are these: Are traditional letters of recommendation valid, fair, or even helpful? In a global society, how can admissions officers accommodate for cultural communication differences in letters of recommendation? Can faculty members maintain a sense of freedom in the recommendation process? Are computer generated, standardized letters of recommendation the best solution to current challenges?

Are They Valid, Fair, or Helpful?

According to some of the literature, traditional letters of recommendation have not been valid or helpful. Validity is compromised because the typical letters are not standardized. (Bruland, 2009, Liu, et al. 2009, and Lui, 2007) Traditional letters of recommendation provide qualitative data rather than quantitative data. Often-used vocabulary such as “good student” cannot be measured in terms of specificity. Therefore, it is difficult to compare one student with another. Also, readers tend to misread and misinterpret what is written.

Traditional letters of recommendation are not always fair and accurate. Close relationships between students and faculty sometimes causes “leniency” (Liu, O., Minsky, J., Guangming, L., & Kyllonen, P. (2009) Literature review Found 11/17/10). Professors who have a personal relationship with students feel pressured to give good recommendations in spite of glaring weaknesses. Most often, it is the case that students will ask professors for recommendations with whom they have a good relationship. Consequently, each letter submitted is written so positively, highlighting each student’s strengths, it is impossible for readers and processor to distinguish fairly between applicants.

Additionally, fairness is complicated because the student has the right to view or waive their right to view the letter prior to it being sent. Studies indicate that students who do not waive the right to view the letter received better recommendations than those who agree to keep it confidential. (Liu, O., Minsky, J., Guangming, L., & Kyllonen, P. (2009) Literature review: Ceci and Peters (1984) Found 11/17/10).

Another issue affecting fairness is the recommending professor’s writing ability. Research shows that admissions officers often favor certain types of letters, particular language, etc. making the process more about the ability of the letter writer rather than the competence of the applicant.

Finally, traditional letters of recommendation are not always authentic. Fraud is a problem because students can easily impersonate professors. Letterhead is easy to get on campus. Students can create email accounts for professors. Nothing can prevent them from writing their own letters of recommendation and sending them to graduate schools and potential employers.

Cultural Communication and Bias

As higher education becomes more global, many students will apply for graduate school and employment in foreign countries. Therefore, cultural communication within letters of recommendation is an issue worth discussing.

The literature shows that the language used in a letter of recommendation influenced students’ success here in America. Students were most likely to be accepted or offered a position in America if their letters of recommendation had the following characteristics:

• An appealing layout and style
• A lengthy and thorough description of the applicant
• An introduction containing “speech acts and appeals to ethos”
• Some mention of scholarship and service
• A “stylistic and pathetic” closing
• “Capitalistic economic metaphors”

It is very likely that this list would look very different in a non-western culture. In certain cultures, China-for example, letters of recommendation are not even used. In many “collectivist” cultures, it is not acceptable to speak about someone or his or her qualities in a negative way. It is culturally more acceptable to be vague or imply a weakness, but not to overtly reveal negative characteristics. In cultures like the US, communication tends to be more frank. There are, therefore, implications for students from other nations applying for school or jobs in the U.S. The reverse is also true. If reader and writer have different values, speech patterns, nuances, subtleties in letters, conventions, etc., decisions will be based on cultural misunderstanding or biases instead of the applicant’s competence.

… what we say and do has meaning only within a framework of cultural knowledge. The ways that we organize and conduct our lives through language are thus ways of being and doing that are not only relative to other possibilities for communicating, but also deeply embedded within the particular framework by which we — as members of our own specific communities — make sense out of experience” (Schiffrin 1994:185).

Bruland, H. (2009) and Liu, J. (2007) Found 11/17/2010 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=44170227&site=ehost-live&scope=site

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=24947723&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Academic Freedom or Discrimination?

Speaking of bias, should a faculty member have the right to refuse students letters of recommendation? The Chronicle of Higher Education ran a story of controversy about a biology professor named Michael L. Dini from Texas Tech University. Dini maintains a very clear policy about student recommendations. On his Web site he clearly states that students who request a recommendation for graduate school will have to “truthfully and forthrightly affirm a scientific answer” to the question: How do you think the human species originated? This was a problem for a student who needed a recommendation from a biology professor to be admitted to medical school. The student did not believe in evolution and could not, in good conscience, answer professor Dini’s question in the way Dini wanted it to be answered. To obtain the biology recommendation, the student had to take a biology course from another institution.

“It’s religious discrimination, and it’s the very antithesis of academic freedom. Universities should teach many theories and challenge their students to consider all the sides to an issue.” -Shackelford

Professor Dini and Cindy Rugeley, a spokeswoman at Texas Tech, argue that Dini’s recommendation policy is not religious discrimination. They say, ultimately, professors have the freedom to choose who they write recommendations for. Secondly, they say that the issue here is not the student’s religion, but his science. Mr. Dini does not believe that the student is using scientific thinking to answer scientific questions. He could not write a letter of recommendation for someone seeking a profession in the sciences if they are not able to set aside personal expectations or beliefs when engaging in scientific inquiry (Rooney, M. (2003) ).

Is Technology the Answer?

Some believe that technology has solved many of the problems surrounding letters of recommendation. There are now many options for computer generated standardized letters of recommendation. Companies such as ApplyYourself, Princeton Review, Xap Corportation are providing recommendation systems in business and higher education. Educational Testing Service produced an online “Standardized Letter of Recommendation” in 2004 that many university’s systems are based on. Below are some advantages and disadvantages:

The Advantages:

• Makes for more time efficient submission and processing
• Informs students immediately about recommendations that have been submitted
• Provides “specific and contextualized items” making levels of specificity and accuracy increase validity (Aamont et al., 1993)
• Translates qualitative data into quantitative data decreasing misinterpretation, political incorrectness and bias.
• Makes the recommendations uniform increasing comparability, reducing leniency, and helps address cultural communication issues by asking direct questions
• Reduces a previously multi-step process to one step
• Tracks internet addresses decreasing fraud and increasing authenticity

The Disadvantages:

• Time consuming for those who previously used a standard letter for most students
• Questions are “crude” and impersonal at times, but often provide alternative spaces for clarification.
• Computer systems crash or are not user friendly (but many argue that technology issues are typically due to user error).

Kiernan, V. 2004 http://rave.ohiolink.edu/databases/record/edua/BEDI04114800

Conclusion and Implication for CTL

It seems that the advantages of submitting Web-based standardized letters of recommendation out-way the disadvantages. And many of the reported disadvantages appear to be easily addressed with appropriate training. Centers for teaching and learning on college campuses may want to provide their faculty members technology support and training in this area.

Greece Holding on to Traditional Standards

Full participation in the Bologna Process would require that Greece award university degrees to students who under their current system only earn a professional degree.  Greece has two distinct types of higher education institutions and two distinct degrees.  The first is the university degree which entails four years of undergraduate work and a diploma upon completion.  This can be followed by one to two year master’s programs and three or more years for a doctorate.  The second is the professional degree, which students earn at technical schools (polytechnics).  These professional programs do not include a full general education curriculum and take three years or less to complete.  This is not to say that the polytechnics or professional degrees are less rigorous – many engineering or medical degrees, for example, are professional and are followed by specializations if desired.

The discrepancy exists because the standard that the Bologna Process promotes is a three-year undergraduate university degree.  Education leaders in Greece are not willing to change their traditional standards for a university degree to fully comply with the Bologna Process.  They believe that a valuable undergraduate university degree must be based on a four-year curriculum that includes a strong general education core.  Aware of the rigor of their education, Greek academics believe that if one of their four-year graduates attends another European university in the Bologna system, he or she should be able to transfer some of the work as part of a master’s program.  (Greece National Report:  Implementation of the Bologna Process in 2003.)

Greece Doing What it can to Embrace the Future

In an effort to stay involved in the Bologna Process but still maintain high standards, Universities like City U have circumvented the program by connecting with American institutions.  City University is a foreign studies location for City University in Seattle.  With this connection, City U in Athens must comply with American standards which align more closely with Greek higher education standards. This solution allows Greece to continue a connection with the global university system while maintaining their standards.  According to Geronicola, Greece is hoping to influence the Bologna Process to raise the academic standards for participating European institutions of higher education.   If this happens, European universities within the Bologna system will have the best of all worlds to offer students- a rigorous education, accessible global instruction and experience, and a world of career opportunities.

What This Might Mean for the U.S.

Geronicola predicts that a university degree from the U.S. will become less and less desirable in the near future.  In the past, European countries have experienced what is commonly known as “brain drain” – well educated students pursuing higher education and careers in countries other than their own (typically the United States).  Greece is a prime example.  The Greek government provides every Greek citizen with a full education from primary through graduate school.  In spite of this, many students, Geronicola included, come to the United States to complete their education.  For many years European students have favored American universities over other higher education systems due to the rigorous and robust nature of the humanities and general education they provide.  An additional draw is that the United States has provided many opportunities for employment after graduation, an important factor since unemployment is high is Greece.  According to Geronicola, although most Greek citizens have Ph.D.’s, they do not have a desirable profession.  Geronicola chose to return to Greece to work but this is not always the case; for example, the daughter of Aphrodite Vavouyios, a resident director at City U, attended university in the United States and stayed. She and her husband are both successful professionals in the Midwest.  Today, they and their two children proudly call themselves Americans.

The bad news for the United States is that Geronicola sees this trend beginning to shift.  The perception among Greek students today is that many American institutions are less rigorous than they once were and that the Bologna Process promises to provide the wide-range global connections that the United States cannot. Today, more and more Greek students looking for global opportunities are opting to attend the more rigorous European schools, such as those in Great Britain.

This summer I had the opportunity to visit Athens, Greece as part of a travel studies program.  I had a wonderful experience.  The Greek people are gracious and ardent. Not only was my life enriched personally, but I gained something professionally as well.  I went on this trip, in part, hoping to learn more about how to help professors train students to be more globally competent.  I knew travel studies would be an excellent component to a strong global curriculum.  I wanted to learn more about travel studies and the pedagogies that made them effective.  I was not disappointed.  One professor in particular used experiential  methods that were extremely effective for student learning.

Philosophy Professor Provides Ideal Example of Experiential Learning

Dr. X had his students read in triplets: (1) writings of ancient Greek philosophers in parallel with (2) contemporary philosophers writing about the same topic and (3) New Testament writings of Paul to the Ephesians and Corinthians.  Then, he took students to various places around the city that significantly connected to the reading.  At each new location he would allow the students to explore the area, observe the people and the culture, and draw conclusions about what they were seeing, tasting, and feeling before he taught them the history of the location.  A perfect example is the trip to Pnyx Hill.  Dr. X assigned three readings the night before:  Martha Nussbaum, Aristotle and Ephesians 2.  For preparation and homework, students were asked to compare and contrast the parallel ideas of justice, citizenship and eudaimonia (full human flourishing) found in the different writings. On the given day he took them up on the hill called Pnyx where the ancient Greek democratic assembly convened.  The students explored the area, and eventually stood near the old Bema seat, where the ancient Greek leader sat and brought issues to the citizens to be voted on.  Professor X then provided a brief lesson on the history of democracy and explained the significance of the surroundings.  He led the students to a small slope, and they sat under an olive tree.  Professor X then asked the students to talk about their observations. He asked them to consider the surroundings and draw conclusions based on what they observed.  He talked to them about their thinking.  He challenged their assumptions.   He asked them to recall their readings and relate the information.  Then he led a discussion about what true democracy would look like according to Aristotle, Nussbaum, and Paul.    He masterfully helped them integrate Greek culture, philosophy and faith.  Through this process the students thought more deeply about the abstract philosophical ideas and their own beliefs.  They discovered far more about themselves and the Greek culture than they would have otherwise.  One student said of her learning experience in Greece, “I found Dr. X’s peripatetic teaching methods an extremely successful way of learning. By doing our class work on site, I was able to apply everything I learned, going beyond mere book learning of facts to tangible, applicable understanding. That really helped me to be able to connect everything we studied not only to its immediate context, but to my life and our existence today, and because of that, I have a much fuller grasp of the material.” (K. Nelson, jr. theatre major)

What this taught me as a faculty development coordinator is this:   providing a learning experience truly is at the heart of teaching.  Since my time in Greece this summer I have focused my  thinking and reading on trying to figure out how to help every Cedarville University professor provide the kind of learning experience the philosophy professor provided in Athens.  We have heard it said, ‘Experience is the best teacher’.  And after what I observed in Athens, I quite agree.  I believe that experiential learning is one of the best pedagogical practices.  Unfortunately, while many professors would agree with me in principle, in reality, they often fall back on the old method of pouring knowledge into the brain of the student. “Teaching by pouring in refers to a medieval belief that we could teach people by drilling holes in the human head and, with a funnel, pour information into the brain. Though we now snicker at that model, we use equally absurd methods today.”  (Learning from Experience by Marcia L. Conner.  http://agelesslearner.com/intros/experiential.html found 9/14/10.) Many acknowledge that lecturing may not be the best way to teach, but perhaps we lack models of how to do it better.    Perhaps we can explore how to use experiential methods close to home.  Perhaps we can look at the process and figure out how to provide an experience right in the lecture hall.

Experiential Learning

Experiential Learning: “Learners taking part in planned real-life activities that are often community based. Learning is facilitated through a combination of planning and preparation, experience, reflection and review.” (iNet Specialist Schools and Academic Trust:  Glossary of Curriculum Terms. http://curriculumdesign.ssatrust.org.uk/Resources/index.php/Glossary_of_Curriculum_Terms Found 9/14/10)

The more I read about education, the more I realize the U.S. is like Lucy, while other industrialized nations are like Henry.  In 50 First Dates Henry stops his car at the same spot every day knowing that Lucy will drive by.  He orchestrates little scenes, like his car breaking down or an animal in the road, just to get her to stop and talk to him.  He relentlessly pursues Lucy, even though she has no memory of their previous encounters.  The world may not be going to such crazy lengths to pursue intellectual relationships with the U. S., but global education groups such as the Bologna Process, the 1994 Group, and Universitas 21 have pursued collaboration with the U.S. through many venues, both intellectual and political.  These groups concentrate on internationalism, global awareness, sharing of intellectual resources and solving world problems.  Like Henry, these groups are a good “date”.  We say we have so much in common.  We say we care about the same things.  We claim to want what other nations want.  But, somehow, after a little time away, the conversations are easily forgotten.    After ten years or more, we have made little progress and committed to very little.  (Chronicle of Higher Education. Feb. 19. 2010. Pg.  29-30.)    (A discussion for another day- positive potential of America’s involvement in Universitas21 http://www.universitas21.com/)

The U.S. has optimistically been “dating” the idea of global education but has little memory of it.  For ten years we have been asking the same questions.

In 50 First Dates, Lucy is wide-eyed and innocent as she interacts openly with Henry about all that she loves.  She is sweet and positive.  Sadly, her disability makes her vulnerable and gullible.   Like many girls on a first date, she asks Henry the same questions about himself.  She is amazed when Henry always seems to say just the right things.  Likewise, the political rhetoric spoken in our country about education is equally as satisfying and sometimes as manipulative.  Many of our nation’s leaders have spoken at length of internationalization, global education, and education reform.  They have done so with great enthusiasm and conviction.  As a nation we are quite gullible and disabled.  If this is not true, then how is it ten years have passed and we are still asking the same questions and have made little progress, if any?

In January of 2000, the Carnegie Corporation of New York gathered some of America’s most influential leaders to meet and discuss educating our nation’s citizens about the world.  The objective was to assess the current situation in the U.S. and then find ways to increase global awareness and competence.  The group made the following assessments:  American students were very behind in their basic knowledge of the world. There were a variety of “scattered” attempts to connect students to international ideas and a great deal of interest in “integrating global perspectives into the curriculum”.  Many educators were enthusiastic and full of innovative ideas.  There was a lack of direction and leadership.  And there was no comprehensive plan to implement solutions.  The process of establishing standards across the K-college curriculum was too overwhelming and daunting for anyone to figure out.  I was amazed by the comparison with the current state of education.  Today’s education journals are publishing articles that provide the same assessment.

In 2000, the Carnegie group asked three key questions that we are still asking today:

• Are schools, colleges, and universities preparing their students to function effectively in a global society in which time and space no longer insulate the nations, peoples, and markets of the world?
• Do U.S. citizens understand enough of the world beyond our national borders to evaluate information about international and global issues and make sound judgments about them?
• Is education in the United States preparing Americans for sustained involvement in an interdependent world?

In 50 First Dates Henry finally convinces Lucy’s father to allow him to create a video for Lucy to watch every day.  The video teaches Lucy about her accident and the important people and events in her life.  Every morning she is encouraged by Henry and her father to ask as many questions as she needs to understand and accept the truth about herself and her relationships. The video helps Lucy accept what is real about her past and present, but it also helps her move forward in her relationships with people like Henry.  I think the U.S. needs a reminder video about its desire to go global.  Maybe this way we can accept the realities of our interconnected world and fully engage in a relationship with it.  Or perhaps we are not really as interested as we think?

My maternal grandmother’s family came to America on the first Mayflower voyage.  I first heard the term “American rugged individualism” from her husband, my grandfather.   He would have such an “atta boy” look of pride on his face when he heard about young men who, like he and his Scottish brothers, had moved away from home and independently settled a piece of land, started a family and made their way in the world.  At family reunions the Yeaton boys would recount fishing and farming stories and compare their big and shiny American-made vehicles.  Even my own father’s humble story is a classic -”pulled himself up by the bootstraps despite all odds”- kind of tale.  His story is one of a boy from a Portuguese immigrant family in poverty and desperation who ultimately became a successful member of the middle class.  He claims the catalyst for change was competitive sports and education.

Some would say my family’s legacy is the example of the “American Dream”.  “America” is a nation which values independence, self-reliance and competition.  “Rugged individualism” seems to describe more than the personalities of the early settlers in the United States.  Instead it seems to describe our national sense of who we are, what we value and what we believe.   Values and beliefs affect what we do and ultimately what we teach the next generation.  When it comes to global education, will our core values of independence, self-reliance and competition restrain American leaders and its citizens from joining in a system like the Bologna Process? Global education, like intercultural communication, hopes to find better ways to promote cultural understanding and global awareness.

Besides having “studies” classes, the U.S., on the whole, does little to really prepare students to communicate or participate cross-culturally.  It has not yet placed a huge emphasis on being culturally and globally aware.  Is this a problem?

According to some intercultural communication research, our skills and abilities, at this point, may land us a global education report card that would read:  Doesn’t Play Well with Others.

A summary of a study by Seo, Miller, Schmidt, and Sowa in 2008

Nearly 150 students participated in the eight-week online chemistry course (83 from the U.S.; 59 from Hong Kong). A large component of the course was an online discussion. Students were divided into groups, required to read course materials, and asked to participate in a threaded discussions (in English) on WebCT.  The results indicate significant cultural differences between the United States and Hong Kong.   These differences were most clearly expressed by students in their communication, participation, and satisfaction.

The Results of the Study:

Participation:  All Hong Kong students participated regularly in the discussion.  On the whole, they joined the discussion and commented nearly twice as much as U.S. students.  Some U.S students posted several times while others failed to or forgot to post.  U.S. students complained about the requirements and deadlines.  H.K. students did not write any complaints.   The students from Hong Kong summarized their groups’ ideas.  They tried to “integrate opinions and create a uniform group perspective on a given topic” (pg.3-4.)  U.S. students simply posted their individual thoughts and ideas.

Communication: U.S. students disagreed more and disagreed more harshly than H.K students.  For example, H.K. students said:  “I can see your point, but I think global warming is the most important thing that we have to pay attention to.”  “Someone expressed that the factories need to control their pollutants, but I want to point out that without many of the factories and their way of production we would lack many resources.”  This is compared to U.S. students who commented:  “I have to disagree with some of the assumptions that you have made about global warming, which you clearly based off of this one article alone.”  “She said that the air quality is improving.  I was wondering where she learned this.  It is completely wrong.” Also H.K. students sought interaction and invited discussion, whereas U.S. students used language that closed further discussion. For example students from Hong Kong said:  “Do you think so?”  Or, “Could you suggest other methods…? U.S. students’ statements were written as complete fact:  “Anyway those are my feelings on this discussion.  I strongly doubt…” (pg.3-4)

Satisfaction with Discussion Groups: When asked what they liked about the discussion U.S. students liked that it allowed them to express their own views.  H.K. students liked reading other students’ views and having the opportunity to share ideas with others.  They also mentioned making new friends and getting to know others and their thoughts.

When it comes to education, I believe the individualism/collectivism dimension is the most important for explaining cross-cultural differences.  Do you agree?

Helpful definitions and concepts:

• American Culture – “In American culture…the normative imperative of the self is to become independent from others, and to discover and express one’s internal wishes or unique attributes.“  “… American culture is referred to as a more-or-less integrated whole composed of abilities, preferences, feeling states, and attributes.”  “Individuals with this view of the self are found to ‘continually identify these attributes and then insure that they are persistently expressed and affirmed.’” (Zhong, pg. 112)
• Culture – “Culture is the ‘collective mental programming’ shared by individuals with other members of their nation or group, but not with the members of other nations or groups.“
• Cultural Dimensions/Perspectives – psychological dimensions, or value constructs, which can be used to describe a specific culture. These are often used in intercultural communication/cross-cultural-based research (definition summary, Wikipedia).  Hofstede names five key dimensions, one of which is individual vs. collective.
• Individual Perspective – values personal achievement, goals and gains.  It promotes self-reliance, competition, self-interest and pleasure.  It is independent, yet demanding of others.
• Collective Perspective – values harmony, cooperation and a sense of belonging.  It promotes reciprocation, concern and protection of others and their interests, and a respect for tradition.  Within collectivism goals and achievements are shared by the group. It maintains rigid social frameworks.
• Education – “Services, such as education, that involve high degrees of human interaction can be greatly influenced by cultural elements.” (Frankel, et.al.,pg.34) “… culture is transmitted from one generation to the next; the values and expectations of education are transmitted and reconstructed via student and teacher participation in school settings.” (Frankel, et al., pg. 40)

Is the Collective Perspective Better for Global Education than the Individual Perspective?  What do you think?

A Helpful Comparison

Frankel, Swanson and Sagan provide a helpful chart which summarizes the differences between individualism and collectivism perspectives as it relates to education issues.

More Questions

The Bologna Process aims to have students and professors from different cultures sharing ideas, appreciating the unique skills and perspectives of others, and hopefully, learning from the best each has to offer.  If global education consortiums like the Bologna Process rely on the fact that students will share a more collective perspective, how will the U.S. students succeed?  Do terms like global, intercultural and multinational always imply a need for collective approaches?  Are there ways to add multicultural value to the education we provide in the U.S. without losing our core values?  Or is it simply the case that Reagan is correct and other nations are making a crucial mistake by giving up academic freedom to groups like the Bologna Process? In doing so are they crowning a new multinational royal family of educators whose scepter we may one day resent?

The hard evidence of totalitarian rule has caused in mankind an uprising of the intellect and will. Whether it is the growth of the new schools of economics in America or England or the appearance of the so-called new philosophers in France, there is one unifying thread running through the intellectual work of these groups — rejection of the arbitrary power of the state, the refusal to subordinate the rights of the individual to the superstate, the realization that collectivism stifles all the best human impulses. –Ronald Reagan

Suggested Reading List:

• BU, Z. (2008). Thinking along the Cultural Line: A Cross-Cultural Inquiry of Ethical Decision Making among U.S. and Chinese Journalism Students. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 63(2), 110-126. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.
• Frankel, R., Swanson, S., & Sagan, M. (2005). The Role of Individualism/Collectivism in Critical Classroom Encounters: A Four Country Study. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 17(1/2), 33-59. doi:10.1300/J066v17n01_03.
• GOH, J. (2009). Globalization’s culture consequences of MBA education across Australia and Singapore: sophistry or truth?. Higher Education, 58(2), 131-155. doi:10.1007/s10734-008-9186-5.
• Hofstede, G. (1983). NATIONAL CULTURES IN FOUR DIMENSIONS. International Studies of Management & Organization, 13(1/2), 46-74. Retrieved from Business Source Complete database.
• Hofstede, Geert H.  Cultures and Organizations:  Software of the Mind.  London; New York:  McGraw-Hill, 1991
• Hofstede, Geert H.  Cultures Consequences:  Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations across Nations.  Thousand Oaks, Calif. :Sage Publications, 2001.
• Seo, K., Miller, P., Schmidt, C., & Sowa, P. (2008). Creating Synergy between Collectivism and Individualism in Cyberspace: A Comparison of Online Communication Patterns between Hong Kong and U.S. Students. Journal of Intercultural Communication, (18), 4. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.

In part one, I want to introduce the current leaders in global education in Europe and Africa and ask whether or not America should follow the trends they are setting. In this segment I rely on information from two articles in particular: Hans Pechar’s article in the Canadian Journal of Higher Education titled, “The Bologna Process” A European Response to Global Competition in Higher Education (2007) and Pam Watson’s Regional Themes and Global Means in Supra-national Higher Education Policy (2009). A complete list of works will be available at the end of each segment.

The Background Story:

After a visit with Natascha van Huttum-Janssen, an educational researcher at the University of Minho in Portugal who spoke at Cedarville last week, I became more curious about what it means for education to go global. We had opportunities to speak formally and informally. In both settings I heard her talk about the need for students to have fully immersed cross-cultural experiences. She spoke of her own children’s ability to speak three languages. She emphasized the importance of getting involved in the larger conversation about education that is happening around the world. In her presentation and some recommended readings, she mentions the Bologna Process, a macro-policy for higher education in Europe. Shamefully, I was not familiar with it, although it was, quite possibly, one of the most crucial developments in higher education in my lifetime. I decided it was time to enter the discussion about education going global. I started by learning about the Bologna Process.

The Bologna Process evolved over ten years ago as a result of goals established by the European Union and the initiative of the Sorbonne Declaration. Both desired “coherence and compatibility” among the universities in Europe. European educational leaders believed a unified process would both enhance student learning and make European universities more sought after internationally (Pechar, pg. 111). Hans Pechar, from the University of Klagenfurt, efficiently summarizes the goals of the Bologna Process in his article, “The Bologna Process” A European Response to Global Competition in Higher Education:

The objectives of the Bologna Process include the creation of a common framework of internationally understandable and comparable degrees, undergraduate and graduate levels of study in all countries, a European approach to quality assurance, and a European Credit Transfer System (ECTS). The overarching aim is to create a coherent and transparent European Higher Education Area with compatible and high quality systems that will make European higher education more attractive to the rest of the world.

In short, this means that most of the countries in Europe are setting common standards that are higher than ever, making higher education more accessible to students, and providing students and their universities with cultural exchanges that make them politically and economically more marketable. In fact the IAU, International Association of Universities, conducted a survey in 2006 showing that Europe “was identified as the most favoured region for future internationalization activities by all six world regions.” (H. Pechar, p. 121). Asia Pacific was ranked second and North America third. Although it has not been named as one of the leaders, Africa also has caught the collaborative vision with their Arusha Convention and African Union’s Harmonisation Policy (Watson, pg. 420).

What do you think? Is America keeping up? Should we?

Next Segment: Do American core values such as individualism, self-reliance, and competition keep us from joining Europe and Africa in their cooperative organizations or creating similar ones?

Suggested Reading:
(2008, Fall2008). Bologna Plus: The Liberal Education Advantage. Liberal Education, pp. 2-3. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=35690578&site=ehost-live&scope=site

(2008). NEWS AND INFORMATION. Liberal Education, 94(2), 5. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=32143475&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Doh, P. (2008). Global Integration Policies Versus Institutional Dynamics of Higher Education. European Education, 40(1), 78-96. doi:10.2753/EUE1056-4934400106.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=34511531&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Hartmann, E. (2008). Bologna goes global: a new imperialism in the making?. Globalisation, Societies & Education, 6(3), 207-220. doi:10.1080/14767720802343308.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=34716553&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Pechar, H. (2007). “The Bologna Process” A European Response to Global Competition in Higher Education. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 37(3), 109-125. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=31833519&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Schneider, C. (2007, Winter2007). It’s Not Just the Economy…. Liberal Education, pp. 2-3. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=24424519&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Watson, P. (2009). Regional themes and global means in supra-national higher education policy. Higher Education, 58(3), 419-438. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9203-3.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=43540624&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Zgaga, P. (2003). The External Dimension of the Bologna Process: Higher Education in South East Europe and the European Higher Education Area in a Global World Reforming the Universities of South East Europe in|sq| View of the Bologna Process. Higher Education in Europe, 28(3), 251. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=10917378&site=ehost-live&scope=site

• Symbols and icons do not mean the same thing to everyone- As professors we must be careful, thoughtful, and self-aware. We often conduct our pedagogical business without taking time to reflect on our own biases. We all have them, and that is not wrong. But it is wrong to approach a class of students with insensitivity to their interpretation of our words, actions, and illustrations. Inclusive and culturally sensitive professors analyze the images they use in Power Point and the stories they tell with careful consideration. We must educate ourselves on what images and phrases have negative connotations for members of our class.
Things We Need To Do:
• Translate – We must never assume our students speak our language or register. We need to explain intentionally how we approach teaching and learning. This equips students with proper gauges and filters for better comprehension. We must give clear examples and use rubrics when giving assignments. This helps students understand what we expect and creates concrete action items from our verbal instructions.
• Think stretch forward rather than step forward. – We professors cannot assume we will succeed in getting a student from a unique population to buy into what we are asking them to do right away. Most humans resist change of any kind, especially when what is being asked of them is unfamiliar. When students see our course assignments and activities as hoops rather than learning opportunities, motivation drops even more. Therefore, we cannot expect a big leap of faith. Rather, we must encourage students to trust us. We must go out of our way to understand and sympathize with our students while we encourage them to try something new or to approach things in a different way. The best way to do this is to start early by asking students what they are trepidatious about, help them set reasonable small goals, and use forms of assessment that encourage continuous improvement. Professors who truly integrate in the classroom present opportunities for growth and nurture the learning process. Nurturing means helping the student start with his own place of reference and leading him toward the benchmark. Our challenge is to keep the standards and objectives rigorous, but be open to new ways of getting there.
• Start with strengths, (yours and theirs), and teach toward the weaknesses – Good classroom practices involve student assessment, and effective classroom assessment starts with getting to know one’s students. What do they know and what do they need to know? When a professor asks these questions he or she will discover the strengths of the students. Starting with students’ strengths will provide the best foundation for academic achievement. As teachers, we must also reflect on our own particular strengths and maximize them early in the teacher/student relationship. We will build confidence and trust within our classrooms when we begin a course using activities, content and assignments that maximize the greatest numbers of strengths of the group. We can tackle the more challenging things after students gain foundational skills and knowledge. For example, start with a chapter or section the students are interested in or have the most knowledge about. We don’t have to start with Chapter 1. Besides, as Tom Angelo reminds us, a good professor presents ideas and concepts, not chapters of books.
(See the following resources in which Angelo offers some great tips on motivating students, great teaching strategies for diverse groups, and assessment techniques that establish prior knowledge in quick, non-threatening ways.)
Article 5

• Understand that there is a hidden curriculum and communicate cross-culturally – As a professor in a small Christian liberal arts university, I need to recognize that the traditions we uphold have deep roots, but may not be universal. Like many American universities, Cedarville tends to favor the linear mode of communication in which information is handed to listeners in a logical, step-by-step fashion. This style of communication and teaching is culturally European, stemming from early thinkers such as Aristotle. The typical American university course is taught linearly by a white middle-class Euro-American. The content is presented, often quite literally, in outline form and supported by clear and reasonable evidence. The problem is that our students include many from other cultural backgrounds or different learning styles who communicate in a more global, circular way. In some cultures, story-telling and parables are used to get a concept across. Professors communicate most effectively in the classroom when they understand the cultural differences within their audience. We must remember that teaching is not an informative speech; it can be a performance. We can act and give examples or scenarios to teach concepts. We can role play and provide stories that illustrate a point to communicate to a diverse audience. Geneva Gay recommends the following when using illustrations: First, use examples and stories from our own culture, then, include some from other cultures as well. These articles provide more insight on the topic: Article 6
Article 7
Article 8
• Use good, team-based learning practices –Professors may not have time to work with culturally diverse students as much as they would like. However, professors can provide the support a student needs by creating small groups. Students who work in groups have the support of their peers. Being connected and supported in small learning communities often makes up for the lack of one-on-one time with a professor. Culturally diverse students have opportunities to share their perspectives more openly in small groups. And peers often tutor one another when they have common interests in the outcome of required work.
A Thing We Need To Consider
As a Christian university, Cedarville has a wonderful opportunity to join the newly emerging counter-cultural movement that recognizes the connection between spirituality and multicultural education. The new generation is crying out for the academy to recognize that humans are spiritual creatures. This fact could be the very point of connection that allows us to be truly diverse. As Christians we are called to recognize the image of God in every student and develop that image in them so they might become what God created them to be. This assumes we are doing all we can to nurture the spirit of every individual in a way that is meaningful to them. We cannot do this if we do not employ inclusive teaching techniques or multicultural education.
An interesting article reminding us that this generation is crying out for multicultural and spiritual connectedness: Article 9
More from Geneva Gay:
Article 10
Article 11
Article 12
Article 13
Article 14
Expressively Black: The Cultural Basis of Ethnic Identity (Praeger, 1987)
Essence of Learning: Multicultural Education (Kappa Delta Pi, 1994)
Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Practice, & Research (Teachers College Press, 2000)
Editor of Becoming Multicultural Educators: Personal Journey Toward Professional Agency (Jossey-Bass, 2003).

Over the following years, I incorporated the two books written by Lisa, Sexuality and Holy Longing: Embracing Intimacy in a Broken World and Growing Strong Daughters into some of the sociology courses I taught. Her down-to-earth approach to family relationships revealed a wisdom that added richly to my classes. As her latest book hit the presses, I greatly anticipated another addition to my class reading list. However, as I started reading her book, I was amazed at the pointed application her writing had to my own personal life. After ten years as a full-time faculty, her words came at exactly the right point in my life. I resonated with her as she applied the sociological imagination through a biblical lens. Sociologists often see the world from a different perspective – we not only turn over every rock, we also examine the soil attached to the bottom of the rock! Lisa’s introspective gaze into the life of harried academics struck a deep cord inside me. As our faculty group of readers gathered in the fall of 2008 to choose a book to read, I suggested we read The Contented Soul. I had begun reading it and recognized that Lisa had a message that most of us needed to hear. It was a great privilege to spend the next 14 weeks working through this book one chapter at a time with my fellow colleagues. Each week brought new insights for each of us. Lisa’s writings made us each feel as if she was sitting in the midst of us and sharing her heart. Now we have the opportunity to have the author with us in person. I am so looking forward to Lisa visiting us here at Cedarville and filling in some of the questions we addressed as we read through her book. I believe that everyone who reads The Contented Soul will recognize that Lisa has put her finger on the pulse of many of us and saw the need we have in our lives to slow down and simplify. I encourage each of you to come meet my friend, read her words of wisdom, and be challenged to savor the life given to us by God.

When I returned to more serious research, I did find a very valuable resource for practical “how to” information about rubrics in a traditional book not a clever video. It was written by authors Dannelle D. Stevens and Antonia J. Levi and was entitled Introduction to Rubrics-An Assessment Tool to Save Grading Time, Convey Effective Feedback and Promote Student Learning. I agree with Adrielle Mitchell who writes,

I was thrilled to come across this book, as there are so few texts out there that address the use of rubrics in the college classroom. Stevens and Levi have done a laudable job of conveying the rationale for using such a grading tool in higher education, and have provided, generously, many outstanding examples. What I find most compelling is that it is so much more than an introduction: Stevens and Levi provide an effective blueprint for the creation of one’s own customized rubrics.

(Introduction to Rubrics. Stylus Publishing LLC. 2005. 2 Feb. 2002.)

This short read is well worth the relatively inexpensive cost of $17.95. It is one of the first, and one of the only, simple but good books on using rubrics in college courses. In just under 130 pages Stevens and Levi are able to provide a rationale for using rubrics, a guide to creating rubrics, several examples and variations of rubrics, and many ways to use them at the college level. The authors have been praised by university professors from all disciplines, as well as directors of teaching and learning centers all over the United States. These professionals report that their rubrics now produce the success that both the university and the student desire. Many love the student-centered approach and the ability to track and document student mastery of subjects. On the Stylus Publishing web page promoting Introduction to Rubrics Amy Driscoll from CSU is quoted as saying, “When departments or groups of faculty use rubrics as described in this book, they will indeed achieve the ‘academic currency’ sought today in higher education.”

I would like to do more here than promote a book. I would like to provide some clues for designing an effective rubric. Actually, the approach is not that different from learning to solve the Rubik’s cube. Learning a new skill, no matter what it is, involves taking relatively similar steps. I recognized this truth at a recent end-of-the-semester coffee break where professors proved their mastery of the infamous cube. As one of those professors tried to teach me the steps to solve the puzzle, I was reminded of the fact that learning to do something new is hard and requires following a plan, mastering small steps and building on them. William Arthur Ward summarizes it well when he says, “Four steps to achievement: Plan purposefully. Prepare prayerfully. Proceed positively. Pursue persistently.”

Steps for Developing a New Skill: In General-Specifically Related to Rubrics

1. Recognize the problems:

• A need for order and consistency – Students vary in ability, interest, and approach to assignments. Benchmarks are not clear and grading feels somewhat random and inconsistent.
• Incomplete results – The quality of work does not meet expectations and students are inconsistent in their thoroughness. They rarely have all the components complete.
• Takes too long – Professors write the same comments over and over again on student work. There are too many possible combinations of degrees of “rightness” on several components of an assignment to confidently assign a numeric or letter grade

2. Plan and Prepare for Success:

1. Reflect on the past
   • Ask yourself what you have done in the past? What worked, what didn’t, and why?
   • Meet with a mentor or colleague and ask what types of assignments have worked for them and ask to look at their rubrics if they have them.
   • Determine the most important aspects of this course. Ask “What does someone in this field do?” and “What would demonstrate mastery of each aspect?”
2. Reflect on Instructional Design
   • What resources will the students need?
   • What are my objectives and assignments going to be?
3. Reflect on each assignment: Activity Design
   • What are the best ways to get the students to engage in deep learning or reach high-level thinking?
   • What are the skills that the student will need to accomplish to prove mastery?
   • What terms and concepts will the student need to master?
4. Reflect on tasks
   • What are the tasks that accomplish the activity?
   • What are the smaller steps or tasks that build on one another to accomplish the big task
   • What is your highest expectation of mastery?
   • What would indicate failure of mastery?

3. Proceed by Implementing New Techniques

Find a format or layout to meet your needs and divide into four major areas:

• Record objective with the parameters for the desired outcome of the assignment
• Record divisions of major categories or dimensions and assign weighted percentages.
• Record subsequent tasks with descriptions as the building blocks to categorical tasks or dimension completion.
• Describe and assign the grading scale or levels of achievement.

4. Pursue Best Practices