English Writer 13 | - Freelance Writer
Mar 05, 2018 | #1
Abstract
At no other point in history have diverse demographics of human beings been in greater contact with one another. The age of cultural hegemony has gradually been displaced by a multicultural world. On the most basic of world preparation environments, classrooms are not free from cultural misunderstandings that can both affect the efficacy of the learning environment and at the same time hinder progress for organization diversity interaction when these people enter the global workforce. The purpose of this research is to use a case study of an English for Academic Purpose post secondary classroom to demonstrate how cultural misunderstandings in the classroom manifest. By framing the importance of multiculturalism in the classroom and theoretical adaptations of multiculturalism in the classroom through a review of related literature, this work will then seek to apply that information to the analysis of a diverse classroom through observational research tactics. By doing so, illustrations of how the current literature manifests in an actual diverse classroom can be added to the current body of research on the matter. With increased attention on the subject of diversity in policy making and education, having a large body of literature to demonstrate how theory is working in practice is of the utmost importance for greater social accord in human society. The results of the study indicate that cultural differences manifest misunderstandings based on subtle miscommunications present on the verbal (language) and non verbal levels. The research also suggests that the degree to which these misunderstandings occur in classrooms is quite high and the resolution of misunderstandings if difficult to access because identifying that a misunderstanding has occurred or that an efficacious resolution has occurred is often difficult.
Introduction
BACKGROUND
At no other point in history have diverse demographics of human beings been in greater contact with one another. The age of cultural hegemony has gradually been displaced by a multicultural world. Organizations, who are understanding the strength of having diverse workforces, are scrambling to diversify and the once localized marketplace has become an international theater. Much of this change can be traced to the age of information as ushered in by innovations in telecommunications. With the Internet and related devices, people and information are literally only a click away from each other. To equip people to operate efficaciously in this new environment, having educational environments that are sensitive to the needs of varying cultures and cognizant of the new world conditions is imperative. In reality, however, the change has been so rapid that socially people from diverse cultures have not been able to anticipate or respond to the complexities interacting with people from different backgrounds can cause. Interacting with people from diverse cultural backgrounds always carries with it the potential for unnecessary misunderstandings. On the most basic of preparation environments, classrooms are also not free from cultural misunderstandings that can both affect the efficacy of the learning environment and at the same time hinder progress for organization diversity interaction when these people enter the global workforce. While multicultural curriculum is important and great strides have been made in having more multicultural educational experiences by public and private institutions, the teacher remains at the fundamental level of the equation for crafting multicultural learning environments. Even the most culturally aware educator will likely have some experience with misunderstandings and much of the strength in multicultural educational paradigms is in how these issues are recognized and resolved. Based on this background information, a case study of a diverse classroom will be examined to identify how cultural differences can create misunderstandings.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this research is to use a case study of an English for Academic Purpose post secondary classroom to demonstrate how cultural misunderstandings in the classroom manifest. By framing the importance of multiculturalism in the classroom and theoretical adaptations of multiculturalism in the classroom through a review of related literature, this work will then seek to apply that information to the analysis of a diverse classroom through observational research tactics. By doing so, illustrations of how the current literature manifests in an actual diverse classroom can be added to the current body of research on the matter. With increased attention on the subject of diversity in policy making and education, having a large body of literature to demonstrate how theory is working in practice is of the utmost importance for greater social accord in human society.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Based on the purpose of the research as framed within the context of the available literature on the subject, the primary research question has been proposed, How do cultural differences create misunderstandings in the classroom. Other sub research questions related to this primary question include: (1) to what degree to cultural differences create misunderstandings, (2) how are misunderstandings being resolved, (3) does the present classroom environment seem equipped to deal with the misunderstandings and (4) what can be done to prevent misunderstandings from occurring in the future.
A DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS
The following terms necessitate defining for uniformity and proper framing of the research study. Though the research recognizes that these are not definitive universal definitions, they are sufficiently robust to serve as a focal point for the current discourse and beyond.
Cultural differences. Cultural differences can be identified as variations in attitudes, beliefs, manners and other elements that may develop from different cultural backgrounds. Cultural differences are often seen when people from two different backgrounds perceive the same event or stimuli differently. For example, a student from a Middle Eastern background may perceived the role of a teacher as different than how a student from the United States may view a teacher. With cultural differences comes the potential to gain different perspectives which can lead to strength in diversity for a given organization. On the negative end of the spectrum, cultural differences can lead to unintended misunderstandings.
Misunderstanding. A misunderstanding is formally defined by Merriam Webster as "A failure to understand something correctly...[or] A disagreement or quarrel" (p. 1). For the sake of this discourse, misunderstandings will primarily be framed within the context of unintended interpretations. For example, if a student smiled and nodded his head to a teacher from the United Kingdom, the teacher would likely perceive this based on their own cultural background as meaning the student understood what was being said and what the expectations were. In reality, the student may have been conveying confusion. This would be an example of an misunderstanding.
A Review of Related Literature
AN OVERVIEW
According to Konan, Chatard, Armand and Mugny, "Cultural differences in the effects of performance goals on achievement and in the effects of classroom performance goal structure on the subsequent adoption of personal performance goals" are an identifiable phenomenon in an increasingly global world (p. 230). To foster diversity in a classroom takes considerable effort on behalf of the teacher and the curriculum development. Fish identified that discovering diversity necessitates creativity, additional effort beyond the norm, diligence and courage by educators. In addition, the researcher identified the traditional context of the public school system as being less than enthusiastic for making adjustments for students with cultural differences (Fish). Education about cultural differences begins with the educator and this is acknowledged as being a prelude to work or the concept of the "real world" (Jones). In today's organizations, it can be stated that topics of race, culture and gender are very "burning" issues. Though there is a growing recognition in the business world that values diversity, like in education, there is far less training for how to do so in an efficacious manner. According to Eikenberry, only 35% of Western firms do cross cultural training of any type despite their global nature. When these issues are not dealt with by teachers, this trickles down to the student. In addition to fully serving all students in the classroom, it also keeps the students who are not in the minority isolated from developing the respect and toleration necessary to contribute effectively to a sustainable global society (Quezada & Romo). Simply treating all cultures with respect is a start, but it is not enough to foster a truly cultural diverse learning environment where misunderstandings will be avoided and a strong work environment for all will be present (Galanti).
IDENTIFYING DIFFERENCES
A number of important cultural differences can be seen in a culturally diverse classroom that can lead to misunderstandings. Among these differences include but are not limited to body language, gestures, dress, teacher's role perception, making mistakes, correcting mistakes, status, food/drink, gender roles, taboo topics, eye contact, silence, writing styles, interrupting and directness (Case). Typically misunderstandings can originate on any of these levels or combinations of these levels. In the most common level of misunderstanding comes verbal and non verbal communication. For non verbal communication, one's competence in the dominating language can lead to things being said incorrectly or taken out of context. Even in the context of learning a foreign language, fluency is not necessarily equitable to a strong understanding of non verbal communications. In one popular example, Thai people use the smile to indicate a number of meanings that do not directly translate into English culture (Staff). This can lead to communications breakdowns and conclusions that are incorrect on behalf of both parties in an information exchange. On a classroom level, it has been noted by the Carnegie Mellon Unviersity Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence that there is tremendous variation in English proficiency and familiarity with U.S. educational and cultural conventions by international students. International students often have not encountered the same challenged or will not respond to challenges the same way or necessarily in a predictable way from a Western perspective (Carnegie). Teacher Differences
As previously identified, the teacher is the first and most poignant position in the cross cultural paradigm of efficacious educational environments. Considerable differences can be seen even in classrooms who claim to be multicultural based on the perspective of that teacher and their respective background. In a study conducted by Curtis, Pisecco, Hamilton and Moore, cultural differences in how teachers viewed ADHD interventions for classroom management differed greatly from U.S. teachers to teachers in New Zealand. In this particular example, U.S. teachers were found to view pharmacological interventions more favorably than their New Zealand counterparts. This attitude is important because it demonstrates where the educators feel the burden of classroom management lies in these types of situations. The U.S. teachers sees it as a psychiatry issue and the New Zealand teacher sees it in a more social and classroom related manner. Neither is right, but both are very different perceptual paradigms. Often times, the innate perspectives of the teacher can influence the degree of expectations they place on students of varying cultures. As Cartledge, Singh and Gibson explained, "Students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are disproportionately identified for special education in the most restrictive placements" (p. 29). Whereas more proactive interventions would be much more beneficial for these types of students, educators are misunderstanding problems in second language proficiency as a learning disability, which is incorrect. Unfortunately, as Urdan discovered, the expectations in which a teacher places on a student can greatly impact that student's performance goals. Rather than high achievement expectations for certain cultural groups, as a result, low achievement expectations becomes the norm and contributes to social and societal inequity. To best assuage the current problem related to teacher centered misunderstandings, teachers have to adapt techniques to accommodate students with diverse backgrounds. The beginning steps of this necessitate teachers being aware of stereotypes, ethnocentrism and prejudice. Knowledge of cultural differences make those differences that manifest in the classroom easier to identify by educators.
STUDENT DIFFERENCES
The best way to understand student cultural manifestation differences in the classroom is through the context of expectations. What students expect from the teachers, the classroom and themselves can vary greatly from one situation to the next. In a case study of students from Taiwan and students from the U.S. in the same classroom, Niehoff, Turnely, Hsiu and Sheu identified examples of this phenomenon. For example, U.S. students expected low reliance on mandatory attendance and wanted a more informal classroom (Niehoff et al.). In addition, U.S. students expected professor's to be available after class and looked at educators as relative equals in the power dynamic continuum (Niehoff et al. ). Taiwanese students, in contrast, expected teachers to be available for consultation much less frequently than did their U.S. counterparts and they also indicated more reverence of a teacher as a power position (Niehoff et al.). Rather than seeing the educator as an equal, they saw them as a position of power and this translated into these students questioning grades and decisions far less often than their U.S. counterparts (Niehoff et al.).
While the Niehoff et al example looked at this perspective from a college environment, similar differences were found amongst Japanese and American 5th graders. According to Hamilton, Blumefeld, Phyllis, Akoh and Miura, Japanese student achievement norms were far more related to their respective aspirations than their American counterparts. As a result, it could be stated that the Japanese students were making more connections between what they were doing in the classroom and how they felt this would impact their future goals. Cultural perspective does translate into the world beyond classrooms. As identified in healthcare surveys, Aboul-Enein and Abou-Enein demonstrated how health care expectations differed among Middle Eastern people and Western people. Though there is danger in overgeneralization, Aboul-Enein and Abou-Enein state that there is enough similarities in people form certain regions that understanding and practices can be evolved to accommodate without running the risk of creating stereotypes and making the problem worse. Politics and Multicultural Education
While multicultural education practices is generally recognized to be important in a global world, many of the current policies being adapted are based as much on political distinctions as they are efficacious protocols based on research. Often times, the pull between efficacious educational practice within the multicultural paradigm puts students and teachers in the middle of a much larger issue (Rolstad). According to Seltzer, Frazier and Ricks
..attempts to introduce multiculturalism into the curriculum appear to be political responses, and efforts to infuse the ....educational curriculum with multiculturalism largely partisan activities engaging only those few who are committed to effecting significant educational and societal changes (p. 1).
Part of this debate and perceptual asymmetry comes from educational perspectives. For example, Fujimoto, Bahfen, Fermelis and Charmine outline categories of work outcomes as being emotional experiences, work attitudes, work dynamics and work behaviors. Whichever dimension a stakeholder places the most value would likely indicate where their position may be on multicultural education policy development. With considerable influence being placed on school accountability, educators and curriculum developers are scrambling to keep classrooms up to code with politics, which may or may not help to develop efficacious educational practices. From after school programs (Bardwell & Kincaid) to classroom management systems, sensitive cultural and political issues like race, class, gender, ethnicity, politics and sexual orientation are increasingly becoming part of the multicultural and diversity paradigm of society (Darvin). Teachers not longer have the luxury of not dealing with the issue of multiculturalism because it is happening in the classroom and in policy development and necessitating change that ranges from technological advances to everyday interactions with students.
Methods
ENVIRONMENT
This observation research study examined an English for Academic Purposes class for three weeks. During that time, the researcher sat in on the classes and observed and recorded the interactions between teacher and students and students with other students. Though the purpose of English for Academic Purposes is generally consistent at many post secondary institutions, each program does have intricacies. This particular program was designed to bring students to a level of English skills that would help them be successful in college courses. This course was designed for students who already had some background in English. The course had a total of 30 students enrolled from various backgrounds. While one non traditional student was from the United Kingdom and there to gain better proficiency in English based on his time away from school, the other students were all English as a Second Language (ESL) students from different areas. Though it was difficult to access all backgrounds based on varying attendance rates, students could generally be categorized as being of Latino descent, Indian descent, Middle Eastern descent and Asian descent.
IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS
To properly collect data, the researcher engaged in a observational task that examined interactions between all members in the class. The way in which these situations occurred, both in accord and misunderstanding, were recorded. In some situations, informal interviews were given to various students and the teacher in an effort to gain clarification of something that occurred. This was particularly important for when other languages were used to express information. After the data was collected, it was then categorized for trends so greater analysis could be fostered. These trends were then examined within the context of how they support, refute or convolute the previously published literature on the topic.
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
The related strengths of the research study are based on first hand observations of a multicultural environment. Rather than looking a issues from a theoretical or a political perspective, this classroom observation demonstrated what was actually happening beneath the umbrella of a much larger subject in practice. Weaknesses related to the study could be considered within the perspective of what degree this particular case study reflects the larger issue. The only way that any reliable speculation on this potential weakness could be made is by framing the results of the study within the context of the literature reviewed on the topic. Being an observational case study, there is also that researcher bias cannot be avoided to some degree. Based on the researcher's own cultural background it is possible that neutrality was not maintained at all times. While this is true to the respective study, it is true to virtually all case study analysis based on observational research. It is estimated by the researcher that the strengths outweigh the negatives to the extent that the study can be considered quite valid and a useful addition to the current body of literature that exists on the subject.
Results
DEMOGRAPHIC COMPOSITION
The teacher of the class could best be described as a British born female who was fluent in Spanish. She was not an ESL student, however, she indicated in a personal interview that she had been working with ESL students for over decade. When asked the degree to which she felt misunderstandings originated in the classroom based on cultural differences, she estimated that it happens quite frequently and that it may even be more frequent than that since many misunderstandings go unnoticed by the educator. Other students in the class consisted of students of Latino descent, Middle Eastern descent and Asian descent. Over half of the students could be considered of Asian descent, however, their Asian backgrounds differed between Chinese, Japanese and Thai descent. The Middle Eastern students were the next highly populated concentration and most of these students appeared to be Islamic. There were also students from India and Latin descent present in the classroom. The split between males and females was almost directly even and this was fairly consistent even amongst the different cultural groups.
STUDENT MISUNDERSTANDINGS
During the course of general interactions, there was very little observable student misunderstandings. These quantified exponentially when group work was required. In general interactions, the students naturally segregated themselves. When the teacher was not present in the classroom, students of similar cultural backgrounds tended to sit together and interact with one another often in their native tongue. During group work, however, the instructor split the group members up and forced them to work with people of different backgrounds. Even during these instances, in the case of a 5 person group that had two Chinese students, those students still typically gravitated toward one another. An observational overview of all the group tasks over the course of the time period revealed at least one or more misunderstanding that could be attributed to a cultural variation. These misunderstandings typically could be categorized as being of the verbal or non verbal communication variety. In some cases, considerable frustration between peer groups was noted. The frustration did not appear aggressive, but when group members were having trouble getting their point across, exasperation was evident. When I asked students about these disagreements, some groups were more open to their personal feelings than others. The Chinese group, in general, tended to internalize these conflicts more and seemed less interested in expressing their feelings or position to the researcher when approached.
TEACHER MISUNDERSTANDING OF STUDENT
During the course of the observational research, at least every other meeting of the class saw one obvious example of the teacher misunderstanding the student. In one particular example, a man of an undermined Middle Eastern background asked a question to the teacher. The teacher gave an answer and at the end asked the student if that "made sense to them." The student then made a non verbal gesture that was interpreted by the instructor as an affirmative response and she went on teaching. At the end of the class the researcher asked the student whether or not the question was answered adequately and he replied, "No, I still did not understand, I thought I made that clear and that the teacher would explain it later because she moved on.... I guessed that she felt it necessary to continue to teaching to make sure we covered all the material." In this particular example, culturally the student felt the non verbal gesture was of sufficient scope to indicate that he still did not understand. The teacher, in contrast, felt he did understand. He interpreted her moving on as being in the best interest of the whole and he was likely confused as to why she did not talk to him later about his issue.
STUDENT MISUNDERSTANDING OF TEACHER
In the previous example, both a student not understanding a teacher was illustrated and a teacher not understanding a student was illustrated. Students misunderstanding teachers was quite observable during the entire research study. It is estimated by the researcher based on further discourse at the conclusion of classes that student misunderstanding of the teacher happens far more than the teacher realizes or that was observable to the researcher. Most of this involved expectations. When the teacher asked a question or gave an assignment, it was often clear that the student was not always cognizant on what was being asked of them. In addition, some of the examples provided by the teacher to students in an effort to help clarify information through connections was regionally and culturally specific and thereby always lost to certain members of the group. In virtually every directive, it could be estimated that at least one student was somewhat unclear on what was being asked of them.
GENERAL ATTITUDES
There were some generalized attitudes that could be seen through observation of the group. The way in which these attitudes were interpreted did affect the way in which the teacher placed expectations on groups. For example, the Asian students placed a high degree of formality on education and the relationship between student and teacher. This was perceived by the educator as "taking the class more seriously" than some of the other groups. It appeared that the expectations of these students in terms of performance was higher from the teacher's perspective. It was also clear that this formal cultural perspective could be where the stereotype of the studious Asian student originates. Unfortunately, however, this generalization did not necessarily mean that other groups took their education less seriously. In the informal interviews that were conducted after class routinely, the researcher found very similar degrees of importance and attitudes toward the importance of education in the perspectives of all the cultural groups. Virtually all groups recognized or identified this class as being one of their most important.
Discussion
The case study conducted by the researcher identified a number of ways that cultural differences can create misunderstanding in the classroom. Most typically and concurrent with the review of literature was the way that language and non verbal protocols can lead to such misunderstandings. Looking at the sub-research questions in context of the study also provide critical details to the equation. Secondary research question (1) asked to what degree cultural differences create misunderstandings. Based on the selected case studies, it can be concluded that cultural differences contribute toward misunderstandings very frequently in multicultural classroom situations. In regards to secondary research question (2), how are misunderstandings being resolved, the answer is more complex. During the case study, misunderstandings were not always resolved because either one party was not aware a misunderstanding took place or one party was not in agreement that a resolution had occurred during an identified dispute. Since a great deal of personal perception is at play in this equation, pure observational research and even follow up questions were not sufficiently robust to make any type of reliable estimation as to how often misunderstandings were actually resolved to the expectations of both parties.
The third secondary research question asked whether or not the present classroom environment seemed equipped to deal with the misunderstandings that occur. Based on the dimensions outlined in the previous secondary research question, if the classroom environment was not equipped to see that misunderstandings have occurred or that resolution had or had not taken place, it can only be concluded that the present classroom environment was not equipped to deal with misunderstandings. This is considerably daunting as the teacher, the fundamental level of multicultural education, was both a decade veteran and proponent of multicultural understanding. She seemed aware of all of the most current research but was unable to translate those theories into practice in her own environment thus brining into question whether or not a single teacher within the larger cultural and political framework can create a truly efficacious multicultural classroom that eliminates misunderstandings. Minimizing misunderstandings, therefore, seems like a more realistic goal for educators and policy makers. The fourth secondary research question, which asked, what can be done to prevent misunderstandings from occurring in the future, is also complicated. At the present time, it is estimated by the researcher and based on literature available on the topic combined with this particular study that continued teacher education about multiculturalism and multicultural environments is still the best way to minimize misunderstandings. In addition, by having curriculum for these culturally aware teachers that compliments what is truly good classroom teaching habits, decisions for multicultural education can be based on efficacy rather than politics.
There are some identified issues that necessitate articulation for better understanding the results. Though this classroom was deemed ill equipped for solving cultural misunderstandings, it is possible that the teacher, though willing and seemingly culturally equipped, was not the best person for the job. To make a better estimation of this, the same study could be conducted with a teacher who was actually an ESL person themselves with a similar amount of experience and cultural understanding. If misunderstandings were limited and resolutions were plentiful, it is possible that teachers who have ESL experience in their personal lives beyond their professional lives may be better equipped for teaching in such environments. The present study also has a homogenous component. The classroom observed was designed for ESL students and 99% of the population in the classroom was ESL students. Future observational case studies on classrooms with heterogenous groupings of ESL and non ESL students would provide additional information that can better frame the results of this study. While this particular classroom is necessary for many students entering into college, it does go against the education protocol known as the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). Under the LRE, theorists suggest that students do best when they are in heterogenous groupings with various cultures, aptitudes and proactive interventions. This particular environment observed only had culturally diverse ESL students, which makes them bound one large similarity by omitting the entire majority group.
According to Cartlege, Singh and Gibson, placing students in restrictive environments gives these students the least access to general education curriculum and experience which could create further cultural divides rather than assuaging them. It is possible and cannot be removed from the equation that the entire notion of a English for Academic Purposes class is flawed. This theory is equally as reasonable as stating that a teacher who English was not their first language would be better equipped to relate to multicultural experiences than one who English is their first language. Neither the present research study or the literature reviewed when put into context of the study is accurately equipped to make such assumptions without further research into the matter being conducted.
References
Aboul-Enein, B. H. & Aboul- Enein, F. 2010. The cultural gap delivering health care services to Arab American populations in the United States. Journal of Cultural Diversity, 17(1), 20-23.
Bardwell, G., & Kincaid, E. 2005. A rationale for cultural awareness in the science classroom. The Science Teacher, 72(3), 32-35.
Brobeck, K. 2006. Classroom culture clash. Vanderbilt Peabody College. [Online]
Cartledge, G., Singh, A, Gibson, L. 2008. Practical behavior management techniques to close the accesibility gap for students who are culturally and linguistically diverse. Preventing School Failure, 52(3), 29-38.
Case, A. 2011. Important cultural differences in the classroom. Independent Online Resource Network for English Teachers. [Online]
Cultural differences. 2011. Health.
Curtis, D., Pisecco, S., Hamilton, R., & Moore, D. W. 2006. Teacher perceptions of classroom interventions for children with ADHD: A cross cultural comparison of teachers in the United States and New Zealand. School Psychology Quarterly, 21(2), 171-196.
Darvin, J., 2009. Cultural and political vignettes in the English Classroom: Problem posing, problem solving and the imagination. English Journal, 99(2), 55-60.
Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence 2010. Teaching in an increasingly multicultural setting: A guide for Faculty. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University. 1-26.
Eikenberry, K. 2000. Capitalize on cultural differences in your classroom. Tech Republic.
Fish. L. 2011. Building blocks: The first steps of creating a multicultural classroom. Ed Change
Fujimoto, Y., Bahfen, N. Fermelis, J. & Charmine, E. J. 2007. The global village: Online cross cultural communication and HRM. Cross Cultural Management, 14(1), 7-22.
Galanti, G. A. 2000. An introduction to cultural differences. Western Journal of Medicine, 172(5), 335-336.
Hamilton, V. L., Blumefeld, P., Phyllis, C., Akoh, H. & Miura, K. 2000. Credit and blame among American and Japanese children: Normative, cultural and individual differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(3), 442-451.
Harsis, D., & Kleiner, B. 1993. Managing and valuing diversity in the workplace. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 12(4), 6-7.
Jones, S. 2009. Incorporation cultural diversity in the classroom. Teachers of Color.
Konan, P., Chatard, A., Armand, S., & Mugny, G. 2010. Cultural diversity in the classroom and its effects on academic performance: A cross national perspective. Social Psychology, 41(4), 230-237.
Lehman-Wizing, S. 2001. Babbling our way to a new babel: Erasing the language barriers. The Futurist, 35(3), 16-23.
Merriam Webster. 2011. Misunderstanding. Merriam Webster Dictionary. [Online]
Niehoff, B., Turnley, W., Hsiu, J., & Sheu, C. 2001. Exploring cultural differences in classroom expectations of students from the United States and Taiwan. Journal of Education for Business, 76(5), 289-293. Quezada, R., & Romo, J. J. 2004. Multiculturalism, peace education and social justice in teacher education. Multiculturalism, 11(3), 2-11.
Quinn, A. E. 2001. Moving marginalized students inside the lines: Cultural differences in classrooms. English Journal, 90(4), 44-50.
Rolstad, K. 2000. The politics of multiculturalism and bilingual education: Students and teachers caught in the cross fire. Bilingual Research Journal, 24(1/2), 199-206.
Seltzer, R., Frazier, M., & Ricks, I. 1995. Multiculturalism, race and education. The Journal of ***** Education, 64(2), 124-125.
Staff Writer, 2007. Education reduces cross cultural misunderstanding of non verbal beahvior. Psyblog.
Sturz, D., & Kleiner, B. H. 2005. Effective management of cultural diversity in a classroom setting. International Journal, 24(5/6), 57-64.
Urdan, T. 2004. Predictors of academic self handicapping and achievement: Examining achievement goals, classroom goal structures and culture. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 251-264.
At no other point in history have diverse demographics of human beings been in greater contact with one another. The age of cultural hegemony has gradually been displaced by a multicultural world. On the most basic of world preparation environments, classrooms are not free from cultural misunderstandings that can both affect the efficacy of the learning environment and at the same time hinder progress for organization diversity interaction when these people enter the global workforce. The purpose of this research is to use a case study of an English for Academic Purpose post secondary classroom to demonstrate how cultural misunderstandings in the classroom manifest. By framing the importance of multiculturalism in the classroom and theoretical adaptations of multiculturalism in the classroom through a review of related literature, this work will then seek to apply that information to the analysis of a diverse classroom through observational research tactics. By doing so, illustrations of how the current literature manifests in an actual diverse classroom can be added to the current body of research on the matter. With increased attention on the subject of diversity in policy making and education, having a large body of literature to demonstrate how theory is working in practice is of the utmost importance for greater social accord in human society. The results of the study indicate that cultural differences manifest misunderstandings based on subtle miscommunications present on the verbal (language) and non verbal levels. The research also suggests that the degree to which these misunderstandings occur in classrooms is quite high and the resolution of misunderstandings if difficult to access because identifying that a misunderstanding has occurred or that an efficacious resolution has occurred is often difficult.
Introduction
BACKGROUND
At no other point in history have diverse demographics of human beings been in greater contact with one another. The age of cultural hegemony has gradually been displaced by a multicultural world. Organizations, who are understanding the strength of having diverse workforces, are scrambling to diversify and the once localized marketplace has become an international theater. Much of this change can be traced to the age of information as ushered in by innovations in telecommunications. With the Internet and related devices, people and information are literally only a click away from each other. To equip people to operate efficaciously in this new environment, having educational environments that are sensitive to the needs of varying cultures and cognizant of the new world conditions is imperative. In reality, however, the change has been so rapid that socially people from diverse cultures have not been able to anticipate or respond to the complexities interacting with people from different backgrounds can cause. Interacting with people from diverse cultural backgrounds always carries with it the potential for unnecessary misunderstandings. On the most basic of preparation environments, classrooms are also not free from cultural misunderstandings that can both affect the efficacy of the learning environment and at the same time hinder progress for organization diversity interaction when these people enter the global workforce. While multicultural curriculum is important and great strides have been made in having more multicultural educational experiences by public and private institutions, the teacher remains at the fundamental level of the equation for crafting multicultural learning environments. Even the most culturally aware educator will likely have some experience with misunderstandings and much of the strength in multicultural educational paradigms is in how these issues are recognized and resolved. Based on this background information, a case study of a diverse classroom will be examined to identify how cultural differences can create misunderstandings.PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this research is to use a case study of an English for Academic Purpose post secondary classroom to demonstrate how cultural misunderstandings in the classroom manifest. By framing the importance of multiculturalism in the classroom and theoretical adaptations of multiculturalism in the classroom through a review of related literature, this work will then seek to apply that information to the analysis of a diverse classroom through observational research tactics. By doing so, illustrations of how the current literature manifests in an actual diverse classroom can be added to the current body of research on the matter. With increased attention on the subject of diversity in policy making and education, having a large body of literature to demonstrate how theory is working in practice is of the utmost importance for greater social accord in human society.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Based on the purpose of the research as framed within the context of the available literature on the subject, the primary research question has been proposed, How do cultural differences create misunderstandings in the classroom. Other sub research questions related to this primary question include: (1) to what degree to cultural differences create misunderstandings, (2) how are misunderstandings being resolved, (3) does the present classroom environment seem equipped to deal with the misunderstandings and (4) what can be done to prevent misunderstandings from occurring in the future.
A DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS
The following terms necessitate defining for uniformity and proper framing of the research study. Though the research recognizes that these are not definitive universal definitions, they are sufficiently robust to serve as a focal point for the current discourse and beyond.
Cultural differences. Cultural differences can be identified as variations in attitudes, beliefs, manners and other elements that may develop from different cultural backgrounds. Cultural differences are often seen when people from two different backgrounds perceive the same event or stimuli differently. For example, a student from a Middle Eastern background may perceived the role of a teacher as different than how a student from the United States may view a teacher. With cultural differences comes the potential to gain different perspectives which can lead to strength in diversity for a given organization. On the negative end of the spectrum, cultural differences can lead to unintended misunderstandings.
Misunderstanding. A misunderstanding is formally defined by Merriam Webster as "A failure to understand something correctly...[or] A disagreement or quarrel" (p. 1). For the sake of this discourse, misunderstandings will primarily be framed within the context of unintended interpretations. For example, if a student smiled and nodded his head to a teacher from the United Kingdom, the teacher would likely perceive this based on their own cultural background as meaning the student understood what was being said and what the expectations were. In reality, the student may have been conveying confusion. This would be an example of an misunderstanding.
A Review of Related Literature
AN OVERVIEW
According to Konan, Chatard, Armand and Mugny, "Cultural differences in the effects of performance goals on achievement and in the effects of classroom performance goal structure on the subsequent adoption of personal performance goals" are an identifiable phenomenon in an increasingly global world (p. 230). To foster diversity in a classroom takes considerable effort on behalf of the teacher and the curriculum development. Fish identified that discovering diversity necessitates creativity, additional effort beyond the norm, diligence and courage by educators. In addition, the researcher identified the traditional context of the public school system as being less than enthusiastic for making adjustments for students with cultural differences (Fish). Education about cultural differences begins with the educator and this is acknowledged as being a prelude to work or the concept of the "real world" (Jones). In today's organizations, it can be stated that topics of race, culture and gender are very "burning" issues. Though there is a growing recognition in the business world that values diversity, like in education, there is far less training for how to do so in an efficacious manner. According to Eikenberry, only 35% of Western firms do cross cultural training of any type despite their global nature. When these issues are not dealt with by teachers, this trickles down to the student. In addition to fully serving all students in the classroom, it also keeps the students who are not in the minority isolated from developing the respect and toleration necessary to contribute effectively to a sustainable global society (Quezada & Romo). Simply treating all cultures with respect is a start, but it is not enough to foster a truly cultural diverse learning environment where misunderstandings will be avoided and a strong work environment for all will be present (Galanti).
IDENTIFYING DIFFERENCES
A number of important cultural differences can be seen in a culturally diverse classroom that can lead to misunderstandings. Among these differences include but are not limited to body language, gestures, dress, teacher's role perception, making mistakes, correcting mistakes, status, food/drink, gender roles, taboo topics, eye contact, silence, writing styles, interrupting and directness (Case). Typically misunderstandings can originate on any of these levels or combinations of these levels. In the most common level of misunderstanding comes verbal and non verbal communication. For non verbal communication, one's competence in the dominating language can lead to things being said incorrectly or taken out of context. Even in the context of learning a foreign language, fluency is not necessarily equitable to a strong understanding of non verbal communications. In one popular example, Thai people use the smile to indicate a number of meanings that do not directly translate into English culture (Staff). This can lead to communications breakdowns and conclusions that are incorrect on behalf of both parties in an information exchange. On a classroom level, it has been noted by the Carnegie Mellon Unviersity Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence that there is tremendous variation in English proficiency and familiarity with U.S. educational and cultural conventions by international students. International students often have not encountered the same challenged or will not respond to challenges the same way or necessarily in a predictable way from a Western perspective (Carnegie). Teacher Differences
As previously identified, the teacher is the first and most poignant position in the cross cultural paradigm of efficacious educational environments. Considerable differences can be seen even in classrooms who claim to be multicultural based on the perspective of that teacher and their respective background. In a study conducted by Curtis, Pisecco, Hamilton and Moore, cultural differences in how teachers viewed ADHD interventions for classroom management differed greatly from U.S. teachers to teachers in New Zealand. In this particular example, U.S. teachers were found to view pharmacological interventions more favorably than their New Zealand counterparts. This attitude is important because it demonstrates where the educators feel the burden of classroom management lies in these types of situations. The U.S. teachers sees it as a psychiatry issue and the New Zealand teacher sees it in a more social and classroom related manner. Neither is right, but both are very different perceptual paradigms. Often times, the innate perspectives of the teacher can influence the degree of expectations they place on students of varying cultures. As Cartledge, Singh and Gibson explained, "Students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are disproportionately identified for special education in the most restrictive placements" (p. 29). Whereas more proactive interventions would be much more beneficial for these types of students, educators are misunderstanding problems in second language proficiency as a learning disability, which is incorrect. Unfortunately, as Urdan discovered, the expectations in which a teacher places on a student can greatly impact that student's performance goals. Rather than high achievement expectations for certain cultural groups, as a result, low achievement expectations becomes the norm and contributes to social and societal inequity. To best assuage the current problem related to teacher centered misunderstandings, teachers have to adapt techniques to accommodate students with diverse backgrounds. The beginning steps of this necessitate teachers being aware of stereotypes, ethnocentrism and prejudice. Knowledge of cultural differences make those differences that manifest in the classroom easier to identify by educators.
STUDENT DIFFERENCES
The best way to understand student cultural manifestation differences in the classroom is through the context of expectations. What students expect from the teachers, the classroom and themselves can vary greatly from one situation to the next. In a case study of students from Taiwan and students from the U.S. in the same classroom, Niehoff, Turnely, Hsiu and Sheu identified examples of this phenomenon. For example, U.S. students expected low reliance on mandatory attendance and wanted a more informal classroom (Niehoff et al.). In addition, U.S. students expected professor's to be available after class and looked at educators as relative equals in the power dynamic continuum (Niehoff et al. ). Taiwanese students, in contrast, expected teachers to be available for consultation much less frequently than did their U.S. counterparts and they also indicated more reverence of a teacher as a power position (Niehoff et al.). Rather than seeing the educator as an equal, they saw them as a position of power and this translated into these students questioning grades and decisions far less often than their U.S. counterparts (Niehoff et al.).
While the Niehoff et al example looked at this perspective from a college environment, similar differences were found amongst Japanese and American 5th graders. According to Hamilton, Blumefeld, Phyllis, Akoh and Miura, Japanese student achievement norms were far more related to their respective aspirations than their American counterparts. As a result, it could be stated that the Japanese students were making more connections between what they were doing in the classroom and how they felt this would impact their future goals. Cultural perspective does translate into the world beyond classrooms. As identified in healthcare surveys, Aboul-Enein and Abou-Enein demonstrated how health care expectations differed among Middle Eastern people and Western people. Though there is danger in overgeneralization, Aboul-Enein and Abou-Enein state that there is enough similarities in people form certain regions that understanding and practices can be evolved to accommodate without running the risk of creating stereotypes and making the problem worse. Politics and Multicultural Education
While multicultural education practices is generally recognized to be important in a global world, many of the current policies being adapted are based as much on political distinctions as they are efficacious protocols based on research. Often times, the pull between efficacious educational practice within the multicultural paradigm puts students and teachers in the middle of a much larger issue (Rolstad). According to Seltzer, Frazier and Ricks
..attempts to introduce multiculturalism into the curriculum appear to be political responses, and efforts to infuse the ....educational curriculum with multiculturalism largely partisan activities engaging only those few who are committed to effecting significant educational and societal changes (p. 1).
Part of this debate and perceptual asymmetry comes from educational perspectives. For example, Fujimoto, Bahfen, Fermelis and Charmine outline categories of work outcomes as being emotional experiences, work attitudes, work dynamics and work behaviors. Whichever dimension a stakeholder places the most value would likely indicate where their position may be on multicultural education policy development. With considerable influence being placed on school accountability, educators and curriculum developers are scrambling to keep classrooms up to code with politics, which may or may not help to develop efficacious educational practices. From after school programs (Bardwell & Kincaid) to classroom management systems, sensitive cultural and political issues like race, class, gender, ethnicity, politics and sexual orientation are increasingly becoming part of the multicultural and diversity paradigm of society (Darvin). Teachers not longer have the luxury of not dealing with the issue of multiculturalism because it is happening in the classroom and in policy development and necessitating change that ranges from technological advances to everyday interactions with students.
Methods
ENVIRONMENT
This observation research study examined an English for Academic Purposes class for three weeks. During that time, the researcher sat in on the classes and observed and recorded the interactions between teacher and students and students with other students. Though the purpose of English for Academic Purposes is generally consistent at many post secondary institutions, each program does have intricacies. This particular program was designed to bring students to a level of English skills that would help them be successful in college courses. This course was designed for students who already had some background in English. The course had a total of 30 students enrolled from various backgrounds. While one non traditional student was from the United Kingdom and there to gain better proficiency in English based on his time away from school, the other students were all English as a Second Language (ESL) students from different areas. Though it was difficult to access all backgrounds based on varying attendance rates, students could generally be categorized as being of Latino descent, Indian descent, Middle Eastern descent and Asian descent.
IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS
To properly collect data, the researcher engaged in a observational task that examined interactions between all members in the class. The way in which these situations occurred, both in accord and misunderstanding, were recorded. In some situations, informal interviews were given to various students and the teacher in an effort to gain clarification of something that occurred. This was particularly important for when other languages were used to express information. After the data was collected, it was then categorized for trends so greater analysis could be fostered. These trends were then examined within the context of how they support, refute or convolute the previously published literature on the topic.
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
The related strengths of the research study are based on first hand observations of a multicultural environment. Rather than looking a issues from a theoretical or a political perspective, this classroom observation demonstrated what was actually happening beneath the umbrella of a much larger subject in practice. Weaknesses related to the study could be considered within the perspective of what degree this particular case study reflects the larger issue. The only way that any reliable speculation on this potential weakness could be made is by framing the results of the study within the context of the literature reviewed on the topic. Being an observational case study, there is also that researcher bias cannot be avoided to some degree. Based on the researcher's own cultural background it is possible that neutrality was not maintained at all times. While this is true to the respective study, it is true to virtually all case study analysis based on observational research. It is estimated by the researcher that the strengths outweigh the negatives to the extent that the study can be considered quite valid and a useful addition to the current body of literature that exists on the subject.
Results
DEMOGRAPHIC COMPOSITION
The teacher of the class could best be described as a British born female who was fluent in Spanish. She was not an ESL student, however, she indicated in a personal interview that she had been working with ESL students for over decade. When asked the degree to which she felt misunderstandings originated in the classroom based on cultural differences, she estimated that it happens quite frequently and that it may even be more frequent than that since many misunderstandings go unnoticed by the educator. Other students in the class consisted of students of Latino descent, Middle Eastern descent and Asian descent. Over half of the students could be considered of Asian descent, however, their Asian backgrounds differed between Chinese, Japanese and Thai descent. The Middle Eastern students were the next highly populated concentration and most of these students appeared to be Islamic. There were also students from India and Latin descent present in the classroom. The split between males and females was almost directly even and this was fairly consistent even amongst the different cultural groups.
STUDENT MISUNDERSTANDINGS
During the course of general interactions, there was very little observable student misunderstandings. These quantified exponentially when group work was required. In general interactions, the students naturally segregated themselves. When the teacher was not present in the classroom, students of similar cultural backgrounds tended to sit together and interact with one another often in their native tongue. During group work, however, the instructor split the group members up and forced them to work with people of different backgrounds. Even during these instances, in the case of a 5 person group that had two Chinese students, those students still typically gravitated toward one another. An observational overview of all the group tasks over the course of the time period revealed at least one or more misunderstanding that could be attributed to a cultural variation. These misunderstandings typically could be categorized as being of the verbal or non verbal communication variety. In some cases, considerable frustration between peer groups was noted. The frustration did not appear aggressive, but when group members were having trouble getting their point across, exasperation was evident. When I asked students about these disagreements, some groups were more open to their personal feelings than others. The Chinese group, in general, tended to internalize these conflicts more and seemed less interested in expressing their feelings or position to the researcher when approached.
TEACHER MISUNDERSTANDING OF STUDENT
During the course of the observational research, at least every other meeting of the class saw one obvious example of the teacher misunderstanding the student. In one particular example, a man of an undermined Middle Eastern background asked a question to the teacher. The teacher gave an answer and at the end asked the student if that "made sense to them." The student then made a non verbal gesture that was interpreted by the instructor as an affirmative response and she went on teaching. At the end of the class the researcher asked the student whether or not the question was answered adequately and he replied, "No, I still did not understand, I thought I made that clear and that the teacher would explain it later because she moved on.... I guessed that she felt it necessary to continue to teaching to make sure we covered all the material." In this particular example, culturally the student felt the non verbal gesture was of sufficient scope to indicate that he still did not understand. The teacher, in contrast, felt he did understand. He interpreted her moving on as being in the best interest of the whole and he was likely confused as to why she did not talk to him later about his issue.
STUDENT MISUNDERSTANDING OF TEACHER
In the previous example, both a student not understanding a teacher was illustrated and a teacher not understanding a student was illustrated. Students misunderstanding teachers was quite observable during the entire research study. It is estimated by the researcher based on further discourse at the conclusion of classes that student misunderstanding of the teacher happens far more than the teacher realizes or that was observable to the researcher. Most of this involved expectations. When the teacher asked a question or gave an assignment, it was often clear that the student was not always cognizant on what was being asked of them. In addition, some of the examples provided by the teacher to students in an effort to help clarify information through connections was regionally and culturally specific and thereby always lost to certain members of the group. In virtually every directive, it could be estimated that at least one student was somewhat unclear on what was being asked of them.
GENERAL ATTITUDES
There were some generalized attitudes that could be seen through observation of the group. The way in which these attitudes were interpreted did affect the way in which the teacher placed expectations on groups. For example, the Asian students placed a high degree of formality on education and the relationship between student and teacher. This was perceived by the educator as "taking the class more seriously" than some of the other groups. It appeared that the expectations of these students in terms of performance was higher from the teacher's perspective. It was also clear that this formal cultural perspective could be where the stereotype of the studious Asian student originates. Unfortunately, however, this generalization did not necessarily mean that other groups took their education less seriously. In the informal interviews that were conducted after class routinely, the researcher found very similar degrees of importance and attitudes toward the importance of education in the perspectives of all the cultural groups. Virtually all groups recognized or identified this class as being one of their most important.
Discussion
The case study conducted by the researcher identified a number of ways that cultural differences can create misunderstanding in the classroom. Most typically and concurrent with the review of literature was the way that language and non verbal protocols can lead to such misunderstandings. Looking at the sub-research questions in context of the study also provide critical details to the equation. Secondary research question (1) asked to what degree cultural differences create misunderstandings. Based on the selected case studies, it can be concluded that cultural differences contribute toward misunderstandings very frequently in multicultural classroom situations. In regards to secondary research question (2), how are misunderstandings being resolved, the answer is more complex. During the case study, misunderstandings were not always resolved because either one party was not aware a misunderstanding took place or one party was not in agreement that a resolution had occurred during an identified dispute. Since a great deal of personal perception is at play in this equation, pure observational research and even follow up questions were not sufficiently robust to make any type of reliable estimation as to how often misunderstandings were actually resolved to the expectations of both parties.
The third secondary research question asked whether or not the present classroom environment seemed equipped to deal with the misunderstandings that occur. Based on the dimensions outlined in the previous secondary research question, if the classroom environment was not equipped to see that misunderstandings have occurred or that resolution had or had not taken place, it can only be concluded that the present classroom environment was not equipped to deal with misunderstandings. This is considerably daunting as the teacher, the fundamental level of multicultural education, was both a decade veteran and proponent of multicultural understanding. She seemed aware of all of the most current research but was unable to translate those theories into practice in her own environment thus brining into question whether or not a single teacher within the larger cultural and political framework can create a truly efficacious multicultural classroom that eliminates misunderstandings. Minimizing misunderstandings, therefore, seems like a more realistic goal for educators and policy makers. The fourth secondary research question, which asked, what can be done to prevent misunderstandings from occurring in the future, is also complicated. At the present time, it is estimated by the researcher and based on literature available on the topic combined with this particular study that continued teacher education about multiculturalism and multicultural environments is still the best way to minimize misunderstandings. In addition, by having curriculum for these culturally aware teachers that compliments what is truly good classroom teaching habits, decisions for multicultural education can be based on efficacy rather than politics.
There are some identified issues that necessitate articulation for better understanding the results. Though this classroom was deemed ill equipped for solving cultural misunderstandings, it is possible that the teacher, though willing and seemingly culturally equipped, was not the best person for the job. To make a better estimation of this, the same study could be conducted with a teacher who was actually an ESL person themselves with a similar amount of experience and cultural understanding. If misunderstandings were limited and resolutions were plentiful, it is possible that teachers who have ESL experience in their personal lives beyond their professional lives may be better equipped for teaching in such environments. The present study also has a homogenous component. The classroom observed was designed for ESL students and 99% of the population in the classroom was ESL students. Future observational case studies on classrooms with heterogenous groupings of ESL and non ESL students would provide additional information that can better frame the results of this study. While this particular classroom is necessary for many students entering into college, it does go against the education protocol known as the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). Under the LRE, theorists suggest that students do best when they are in heterogenous groupings with various cultures, aptitudes and proactive interventions. This particular environment observed only had culturally diverse ESL students, which makes them bound one large similarity by omitting the entire majority group.
According to Cartlege, Singh and Gibson, placing students in restrictive environments gives these students the least access to general education curriculum and experience which could create further cultural divides rather than assuaging them. It is possible and cannot be removed from the equation that the entire notion of a English for Academic Purposes class is flawed. This theory is equally as reasonable as stating that a teacher who English was not their first language would be better equipped to relate to multicultural experiences than one who English is their first language. Neither the present research study or the literature reviewed when put into context of the study is accurately equipped to make such assumptions without further research into the matter being conducted.
References
Aboul-Enein, B. H. & Aboul- Enein, F. 2010. The cultural gap delivering health care services to Arab American populations in the United States. Journal of Cultural Diversity, 17(1), 20-23.
Bardwell, G., & Kincaid, E. 2005. A rationale for cultural awareness in the science classroom. The Science Teacher, 72(3), 32-35.
Brobeck, K. 2006. Classroom culture clash. Vanderbilt Peabody College. [Online]
Cartledge, G., Singh, A, Gibson, L. 2008. Practical behavior management techniques to close the accesibility gap for students who are culturally and linguistically diverse. Preventing School Failure, 52(3), 29-38.
Case, A. 2011. Important cultural differences in the classroom. Independent Online Resource Network for English Teachers. [Online]
Cultural differences. 2011. Health.
Curtis, D., Pisecco, S., Hamilton, R., & Moore, D. W. 2006. Teacher perceptions of classroom interventions for children with ADHD: A cross cultural comparison of teachers in the United States and New Zealand. School Psychology Quarterly, 21(2), 171-196.
Darvin, J., 2009. Cultural and political vignettes in the English Classroom: Problem posing, problem solving and the imagination. English Journal, 99(2), 55-60.
Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence 2010. Teaching in an increasingly multicultural setting: A guide for Faculty. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University. 1-26.
Eikenberry, K. 2000. Capitalize on cultural differences in your classroom. Tech Republic.
Fish. L. 2011. Building blocks: The first steps of creating a multicultural classroom. Ed Change
Fujimoto, Y., Bahfen, N. Fermelis, J. & Charmine, E. J. 2007. The global village: Online cross cultural communication and HRM. Cross Cultural Management, 14(1), 7-22.
Galanti, G. A. 2000. An introduction to cultural differences. Western Journal of Medicine, 172(5), 335-336.
Hamilton, V. L., Blumefeld, P., Phyllis, C., Akoh, H. & Miura, K. 2000. Credit and blame among American and Japanese children: Normative, cultural and individual differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(3), 442-451.
Harsis, D., & Kleiner, B. 1993. Managing and valuing diversity in the workplace. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 12(4), 6-7.
Jones, S. 2009. Incorporation cultural diversity in the classroom. Teachers of Color.
Konan, P., Chatard, A., Armand, S., & Mugny, G. 2010. Cultural diversity in the classroom and its effects on academic performance: A cross national perspective. Social Psychology, 41(4), 230-237.
Lehman-Wizing, S. 2001. Babbling our way to a new babel: Erasing the language barriers. The Futurist, 35(3), 16-23.
Merriam Webster. 2011. Misunderstanding. Merriam Webster Dictionary. [Online]
Niehoff, B., Turnley, W., Hsiu, J., & Sheu, C. 2001. Exploring cultural differences in classroom expectations of students from the United States and Taiwan. Journal of Education for Business, 76(5), 289-293. Quezada, R., & Romo, J. J. 2004. Multiculturalism, peace education and social justice in teacher education. Multiculturalism, 11(3), 2-11.
Quinn, A. E. 2001. Moving marginalized students inside the lines: Cultural differences in classrooms. English Journal, 90(4), 44-50.
Rolstad, K. 2000. The politics of multiculturalism and bilingual education: Students and teachers caught in the cross fire. Bilingual Research Journal, 24(1/2), 199-206.
Seltzer, R., Frazier, M., & Ricks, I. 1995. Multiculturalism, race and education. The Journal of ***** Education, 64(2), 124-125.
Staff Writer, 2007. Education reduces cross cultural misunderstanding of non verbal beahvior. Psyblog.
Sturz, D., & Kleiner, B. H. 2005. Effective management of cultural diversity in a classroom setting. International Journal, 24(5/6), 57-64.
Urdan, T. 2004. Predictors of academic self handicapping and achievement: Examining achievement goals, classroom goal structures and culture. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 251-264.