Working Together - academicleadership.curtin.edu.au · Web viewAboriginal academic Professor Marcia Langton argues that the most difficult relationship is not between black and

Working Together: Module 3

Intercultural Skills for Facilitating Learning

Module 3 - Working Together

Intercultural Skills for Facilitating LearningContents

Introduction................................................................................................................................... 2

Learning Outcomes........................................................................................................................ 2

Module Topics................................................................................................................................2

Theories of Intercultural Teaching and Learning............................................................................2

Positioning and Reflexivity.............................................................................................................5

Racial Identity Models....................................................................................................................6

Practical Learning Activity.............................................................................................................. 8

Intercultural Competency in Educators........................................................................................13

Cultural Competency Continuum.................................................................................................14

Inhibitors to Effective Learning in the Intercultural Space...........................................................15

Practical Learning Activity............................................................................................................ 19

Getting Participants to Effectively Engage in the Intercultural Space...........................................19

References....................................................................................................................................21

Page 1


IntroductionWelcome to Intercultural Skills for Facilitating Learning

In this module we will be exploring intercultural skills and strategies for facilitating learning. The aim of this module is to explore how different theories and approaches from teaching and learning, as well as cultural and racial, studies can assist an intercultural leader to be more effective in an intercultural learning environment. The challenges (and possibilities) facing leaders in this setting are considerable. Factors include both the preconceptions and prior experiences of learners, and also how our own identity and positioning as educators can affect our interpretation of situations that may unfold in intercultural learning environments. Having a broad understanding of different theoretical approaches, as well as practiced based skills from lessons learnt by others working in intercultural learning environments are crucial in order to equip you to be an effective intercultural leader.

Learning Outcomes Examine theories of intercultural teaching and learning and recognise their application to a

range of intercultural contexts Evaluate own and other’s positions within racial identity models Apply a range of tools to facilitate student engagement in the intercultural space Examine principles underlying cultural safety, cultural security, cross-cultural awareness

and competency Explore and critically analyse theories and definitions of culture

Module TopicsThe key topics for this module focused on Intercultural Skills for Facilitating Learning are:

Theories of Intercultural Teaching and Learning Positioning and Reflexivity Racial Identity Models Intercultural Competency Continuum Inhibitors to Effective Learning in the Intercultural Space Getting Participants to Effectively Engage in the Intercultural Space

Theories of Intercultural Teaching and LearningMany pedagogical theories in the intercultural space have focussed on teaching and learning in international contexts or when foreign languages are a factor. There is much literature offering educators theoretical perspectives for working interculturally and cross-linguistically. Yet while foreign language teaching has been heavily influenced by linguistic theory, more recently, social change and globalisation has seen increasing focus on also explaining cultural factors in the intercultural space (Byram & Nichols, 2001). Attention on Indigenous cultural factors in post colonial settings and attempts to remove outcome disparities has also increased. In an increasingly

Page 2


multicultural world, intercultural competence is becoming an often required graduate and employee attribute. Understanding culture, and its effects on how individuals communicate and act, has become a crucial element for interpreting social behaviours. Liddicoat et al (2003) have developed a model for effectively infusing cultural dimensions into language teaching programs in Australia. While this model speaks directly to embedding cultural learning when language is also a factor, the overarching principles in this model and their relationship to teaching are directly applicable to an intercultural space where cultural exchange and learning is the focus rather than language differences per se (that is, everyone in the classroom speaks English fluently). The five overarching principles are:

1. Active construction

Educators do not transmit information about the culture directly, but provide opportunities for students to see the culture through meaningful language and dialogue in context.

Learners construct knowledge for themselves by engaging through dialogue. Teachers support students’ learning by providing diverse experiences of culture and by

asking questions that encourage learners to seek their own answers.

2. Making connections

Learning does not happen in a vacuum: connections need to be made for each student. It is important to create links for students between existing cultural knowledge and the

new knowledge. There is a role for, and a need to focus on, both the learners’ own culture(s) and the

culture(s) being learnt. Learning is not learning about others, but learning about oneself in relation to others. Educators can support this by providing experiences for students to connect and by using

questions to encourage learners to create their own connections.

3. Social interaction

Interacting with others is an important part of learning. Learning involves knowing how to express ideas and interpretations and how to

understand and respond to those of others. Collective knowledge can be used to develop interpretations and discussions. Interaction allows opportunities for learners to bring their own perspectives and

observations to the task of learning. Interaction allows opportunities for learners to act on and think about their learning in

communicating with others.

4. Reflection

Reflection in intercultural learning needs to go beyond questions of ‘what’ (What did I think? What did I feel? etc.) to explore questions of ‘why’ and ‘how’ (How did I interpret the writer’s/speaker’s meaning? Why did I interpret this event/text in this way? How was the meaning different from what I expected? How did I respond and why? etc.)

Intercultural learning is personal — it involves a need to work out one’s own perspectives, ideas, and responses.

Learning is not simply ‘knowing’— it involves analysing, thinking, and interpreting.

Page 3


5. Responsibility

Taking responsibility for one’s own actions, attitudes, and responses. Recognising one’s own role in communication and the importance and effect of one’s own

language and behaviour and acting accordingly. Recognising the validity of other perspectives and acting accordingly. Recognising one’s own learning needs.

As Liddicoat et al. and others highlight, it is crucial that the intercultural teaching environment emphasises considerable opportunities for student interaction to encourage Intercultural learning. However, Briguglio (2006) argues that simply having an intercultural student body does not necessarily promote interaction, and can in fact re-inforce negative stereotypes. Briguglio empahsizes the importance of guided discussion with a skilled facilitator who can lead participants to explore intercultural issues sensitively.

An increasing focus on ‘Closing the Gap’ between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians has resulted in much focus on renewing curricula to identify how teaching and learning in relation to Aboriginal studies can be an authentic and transforming process, that not only equips graduates with intercultural competencies, but can effect real social change.

Work by the curriculum renewal project ‘Teaching for Change’ Project occurring in 5 universities in Eastern Australia1), is a relevant example (Teaching for Change: engaging in transformative eduction). The OLT funded Project originally focussed on Problem-Based Learning, a favoured approach in many Aboriginal study sites due to its dialogic nature that allows students and teachers to explore emotional and intellectual discomforts through discursive exchange, creating the possibility for knowledge ‘shifts’ (Boler, 2004). Yet due to the colonial underpinnings of the term ‘Problem-Based’ (i.e. insinuating Aboriginal spaces are problems that need to be ‘fixed’) the project expanded the term to be more inclusive of multiple perspectives. The term “PEARL” was developed as a way of modelling this teaching and learning approach. The PEARL model also offers intercultural leaders important principles for considering in their work that extends beyond the classroom to supporting broader, system level changes to reflect multicultural equality and inclusiveness.

PEARL stands for:

P (for performative, political, process, place based): bringing experiences, knowledge and practice to the place where the current learning process occurs, reflecting and responding to the agency of the space and the elements of the place, performing our learning, embodying the process and recognising their inherent political nature and knowing that we

1 University of Queensland, Monash University, University of Technology Sydney, Charles Darwin University, and University of Newcastle)

Page 4


move through and out of the place and back to influence the places where teaching and learning occurs.

E (for embodied, experiential, explorative, engaged, emotion, empathy, experience): A holistic exploration that engages mind, body and emotion in empathetic dialogue. A transformative process based on equal collaboration.

A (for active, anti-racist, anti-colonial, active): Theoretical imperatives relate implicitly to anti-racist/anti-colonial discourses. Practically we view PEARL as aiding students to shift from reflection to action through agency and awareness. The shift to action is a critical element of transformation and enabling students to become agents for change.

R (for relational, reflective, reflexive): Through reflection on particular structured learning activities, student’s experiences are transformed into knowledge and deeper wisdom which they apply to their personal and professional lives.

L (for lifelong learning): Learning is for life, for change, for empowerment, for hope, for knowledge, to lead, to let go of assumptions, to liberate.

Clearly, key principles supporting effective teaching in the intercultural space are reflexive practice, understanding ones own position, making connections between the material being learnt and our own cultural frameworks, relating information to the current context, social interaction and empathy and responsibility to engage in learning.

Positioning and Reflexivity As intercultural educators, in order to facilitate effective dialogue about intercultural issues, we must first be able to understand ourselves (Adams & Janover, 2009) by exploring our own ‘positioning’. Individual positioning may include our profession, hobbies, and social status, family, and life experiences. It also involves exploring the many social roles and positions we occupy that affect how we exist in the social world. To work effectively in an intercultural space also requires a capacity for personal reflexivity; where we can reflect on our positioning to interrogate, and critique, how different influencing forces shape our understanding of one another and our world. This includes reflecting on the different values, beliefs and attitudes we have developed (and exploring why they have developed that way) through positioning, experiences, and broader social forces.

Who we are in the intercultural space is affected by our history, social influences, family experiences, and personality, and therefore when we engage in reflexive self practice it can also reveal the qualities we project on to others (Marotta, 2008). This is extremely important if we are in the role of an intercultural educator. Understanding the influential forces in the construction of our own identity can assist identifying our own vulnerabilities and potential triggers that may

Page 5


occur when facilitating learning in an intercultural space. For many learners, their internalised systems of belief would have sat relatively unexplored until they found themselves in an intercultural teaching space. This is deeply challenging for many, and as an intercultural educator, your own self reflexive processes and practices is crucial to supporting and facilitating reflexivity in learners. While journal writing is an often used process for engaging in reflexive practice, it is also important to recognise your role as a reflexive educator or mentor who can assist someone to explore their beliefs and views from another perspective: to be the mirror for behaviours and values that may be otherwised overlooked (Virgin, 2011).

Racial Identity Models Educating in the intercultural space is not only about understanding culture, but the influences of socially constructed notions; specifically, race and ethnicity. Becoming aware of our own racial identity can assist us to investigate when, where, how, and what impact, racially based experiences and issues have had in our lives, and our own positioning.

Race is a category that was developed in the 15 th century as a ‘scientific’ justification for slavery and domination. Inferior and negative traits were attributed to the enslaved and superior traits were attributed to the Europeans to support the subordination of one ‘racial’ group in relation to another (Hud-Aleem & Countryman, 2008). While the concept of race was originally linked to biological characteristics, race is now seen as a socially constructed category. Yet although the American Anthropological Association states the “physical variations in the human species have no meaning except the social ones that humans put on them” ("Americal Anthropological Association Statement on Race,"), the use of skin colour continues to be often used to distinguish difference between groups. It is because of the enduring link society places on race, reflecting on your own racial identity is crucial if we are to work effectively in intercultural interactions. Another important element of our identity is our ethnicity, or the groups we identify with, consciously or unconsciously, because of a common bond due to traditions, behaviours, values and beliefs (Ott, 1989).

Page 6


Chávez and Guido-DiBrito (1999) argue racial and ethnic identity is triggered most often by two conflicting social and cultural influences: firstly, the immersion into cultural traditions and values through our background and current community, familial and spiritual/religious affiliations and, secondly, the filtering of an ethnic identity projected by negative treatment, media messages or racial/ethnic stereotyping from other members of the community. These different levels of influence mean that different ethnic groups in society experience different social status that can be both unconscious or conscious, depending on whether the ethnic group you belong to is the dominant (and majority) or minority. Accordingly, they argue, everyone benefits from developing conscious racial and ethnic identities, particularly in learning settings.

In their excellent resource Courageous Conversations about Race (2006), Singleton & Linton offer a practical guide for educators aiming to develop racial consciousness within a learning environment. Racial consciousness, they explain, is:

a process where we seek to explore how we understand ‘race’, how it featured in our childhood and what factors influenced it, inclusive of broader social narratives and policies

Educators and cultural leaders need to ‘establish a racial context that is personal, local and immediate’ (Singleton & Linton, 2006, 73). Singleton & Linton suggest establishing our racial context can be done by undertaking a racial auto-biography, to understand how our racial identity has formed, and the kind of influence this identity can have in an intercultural teaching and learning setting. Not only will the educator’s own racial consciousness be enhanced; he/she will be better equipped to understand and interpret how learners are engaging with, and responding to, learning material.

Practical Learning Activity

Complete a ‘racial autobiography’. There are no set ‘rules’ about how to write this autobiography; rather it is important to let the reflections and thoughts flow without self-editing. However, responses to the following prompts should be included:

What can you recall about any events, conversations or experiences you have had in your life related to race, race relations and/or racism that may have impacted you?

How do you think these experiences will influence or impact how you work in an intercultural teaching & learning space?

At the back of this Module you will find an example of a racial autobiography from Singleton & Linton’s (2006) book.

Another way of looking at our racial identity is through theoretical models. Over the last four decades, many different approaches have been developed to understand the psychosocial process of defining self-identities, and the complexities of this process particularly in the context of race

Page 7


relations (Chavez & Guido-DiBrito, 1999). Since the early 1990s, understanding white racial identity (or ‘whiteness’)—and highlighting the often unconscious privileges that come with that—has received increasing interest (Manglitz, Johnson, & Cervero, 2005). Janet Helms’ White Racial Identity development model is one of the most discussed models (Helms, 1990). As a scholar of colour, Helms argued that if American society was to improve its racial inter-relations, then white American’s would need to turn a critical lens on to their passive acceptance of the racist status quo which afforded ‘whiteness’ (those exhibiting the physical characteristics of white Europeans) ongoing social and systemic privilege. The model consists of a six-staged, two-phased process through which white people may explore levels of their racial identity.

Table 1: Helms’ White Racial Identity Model (1990)

Helms’ White Racial Identity Model

Phase 1: Abandoning racism

Stage 1: Contact ‘Obliviousness’ –individuals do not identify with a race and there is an assumption that ethnicity is connected to only ethnic minority groups. One is unaware of privileges, racial attitudes are developed through external influences and individuals will avoid racial discussions and deny existence of racism.

Stage 2: Disintegration–often occurring due to increased contact with people from ethnically diverse groups, exposure to reality of racism can lead to anxiety, guilt, depression and internal conflict between the knowledge of injustices and whether or not to conform. Helms suggest the individual will try to resolve the negative feelings in this stage via three solutions: 1) Over identification/ appropriation with ethnic group of question 2) paternalistic attitudes to protect from further abuse 3) retreat back to white culture to avoid discomfort.

Stage 3: Reintegration –discomfort of previous learning process leads to hostility and anger towards racial group in question, and a strong positive bias toward white culture, with victim blaming common.

Phase 2: Redefining white identity

Stage 1: Pseudo-independence –if personal reflexivity takes place, the individual begins to question the notion of a racial minority as inferior. This is characterised by an intellectual understanding of racism rather than a personal responsibility, and a conscious shifting from a sense that whites are superior (however subconsciously the

Page 8


belief still applies).

Stage 2: Immersion/emersion –process of white redefinition of identity through self-examination that questions what it means to be white, and how one may have contributed to racism.

Stage 3: Autonomy–the internalisation of a positive white racial identity through the individual’s personal journey characterised by comfort in recognising and acknowledging differences, nonracist attitudes and a diverse cultural identity, and is more open and able to relate to other races.

In Australia studies in ‘whiteness’ are increasingly interrogating the complex and often highly political forces that can influence white identity and behaviour. Kowal & Paradise (2005) and Kowal (2011) have explored the contemporary white identity and argue that a striking feature is a reluctance to claim any agency in the process towards improving Aboriginal outcomes, leading to an ambivalent role, a constant need to weaken the negative stigma associated with whiteness and the complexities of how ‘political correctness’ can emphasise structure and downplay agency. The impact of white guilt in the development of this identity is also an important feature in the psyche of many white Australian’s and their racial identity (Williams, 2000). Significantly, Helms challenges white people to reclaim whiteness as a positive force by “making amends for what one has done wrong with respect to color differences in the past, making sure that one does not permit these trespasses to occur in the present, and moving on with one’s life” (Helms, 2000, p. 3).

Fearon (1999) suggests that ‘identity’ has two types; the ‘social’ and the ‘personal’. The former refers to a social category, a set of persons marked by a label and distinguished by rules deciding membership and characteristics or attributes. The latter, a sense of personal identity is some distinguishing characteristic/s that a person takes special pride in or views as socially consequential. Identity as part of a cultural group fits Fearon’s social identity. For Aboriginal Australians, identifying as part of a member of a particular group does have guidelines and characteristics that imply membership, with membership to a particular group decided by the members themselves. Determinants to membership can include relationships, kinship and connectedness, skin colour and physical characteristics, such as facial features. Importantly, among Aboriginal people there exists the obligatory protocol of exchanging information to others within the group about who you are (who your mob is) and where you are from (your cultural grouping and country) and is an essential part of establishing and reinforcing one’s identity.

While exploration and discussions in relation to the forces shaping Aboriginal Australian identity are considerable, comparative racial identity models to Helms have not been developed for an Aboriginal Australian context. However, the American context may offer some transferable ways of thinking about Australian Aboriginal identity within a framework. One of the most famous

Page 9


models is William Cross’ People of Color2 Identity Model (PCIM), which draws links between identity development through personal features and group/social identity in the context of historical and contemporary racial disadvantages (Hud-Aleem & Countryman, 2008). The PCIM consists of four stages:

i) Pre-encounter: characterised by a complete unawareness of race as a social construct and embracing of ‘coloured’ culture. The absorption of the values and beliefs of the dominant white culture.

ii) Encounter stage: a specific event leads to critical evaluation of identity, group membership, and white society, with the reality of racism realised.

iii) Immersion/emersion stage: immersion in non-white culture in an attempt to replace the pre-encounter identity, characterised by disdain of white culture and judgement of other non-white people based on standards of ‘who is black enough’.

iv) Internalisation: a more objective view of the world, characterised by confidence and group membership security: appreciating own and others. Rejects racism, no longer judging based on race, but on personal character.

v) Internalisation-Commitment: a positive sense of racial identity characterised by a commitment to a plan of action or general sense of commitment to the concerns of people of colour, sustained over time.

Another model comes from Parham (Parham, 1989), who describes cycles of racial identity development as a lifelong, continuously changing process for people of colour. This theoretical approach argues people move through angry feelings about whites to develop positive frames of reference, with a realistic perception of one’s racial identity eventually developed which leads to greater success in the intercultural space. Parham’s model importantly identifies that when negative treatment is experienced from white people by people of colour, consciousness of a racial identity-and difference- are triggered.

All these models have strengths and weaknesses, and a comparison by Chávez & Guido-DiBrito (1999) is presented on the next page.

2 Note the word ‘colour’ is obviously an American term referring to people of colour in America, and is not used or appropriate in the Australian context. However, for the purpose of presenting these models that have been developed in contexts highlighted by white authority and domination with subordination of minority groups and ‘coloured’ Americans, we have kept the use of these terms as depicted in the models.

Page 10


Table 2: A Comparison of Racial Identity Models (Chavez & Guido-DiBrito)

Strengths Weaknesses

Helms Outlines interracial exposure as a powerful trigger for how racial identity develops.

Confuses individual development toward a nonracist frame with development of a racial identity. The model assumes that white racial identity is about their perceptions, feelings, and behaviours to non-whites rather than about the consciousness of an actual white racial identity.

Cross Helpful in outlining racial identity as a dynamic process influenced by those both within and without a particular ethnic group.

Starts from premise that before non-whites experience identity, they are first unaware of racial identity- theirs or others.

Parham Sense of progress in outlining shift from an unconscious to a conscious racial identity.

Identifies unavoidable exposure to racial difference as the primary trigger for the development of racial identity.

These models are by no means exhaustive; they merely provide us with building blocks for thinking about racial and ethnic identity, the continuum of how this identity develops and, importantly, what it means in the Australian context. An individual’s identity is complex, influenced by, and in response to, many different factors, and is “shaped by individual characteristics, family dynamics, historical factors, and social and political context” (Tatum, 2003). These factors are somewhat infinite and include things like gender, age, personality and religion/spirituality. The diversity of influencing forces means that we are all uniquely shaped by individual identities. Identity development is a continual process that happens throughout our lives, and while theoretical models offer some suggestions for exploring our identity, it is through self-reflection that perhaps the most effective connections can be made.

Page 11


Intercultural Competency in Educators Greater awareness of our own racial identity and ongoing reflexivity provides the foundation for competent engagement in an intercultural space whether as an educator, or a learner. It is through reflexivity that we can begin to develop cultural competencies and skills. There is considerable theoretical and practical information articulating cross-cultural and inter-cultural competencies in action. Characteristics include:

the ability to interpret and relate, to have a positive and curious approach to differences and unfamiliarity to be sensitivit to diversity, and have insights about how culture effects communication and language

(Marotta, 2008; Roy & Starosta, 2001; Sercu, 2004).

Byram & Nichols (2001) developed the notion of an ‘intercultural speaker’ to describe skills and competencies an intercultural educator and leader must possess. They describe someone who has the ability to interact with others, to accept other perspectives of the world, to mediate between different perspectives and most importantly, be conscious of their own evaluations of different perspectives that are occurring (ongoing reflexivity). They observe that a potential intercultural speaker evolves initially from two domains:

1. Intercultural attitudes—curiosity and openness and a readiness to suspend disbelief about other cultures and belief in one’s own. One’s own values must be made ‘relative’ and reflected upon.

2. Knowledge—not necessarily about other cultures per se, but a knowledge about how social identities form and function.

As no intercultural speaker will have all the knowledge necessary for any particular cultural group, Byram & Nichols suggest there are a number of crucial skills that educators in this space need to employ, particularly in order to mediate and resolve the misunderstandings that can arise in the intercultural setting. This mostly concerns skills that are able to bring forth alternative perspectives and ‘decentralise’ attitudes:

i) Skills of interpreting and relating- ability to interpret information from another cultural perspective and relate it to one’s own

ii) Skills of discovery and interaction-ability to acquire new knowledge of another culture and practices

iii) Critical cultural awareness – where reflexivity meets critical evaluation of one’s own practices, beliefs and values as cultural ‘products’, as well of that of others

Effective and generic teaching and learning skills in group facilitation, inclusive communication and creating safe spaces for group interaction, engagement and dialogue, are crucial foundations for the intercultural educator. Importantly, facilitating effective interaction in the intercultural space requires educators to be equipped to lead students through guided discussion that promotes two-way learning to explore issues and promote genuine intercultural learning. Other intercultural competencies in educators include:

Page 12


ability to continually reflect on the influence of their own ethnic/racial identity and how it influences the learning environment

consciously ensuring learning materials and activities are inclusive of a variety of multicultural world views

the ability to create an environment that balances different cultural learning norms (such as collaborative work and individual tasks, visual to written, discussion & reflection etc) (Chavez & Guido-DiBrito, 1999; Gardener, 1997).

These skills, augmented by engagement in ongoing self-reflection and racial consciousness, will assist the intercultural educator to take learners through a “dynamic process of growth through ongoing questioning, self-assessment, knowledge and skill-building, starting with the students’ level of current competence and supporting enhancement of their abilities”(Sowers-Hoag & Sandau-Beckler, 1996, p. 37).

Cultural Competency Continuum Over the last three decades, globalization and increasingly multicultural societies, (as well as the focus on improving outcomes for Indigenous peoples around the world), has resulted in the broadening of cultural safety to include terms such as cultural security, sensitivity, awareness and competence. Although these terms have largely been discussed with reference to improving health practice for culturally diverse groups, increasingly these terms are being applied cross-sectorally, and interprofessionally. As a result, ‘cultural competency’ is increasingly seen as a skill required in a variety of social and professional settings. Competency is often referred to as a continuum, presented as a linear process of development beginning with cultural awareness (recognizing differences and commonalities, understanding one’s own cultural influences: often the focus of training sessions) to sensitivity (how might my awareness influence my behaviour and how can I accommodate different cultural needs) to eventual safety and competence.

The notion of cultural safety has its foundations in the 1980s in nursing practice in New Zealand, where the power differences between Maoris and health practitioners was recognised as a major determinant affecting Maori health outcomes. Cultural safety has been defined as:

[A]n environment that is safe for people: where there is no assault, challenge or denial of their identity, of who they are and what they need. It is about shared respect, shared meaning, shared knowledge and experience of learning, living and working together with dignity and truly listening (R Williams, 1999)

Cultural safety refers to environments that are culturally safe for all people; where identity, culture and community feel secure.

The National Health and Medical Research Council states that cultural competency is:

A set of congruent behaviours, attitudes, and policies that come together in a system, agency or among professionals and enables that system, agency or those professions, to work effectively in cross-cultural situations. Cultural competence is much more than awareness of cultural differences, as it focuses on the capacity of the health system to improve health and wellbeing by integrating culture into the delivery of health services

(NHMRC, 2006, p. 7)

Page 13


Cultural awareness → cultural sensitivity→ cultural safety

Another way of understanding this process is in incremental steps, which Coffin presented as a pyramid that related to Maslow’s theory of human motivation (which Coffin understood as Maslow’s lower needs being comparable to cultural awareness; you cannot become competent without going through the process of cultural awareness, sensitivity and safety/security).

In the teaching and learning space, opportunity for interaction and dialogue across cultural groups will ultimately offer the most effective potential for learners to experience ‘shifts’ along-or in to- next stage of the cultural continuum. Findings from one study suggest frequent interaction among interracial students may be more effective in developing cultural knowledge then more formal cultural awareness training sessions (Antonio, 2001). These interactions are particularly important when we consider that culture is an inherited lens through which we perceive and understand the world in which we live (often referred to as an individual’s ‘worldview’) and understanding it is essential to better understanding others (Paden, 1994). Informal interactions between interracial learners create much more opportunity for cultural awareness to develop that is not limited to stereotypes, with individuality and diversity among cultural groups better understood.

Inhibitors to Effective Learning in the Intercultural SpaceEducators in an intercultural learning environment may be presented with a number of challenges with learners, such as: lack of engagement to vocal resistance/ recalcitrance (particularly when unpacking the social construction of racial identity) (Haddad, 2002); emotional responses generated from the colonial past; and current disparities such as white guilt (Williams, 2000) or ambivalence (Kowal & Paradies, 2005), or anger and resentment. Many members of minority groups also bring experiences into the learning setting of having to negotiate stereotyping, unfair treatment and exclusion, and this can affect their engagement in the intercultural space. In

Page 14


contrast, many white learners may be resistant to learning things that are outside of the normal educational style they are accustomed to (Chavez & Guido-DiBrito, 1999).

While in any learning environment there is likely to be the ‘very engaged’ student and the ‘non-engaged’, when attempting to shift students through a cultural competency and racially reflective continuum. There are also many individual factors the educator must take in to account when considering the disengagement, or inability to ‘shift’, of some learners. These factors can include the initial level of resistance, previous exposure to cultural learning content and prior multicultural life experiences (Lawrence & Tatum, 1998). These individual forces, many which go beyond the scope of a classroom, can however, speak more to the intercultural educator’s role as leader in supporting larger system developments that can in turn support in-the-classroom changes. Lawrence and Tatum suggest these include the importance of intercultural material in multiple courses, the enrolment of students in multiple courses (not just one course on intercultural competency), and leadership at the senior level (Lawrence & Tatum, 1998).

Having honest, open and productive conversations about racial issues is often extremely difficult largely, Singleton & Linton argue, because we all see racial issues differently due to our own subjective racial affiliations (which is why undertaking a personal racial autobiography is so important). They also suggest communication is racialised, meaning people enter dialogue having very different communication styles and importantly, different expectations of the outcomes. Distrust, fear, and fustration are common emotional undertones. Another important reason for these difficulties is the different colour commentary at play. Even though Singleton & Linton wrote on white and African American interrelations, their identification of the differences in ‘coloured commentary’ may offer some thought provoking factors for intercultural educators to consider in classroom dynamics:

Table 3: Understanding White Talk and Colour Commentary (Singleton & Linton, 2006, p. 123)

White Talk Colour Commentary

Verbal: Characterised by loud, authoritataive, and interrupted speech. Value is placed on expressing oneself and controlling the conversation.

Example: Who speaks first, longest, and most often.

Nonverbal: Characterised by silent respect for as well as disconnect from the one talking and/or positional/cultural authority.

Communication takes place through body motions and other nonverbal expression.

Example: Folded arms, silence, sighs, rolling of they eyes, refusal to offer direct eye contact.

Impersonal: Typically spoke in third person. Prone to explaining opinion through use of other people’s stories or experiences.

Example: “My best firend who is Black…I am married to a person of color who thinks

Personal: Typically spoken in first person. Great value placed upon sharing one’s own story and experiences.

Example: “The police pulled me over because I am Black…As a Chicano, I don’t trust White

Page 15


that…I grew up around Asians and they said…”

people…We believe that ‘such-such a place’ has a problem with people of color.”

Intellectual: Dialogue is abstract and disconnected from immediate and local reality. More interested in quantitative analysis of one’s thinking.

Example: “Statistics say …Does the data really suggest that it is because of race? I once read that…(so-and-so) said…Can you give me a citation that supports that? What university did he attend? He studied with…”

Emotional: Dialogue is centred on an immediate and local racial reality. More interested in qualitative analysis and feelings.

Example: “I don’t feel as though you like or respect me as a Black teacher…I feel alone here as the only teacher of color…I get so angry when they speak for me, misinterpret and misrepresent me…I don’t trust...I don’t feel safe.”

Task Orientated: Organised around the need ‘to do’ something and to find solutions. An impatient focus on locating tools and strategies to address racial issues. Views the racial challenge as a technical problem in which the solutions exists and simply need to be unearthed. See introspective conversation as a waste of time.

Example: “When are we going to get to the actions? I’m tired of talking? What does talking about race have to do with the achievement gap? Give me a strategy.”

Process Orientated: Organised around the need ‘to be’ respected, validated, and affirmed. Developing trust in others occurs through the examination of racial attitudes and beliefs in public. Racial challenges are viewed as adaptive problems that require us to deal with our inner thought processes and to explore our biases to create undiscovered soltuions.

Example: “How do you feel about this Black student? How do you believe your students of color feel about you as a teacher? How do Latino faculty feel about working in a predominately White school?”

Classroom learning and discussions about Aboriginal material can also be challenged by conscious and unconscious stereotypes, preconceived judgements, political sensitivities’, token identification and racism. These undercurrents can create an environment where discussions of Aboriginal material become ‘problematic’, tense, and/or unproductive. At the University of British Colombia in Canada, a reflective project was undertaken to identify what factors students felt made conversations about Aboriginal material difficult and how to address it. Key dimensions identified include:

1. Social position – importance of facilitators acknowledging their social position, clarifying parameters of your position and assisting conflicts that may arise in sensitive material. Stating social position assists allows an educator to define the scope of their ability and authority to speak to certain social, cultural, and historical experiences for students and others.

2. Tokenisation – facilitator’s actions could assume that all Aboriginal people are "experts" to be consulted about Aboriginal subject matter. The "Aboriginal as expert" presumes that any Aboriginal person has knowledge of, and is willing to speak to, issues and information

Page 16


regarding Aboriginal peoples and history, potentially leading to embarrassment, tokenization, and discomfort.

This important project also presents examples of classroom incidents and support strategies to address common arising factors that drive conversations about Aboriginal issues to be so difficult. Resources are available at:

http://www.intheclass.arts.ubc.ca/what-i-learned-in-class-today.html

Aboriginal academic Professor Marcia Langton argues that the most difficult relationship is not between black and white people ‘but between white Australians and the symbols created by their predecessors. Most Australians do not know and relate to Aboriginal people. They relate to stories told by former colonists.' (cited Reconciliation Australia, 2010) Langton is identifying the impact of ‘myths’; how inaccurate stereotypes of Aboriginal Australians can influence intercultural interactions in a learning environment. An example of such myths identified by Reconciliation Australiai includes:

Aboriginal people only excel in sport. Aboriginal people are alcoholics who can’t handle their grog. Aboriginal people are lazy and don’t want to work. Aboriginal people get free houses, cars and undeserved special treatment. Native Title can take away people’s property. Aboriginal people trash their houses. Too much taxpayer money is spent on Aboriginal people. Aboriginal organisations are corrupt. There is no Aboriginal leadership. Things will never change.

Many non-Aboriginal Australians psychologically hold on to these myths, unconsciously and consciously. However, it is not only Aboriginal Australians who are the subject of such myths and stereotypes: preconceived racial categorizing affects all ethnic groups. You may find the following link interesting in relation to stereotyping:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1wztUJ4VVE

When attempting to de-bunk stereotypes in the an intercultural teaching and learning space, it is important to ensure the reflexive lens is also intercultural; that is, everyone, whatever their cultural/racial background, looks reflexively at their own package of stereotypes. For example, Aboriginal stereotypes of white Australians may include:

White people all want to help us like we can’t help ourselves. White people are always in a position of power. All whites are suspicious / scared of Aboriginal people. White people don’t listen. They think they know better then us. Whites always end up doing it their way, in the end. Things will never change.

Page 17

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1wztUJ4VVE

http://www.intheclass.arts.ubc.ca/what-i-learned-in-class-today.html


Practical Learning Activity

Reflect on your own assumptions. How have they developed? How do they influence your thinking and behaviors? What kind of stereoptypes do you feel other cultural groups may have of you?

Getting Participants to Effectively Engage in the Intercultural Space Identifying strategies to improving participant engagement in an intercultural learning space is crucial if educators are aiming to effect authentic, and effective, learning experiences. The complex and many educational challenges that can arise in this setting means educators need to feel equipped with a tool kit or ‘dilly bag’ of suitable strategies to manage difficult scenarios, and install effective practice. Educators in this space are extremely diverse; teachers may be Aboriginal, white or of other ethnic decent, while learners may have voluntarily enrolled in the course or have been made to take the course as part of other tertiary/professional course requirements. In tertiary settings, learners are also likely to be mostly ‘mainstream’, with significant representation from a diversity of international countries. What this means in practice is that intercultural teaching is complex, diverse, challenging and exciting.

In 2008 Christine Asmar, from the University of Melbourne’s Murrup Barak (Melbourne Institute for Indigenous Development), undertook research as part of an Australian Learning and Teaching Fellowship to identify ‘exemplars’ for good practice in Aboriginal university teaching, with 'Aboriginal teaching' being a broadly defined category inclusive of both Aboriginal and non- Aboriginal staff teaching anything with Aboriginal content to either Aboriginal or mainstream students. The findings were analysed, resulting in identification of 15 exemplar ‘Approaches to Indigenous Teaching ’ :

1. Make the classroom a safe environment for learning. 1.1 Understand, anticipate and allay fears.1.2 Establish relationships of trust and respect.

2. Show confidence in your own expertise, credibility and authority.3. Set high academic and personal standards (and model them yourself).4. Provide scaffolding and support where needed.5. Negotiate emotions in the classroom.6. Model dialogue by teaching in pairs / collaboratively.7. Locate local Indigenous issues in global contexts.8. Get students to question established assumptions and ‘facts’.9. Build relationships with, and connect students to the community.

9.1 Take students to community.9.2 Bring community to the classroom.

Page 18

http://www.indigenousteaching.com/html/exemplars_index.html#Fifteen_approaches

http://www.indigenousteaching.com/html/exemplars_index.html#Fifteen_approaches


10. Teach students to ‘walk in the shoes of others’.11. Utilise personal experience.

11.1 Link your own personal experiences to the topic.11.2 Ask students to relate their own personal background to their current learning.

12. Encourage student self-awareness.12.1 Help students to know themselves and their own values better.12.2 Require students to reflect on their own learning.

13. Show students the relevance of learning for future jobs/careers.14. Be open to reflecting, learning and changing as a teacher.15. Be enthusiastic and enjoy your teaching!

A description of how to enact these exemplars is included as part of the module resources in your workbook.

Page 19


References

Adams, S., & Janover, M. (2009). Introduction: theorising the intercultural. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 30(3), 227-231.

Americal Anthropological Association Statement on Race.). Retrieved May 20, 2012, 2012, from www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

Antonio, A. L. (2001). The role of interracial interaction in the development of leadership skills and cultural knowledge and undesrtanding. Research in Higher Education, 42(5), 593-617.

Asmar, C. (2008).' Indigenous Teaching at Australian Universities: Teaching Exemplars' www.indigenousteaching.com/teaching-exemplars

Boler, M. (2004). Teaching for hope: the ethics of shattering world views. In D. Liston & J. Garrison (Eds.), Teaching, learning and loving: reclaiming passion in educational practice (pp. 117-131). New York: Routledge.

Briguglio, C. (2006). Empowering students by developing their intercultural communication competence: a two-way process. Paper presented at the 17th ISANA International Conference, Sydney, NSW.

Byram, M., & Nichols, A. (2001). Developing Intercultural Competence in Practice: University of Michigan.

Chavez, A., & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1999). Racial and ethnic identity and development. New Adult and Continuing Education, 84, 39-47. Cultural Competency in Health: a guide for policy, partnerships and participation. (2006). National Health and Medical Research Council Retrieved from http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/hp19.pdf.

Fearon, J. D. (1999). What is identity (as we now use the word)? Stanford University. Stanford, California.

Gardener, H. (1997). Extraordinary minds: portraits of exceptional individuals and examination of our extraordinariness. New York: Basic Books.

Haddad, A. T. (2002). From student resistance to embracing the sociological imagination: unmasking privilege, social conventions, and racism. Teaching Sociology, 30(3), 328-341.

Helms, J. (1990). Black and White Racial Identity: Theory, research and practice. New York: Greenwood.

Helms, J. (2000). A race is a nice thing to have: a guide to being a white person or understanding the white persons in your life (3rd ed.). Topeka, Kansas: Content Communications.

Hud-Aleem, R., & Countryman, J. (2008). Biracial identify develop and recommendations in therapy. Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience [formerly Psychiatry], 5(11), 37-44.

Kowal, E. (2011). The stigma of white priviledge. Cultural Studies, 25(3), 313-333.

Kowal, E., & Paradies, Y. (2005). Ambivalent helpers and unhealth choices: public health practioners' narratives of Indigenous ill-health. Social Science & Medicine, 60, 1347-1357.

Page 20

http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/hp19.pdf

http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm


Lawrence, S. M., & Tatum, B. D. (1998). White racial identity and anti-racist education: a catalyst for change: Teaching for Change: building social justice in the classroom.

Liddicoat, A. J., Papademetre, L., Scarino, A., & Kohler, M. (2003). Report on intercultural langauge learning (sections 3.2 and 3.3). Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.

Manglitz, E., Johnson, B., J, & Cervero, R. (2005). Struggles of hope: how white adult educators challenge racism. Teachers College Record, 107(6), 1245-1274.

Marotta, V. (2008). Intercultural hermeneutics and the cross-cultural subject. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 30(3), 267-284.

Ott, S. (1989). The Organizational Culture Perspective. Chicago: Dorsey Press.

Paden, W. (1994). Religious worlds: the comparative study of religion. Boston: Beacon Press.

Parham, T. (1989). Cycles of psychological nigrescence. The Counselling Psychologist, 17(2), 187-226.

Langton, M (N.d.) cited on. Reconciliation Australia Mythbusters. Reconcilitation Australia, 2010 retrieved from http://www.reconciliation.org.au/home/get-involved/learning-tools/mythbusters

Roy, A., & Starosta, W. J. (2001). Han-Georg Gadamer, Language, and Intercultural Communication. Langugage and Intercultural Communication, 1(1), 6-20.

Sercu, L. (2004). Assessing intercultural competence: a framework for systematic test development in foreign language education and beyond. Intercultura Education, 15(73-89).

Singleton, G., & Linton, C. (2006). Courageous Conversations About Race. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.

Sowers-Hoag, K. M., & Sandau-Beckler, P. (1996). Educating for cultural competence in a generalist curriculum. Journal of Multicultural Social Work, 43(3), 37-56.

Tatum, D. (2003). The complexity of identity: "Who am I?" Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria? And other conversations about race. New York: Basic Books.

Teaching for Change: engaging in transformative edcuation. Retrieved May 24, 2012, 2012, from www.teaching4changeedu.au/

Virgin, J. (2011). Self-reflexivity in cross-cultural understanding. (Thesis), Global College, Brooklyn. Retrieved from www.annualglobalcollegeconference.com/uploads/6/8/9/8/6898942/julie_virgin_senior_thesis.pdf

Williams, R. (1999). Cultural safety--what does it mean for our work practice? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 23(2), 213-214.

Williams, R. (2000). Why should I feel guilty? reflections on the workings of guilt in white Aboriginal relations. Australian Psychologist, 35(2).

Page 21

http://www.annualglobalcollegeconference.com/uploads/6/8/9/8/6898942/julie_virgin_senior_thesis.pdf

http://www.annualglobalcollegeconference.com/uploads/6/8/9/8/6898942/julie_virgin_senior_thesis.pdf

http://www.teaching4changeedu.au/

i

Documents

Working Together - academicleadership.curtin.edu.au · Web viewAboriginal academic Professor Marcia Langton argues that the most difficult relationship is not between black and