Transcript Living and Studying Abroad - HKU

Synergetic Culture of Learning:
Researching the Academic Experience of
CHC Students Studying Abroad
Dr Anwei Feng
Email: [email protected]
Seminar for the Faculty of Education, Hong Kong University
Outline

Background





The Durham Project



Literature on CHC students studying abroad
The issues and the notion of culture of learning
How are the issues studied and debated?
The Concept of Third Space
 Homi Bhabha (1990; 1994)
 The 2005 Leicester Conference
 Claire Kramsch (1993)
Methodology
Data
Summary
Background

Literature

Substantial on international students studying
abroad. Research in the UK alone:




M. Byram and A. Feng (2006)
J. Coleman (1997; 1998, 2001)
E. Murphy-Lejeune (2002)
Much focus on CHC students studying abroad:


M. Byram and A. Feng (2006)
M. Cortazzi and L. Jin (1993; 1996; 1998)
Many more in the US, Australia, New Zealand, Canada
and other countries.
Driving Forces
The literature grows rapidly because:
1. UK has the most diverse student body in the world (CIHE, 2006)

11% of student body come from overseas

40% of postgraduate population from overseas

75% HEIs have students from more than 100 countries
2. HESA 2004/05 statistics show many from CHC countries:.



P. R. of China – 52,675 (Largest overseas group studying in the UK)
Hong Kong, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore – all in top ten in the number
table (45,000)
Total overseas Ss – 318,410
This increase is driven both by


Forces of globalisation and internationalisation
Financial significance for resource constrained universities
The Issues
Widely agreed: Students from different cultures do differ! Their values,
beliefs and behaviours do differ!
To address the differences, some say:

International students come here to receive a British education, so they should and they do
adapt, accommodate and acculturate into our system (i.e. to do things OUR way). So we
stick to what we do.
Others say:
Student mobility renders many ‘established’ theories of learning and teaching problematic.

We need to study their experience here and to internationalise our curriculum, our pedagogy,
etc.

Both ISs and we teachers need to develop intercultural understanding and to communicate
better with each other.
In order to address the issues, they say:

We need to know differences between ‘cultures of learning’

e.g. Confucian culture of learning
Socratic culture of learning

We can then explore a common ground, or a space or place where we can celebrate our
differences. Etc.
What’s Culture of Learning?

Working definition of ‘culture of learning’ (one
form of culture):
Values and beliefs of quality teaching and learning
shared by a particular national group and the norms
or behaviours that are built on them (cf. Cortazzi &
Jin, 1996)
Philosophical assumptions about the nature of teaching
and learning, perceptions of the respective roles of
and responsibilities of teachers and students,
learning strategies encouraged, and qualities valued
in teachers and students (Hu, 2002)
How is it studied?
Often through comparative or contrastive studies into the values,
beliefs and behaviours of cultural groups under question.
Literature documenting such studies with a focus on East Vs
West conceptions of learning includes:









Cortazzi and Jin (1996a; 1996b; 2001)
Fullen (2001)
Hammond and Gao (2002)
Harris (1995)
Jin and Cortazzi (1993; 1995; 1998)
Kember (1997; 2000)
Littlewood (2001; 2003)
Tweed and Lehman (2002)
Watkins and Biggs (1996; 2001)
Comparative Studies
Socratic versus Confucian Conceptions of
Learning

Socratic Conception of quality learning which is
widely discussed as learning philosophy for all is a
western exemplar that values questioning of
received knowledge and generating and expressing
own hypotheses on such bases.

Confucian Conception values effortful, respectful,
and pragmatic leaning of knowledge as well as
behavioral reform. (Tweed and Lehman, 2002)
Socratic conceptions
Main theories of learning
 Constructivism (Steffe & Gale, 1995; Biggs 1999)
 Phenomenography (Marton & Booth, 1997)
Core argument:
Learning is a way in which learners interact with the
world. Quality learning takes place only when
they generate their own knowledge on the basis of
the existing and when they engage themselves
with higher cognitive-level processes.
“Good teaching is getting most students to use the higher
cognitive level processes …” (Biggs, 1999: 4)
HCL Proc.
Theorising
Reflecting
Generating
Applying
Relating
Recognising
Note-taking
Memorising
LCL Proc.
Passive
(e.g. Lectures)
B
A
Teaching Method
Ss’ activities
Active
(e.g. PBL)
Confucian Conceptions 1


Confucian learners consider knowledge to be
commodity to be transferable between teacher
and student.
Quality learning is accomplished through
successive repetitions and iterations, each of
which drills deeper and deeper into the
knowledge transmitted. One questions it only
when s/he understands it properly (Pratt, 1992b)
Memorisation (the lowest cognitive level activity) is
strongly emphasised!
Confucian Conceptions 2
In exploring the “paradox of Chinese learners” – rote learning,
large classes, expository methods, relentless normreferenced assessment, etc. but good academic performance
– Watkins and Biggs (1996) summarise features of Chinese
learners as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Understanding through the process of memorising
Success attributable to hard work, not ability
Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation mutually inclusive
Respect for seniority and conformation to group norms
Individual success tied to family face
Collaborative learning outside classroom
Chinese Perceptions
N = 135 (Cortazzi and Jin, 1996)
A good teacher
A good student
Has a deep knowledge
Is hard working
Is patient
Learns from each other
Is humorous
Pays attention to teacher
Is a good moral example
Respects and obeys
teacher
Contrastive Studies (cotazzi & Jin, 1996)
China (Cult. of Learn.) UK (Cult. of Learn.)
Knowledge from authority
Skills in learning
Collective consciousness
Individual orientation
Teaching and learning as
performance
Teaching and learning as
organisation
Learning through practice and
memorisation
Learning through interaction and
construction
Listener/reader responsibility for
communication
Speaker/writer responsibility for
communication
Hierarchy, face, respect
Equality, informality
Teacher as model and centre
Teacher as organiser
Contrastive Studies - Hammond & Gao
(2002)
Dialectic
(Asian)
Dialogic
(Western)
Teacher
Holds power, knows all,
controls space
Shares power and
exp.ce, creates space
Student
Listens, follows instr.s,
just a student
Contributes, make
proposals, a scholar
Learning
focus
Fixed, fragmented,
transmitted
Emergent, connected
to whole, constructed
Education
systems
Protect status quo,
encourage compet.n,
Create future,
encourage collab.n
Many models suggested are

Based on the binary view that takes cultures in
contact as two entities of homogeneity and unity.
East
West
The ‘Bridge’ Metaphor
Binary contrasts challenged
Is there a contrast?
(Biggs 1999; Kember, 2000; Littlewood, 2001)




“Myths”, “misconceptions”, or only “partially true”
(Littlewood, 2001) Sample size: 2656 students in
eleven countries (8 Asian and 3 European)
Research tool: 12-item questionnaire on perceptions
and attitudes in learning (similar to Cortazzi and Jin)
Major finding (See Graph in transparency)

No significant difference in perceptions and attitudes
Contrasts such as those given before are criticised as an
essentialist or reductionist approach to theorising
culture (Holiday, et al. 2004)
Reconceptualising Culture
Culture should not be limited to essential features of
a particular social group, i.e., to ‘shared values,
established norms and patterned behaviours’.
Bhabha (1994) argues that:



On the one hand, culture is “heimlich” with its seriality,
generalisability and coherence.
On the other hand, it is “unheimlich” , heterogeneous and
ambivalent, with its openness: permeable by otherness,
susceptible to context and even self-contradictory.
Cultural differences, thus, “should not be
understood as the free play of polarities and
pluralities in the homogeneous empty time of the
national community.” (p. 162).
Third Space Perspective 1

Bhabha, H. (1990; 1994)


All forms of culture are subject to hybridity
which leads to a third space that “constitutes
the discursive conditions of enunciation that
ensure that the meaning and symbols of culture
have no primordial unity or fixity; that even the
same signs can be appropriated, translated,
rehistoricised and read anew.”
This space “displaces the histories” and “gives
rise to something different, something new and
unrecognisable, a new area of negotiation of
meaning and representation.” (1990: 211)
Third Space Perspective 2


Kramsch (1993: 257) – ‘For most, it [the third
place] will be their stories they will tell of these
cross-cultural encounters, the meaning they will
give them through these tellings and the dialogues
that they will have with people who have had
similar experiences. In and through these
dialogues, they may find for themselves this third
place that they can name their own’
Leicester Conference (June, 2005) – ‘A third space
is forever a ground for negotiation. It can never be
generalised or institutionalised. Once it becomes
generalisable, it is no longer a third space.’ (a
conclusion by a participant)
Durham Project
Foreshadowed Questions:



Do CHC students truly experience the differences
between Confucian and Socratic cultures of
learning as defined by commentators such as
Cortazzi and Jin (1996a)? Or they construct
something entirely new and unrecognisable?
If the former, how do they reconcile the
differences? Negotiate their identity?
Do they co-create with others, e.g., local students
and lecturers around them, a space they can
celebrate?
Informants and Methodology

Informants
Mainly CHC students at DU
 Some tutors


Ethnographic approach
 Classroom
observation
 Ethnographic interviews (casual
conversations)
 E-Forum for lecturers
Emergent Themes from Data
Four themes emerged from the data:
 Initial expectations or perceptions versus
experience
 Negotiation of identity (Evidence of something
new, unrecognisable as a result of hybridity)
 Inside or outside classroom dynamics (a
negotiation process)
 Surface or Deep Approaches to Learning or
something else (Based on constructivist theory
particularly the binary comparison of deep
versus surface approaches (Biggs, 1999))
Perceptions versus Experience

MA Law student from China
“The difference was immediately proved when I arrived.
In law classes in China, the teacher is the centre
while students are on the receiving end. Group
discussions or assignments have to take the
teacher’s points as the ‘dominant views’ (主流观点). In
England, however, the interaction between the
teacher and the students is more prevailing. … The
teacher seems to like challenges from students.” (FN
– 10, 03/02/05)
Difference expected and experienced
Perceptions versus Experience

EdD student from Taiwan


Local lecturer in finance (e-forum)


“I knew it is necessary to speak up in class here. So I try
to participate …” (FN – 5, 17/07/04)
“… I had a Japanese student last year. Surprisingly, she was
quite an active participant in every thing, tutorials or group
work. …” (E-forum, 09, 02/11/03, Original English)
MS student in computer science

“… Not much as expected, some of our tutors are from
China. …” (FN – 8, 12/01/05)
Perceptions of difference in norms expected but not always
proved true.
Perceptions versus Experience

MA from China

She originally took a local student’s behaviour
of asking ‘simple questions’ in discussions as
“Hou Lian Pi” (thick-skinned). In time, she
accepted it sincerely, “If a question can get
answered quickly, why do I have to waste time
figuring it out myself? Of course, I would ask a
friend first, or in a small group. …” (FN-11,
17/10/04)
Value of ‘face’ was shown initially, but change
took place, partial transformation though.
Negotiating Identity
MA student in education from China,
 “… the majority of my classmates are British.
Honestly, I often couldn’t follow what they were
talking about. They often talked about the local
system. But I don’t wish to look Ben (slow-witted),
so I spoke up when sometimes I only sort of
understood what was going on. … I was even
more frustrated when they showed no interest in
what I said …” (FN-8, 26/10/04, my translation
and emphasis)
Trying to negotiate a space, at a risk, but not
successfully
Negotiating Identity

‘Stunning student’
“(Some local students) tend to think that all Chinese
can’t speak English properly. … They tend to size
international students up. Then when we say
something pretty intelligent during tutorials, they
are stunned. …” (FN–3, 18/02/04)
MA student from Singapore
(He said he was much more active in a UK
classroom than he used to be back in
Singapore but still struggling with essays)
A new identity for the individual
Approaches to Learning

‘More active’
“… Since I came here, I feel I have become more
active and analytical in studying. I research
more. I also try to contribute more to the class.
I find it very interesting and of course. I have
done quite OK, lah, and definitely impressed
the teacher …”
Economics S. with experience in HK and Singapore
Active learner taking a deep approach (but showed
respect for authority).
Approaches to Learning

“Listen attentively”
“A ‘quiet’ EdD student from Taiwan who was observed
closely came up with two quality assignments that
showed many features of a deep learner who
analyses, relates and theorises competently. When
asked she replied she lacked oral competence, but
“listened attentively”, took notes, tried to figure out
the meaning through all available means, in- or outside the classroom.
Is this a deep or surface learner?
Approaches to Learning

Memorising
“… (Memorising is helpful). The students who go
through the Chinese system all know how
important memorisation is. In China, you get
nowhere if you don’t memorise. … Here it
seems I memorise less. But I feel the extensive
readings I do for each module can help me
remember a lot of things.” (FN – 21, 08/11/05)
MS student in computer science
Showing trace of a deep learner, but at the
same time, value of memorisation
Approaches to Learning

“Research study”
“Since I came to UK, research study has been my
major strategy of learning, for essay writing, to be
more specific. … However, a lot of principles,
formula, definitions of terms, etc. must be
memorised. Otherwise, the knowledge will soon
disappear from my brain like ‘flowing sand’. ...”
(FN–23, 17/10/05)
MA student in finance from China
“[Research study] is searching for information
focusing on one topic. You read a lot and do lots of
things in the library or internet to understand the
information for your essays …”
Understanding, memorising, and learner autonomy
Approaches to Learning

A MA student in management from China moved from a
college to a house where he could have daily
conversations with a local landlady and spent huge
amount of time socialising with local friends while
remaining quiet in class and focusing only on things to
be assessed. Reason:
“My English is very poor. First, I wish to master the
language as soon as possible. … I don’t care how
others think of me. To improve my English is one of
the main purposes of my study anyway. With that
[English], I have a great advantage …” (FN-2, 12/03)
A surface learner or a strategic learner?
Classroom Dynamics




In a mixed classroom, there is a contrast between local
students who tended to be more articulate and CHC
students did not
 Major causal factor: linguistic barrier
In group Activity it is less so
In a mixed group, the first student who speaks up
determines quantity of participation
If majority is CHC (often the case in ‘popular courses for
Asia’ such as business administration, international law
and computer science), some could be as active as their
local counterparts (FN-4, 23/10/04)
 Causal factors: Tutor’s pace of speech; “We discuss
in Chinese if …”, “same level of English”, etc.
Participation is mostly context dependent
Classroom Dynamics

Tutors measures:






Slow down pace of lecturing
Approach Ss individually to show concern
During discussions, fill in cultural gaps
Encourage weaker voices (including naming a quiet
student in a small group to elicit a contribution)
…
Students’ response

“It [slow-paced lecture] was OK at the initial stage. In time,
many of us got fed up with it … because slow pace in
lectures are not authentic teaching. Showing special
concerns looked irritating as they made me look stupid”
(FN-17, 06/12/04, my translation and emphasis) .
Close observation of students and frequent elicitation of feedback
necessary
Summary 1
CHC Students academic experience abroad
 (many) developing a new identity




Stunning student in classroom (to claim breathing space)
Language-first learner (non-language major but put
language first)
Surprisingly active Japanese student (unrecognisable
identity)
Mediating in intermediate zones



Asking questions first to friend then in a small group
(‘face’ kept and new value accepted)
Extensive reading to enhance memorising (New strategy
based on own belief)
‘Research study’ (eclectic conception)
Summary 2
CHC Students Experience in the UK
 Mediating in intermediate zones


Doing-well student who “impressed the teacher” (deep or
active learner with respect for authority)
Creating own space of learning




Quiet listener who adopted deep learning approach
(listen, take notes, try to clarify and understand through
all means, … theorise)
Valuing research study by extensive reading (to develop
higher-order thinking skills) but refusing to give up
memorising (‘lower’ cognitive skills)
Learners having linguistic difficulties but rejecting being
patronised (?) Self-esteem
Discussing in Chinese when no one else around (?)
A Theoretical Issue
The data support the claims by third space/place theorists that cultures
in contact do lead to something new and something that displace the
history, creating very individual, heterogeneous and ambivalent
space/place for celebration.
However, the data also show that, in the process of negotiation, one can
also see something recognisable, coherent and something that
reflects the history(ies) of the parties involved, e.g., Socratic and/or
Confucian cultures of learning,.
Furthermore, there is no evidence to show that the change in identity
or in values is permanent. Some students might be simply ADJUST
their strategy in the situation.
Question: Do commonly cited definitions of third space/place
place too much emphasis on ambivalence to render the
notion unhelpful in researching or studying cultures in
contact?
Concept of Synergetic Culture
Culture (the modified)
(Shared, patterned, established) norms,
knowledge, values, beliefs, etc. with
coherence, seriality, etc.
Synergetic (the modifier)
Contact, interactive, reactive, simultaneous,
improvising, cooperative leading to things
new, unpredictable, unrecognizable, or
greater than the combined two
Synergetic Culture
Conceptual Model
C3
C4
C1x
C2b
C1
C2
C2a
C1a
C5
A Working Definition
‘Synergetic Culture of Learning’ can be used to refer
to:

Interactive space in which ‘culture’ is negotiated in
or built into the very condition of communication in
the performative present of interpretation.
●
●
In this space, something entirely new and something that
displaces the histories of all involved can arise, forming
the ambivalent and heterogeneous part of a learning
culture the individuals involved can name as their own.
It can also be intermediate zones where mediated ways of
behaving and modes of thinking can be identified and
individual identities are negotiated and transformed, i.e.,
the integrated part of this culture whose roots can be
traced to the cultures of learning in contact.
Comments and Questions!
THANK YOU