Finding Common Ground: Enhancing Domestic-International Student Engagement in the Classroom

Finding Common Ground: Enhancing Domestic-International Student Engagement in the Classroom

Shanton Chang

Department of Information SystemsThe University of Melbourne

ALTC funded project

The University of MelbourneRMIT UniversityVU University

Why is this an issue in Australia?

Growth in the numbers of international students has outpaced pedagogic understandings of effective teaching and learning practices.

Practice has ‘run ahead of theorisation and empirical research’ (Marginson, 2007: 7).

Was left to happen by osmosis

International student issue - Local students often are left out of the discussion.

Educating Globally Mobile Graduates

The diverse classroom with students from different backgrounds provides:

• a great resource for educating globally mobile graduates.

• the broader student body with the opportunities for engaging in intercultural exchanges and communication.

• provide a global outlook for all students by bringing diversity and new ways of looking at things

Current Situation: How are we doing it?

Currently, the work done around internationalising the curriculum in Australia tends to focus on the following themes; how to teach across cultures and international students how to include culturally inclusive curriculum; and the use of international case studies (Arkoudis, 2006; Ballard and Clanchy, 1997; Biggs, 1997, Chang, 2007).

In addition, Ladd and Ruby (1999) and Kashima and Loh (2006) provide further insights into the adjustment and acculturation needs of international students.

Additionally, work is being done on what competencies are needed by academics who teach across cultures (Sanderson, 2007)

Current Situation: Some Challenges

Marginson and Eijkman (2007, Executive Summary, p. 6) concluded:

“… the internationalisation of the curriculum content, and the potential pedagogical, curricular and other implications of

greater diversity of national origins, native languages, cultural backgrounds and educational preparations in the

student body, appear to be underdeveloped. Perhaps there were simply not the resources to create more inventive approaches to pedagogies and curriculum in now more

multi-cultural classrooms.”

Current Situation: What might be done?

Treleaven, Freeman, Leask, Ramburuth, Simpson, Sykes and Ridings (2007) provide cogent discussions about the importance of and need for embedding intercultural communication within the curriculum of business faculties.

They also showed the resources, support structures (communities of practice), policies needed to bring about internationalisation of the curriculum.

Note UKCISA’s project to be launched at their Conference in July 2010

We know it is important but how do we do it?

Where does interaction fit into content teaching?

What are the benefits and obstacles?

The Interaction Conundrum

Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) funded Project

Focus• exploring the benefits of interaction, the obstacles

and examples of practice• investigating practices that can enhance interaction

within the learning environment

Data collection• online survey of academic staff • academic staff and students interviewed (focus

groups)

Outcome• The development of the Interaction for Learning

Framework

Principles Underpinning the Framework

– Acknowledges and capitalises on student diversity as a resource for learning and teaching

– Engages students from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds within the learning context in a variety of ways

– Embeds interaction in curriculum planning and links to teaching, learning and assessment

– Promotes peer engagement through curriculum-based activities

– Recognises the variety of ways that interaction can be utilised across different learning contexts

increased awareness and understanding of different perspectives - enriched learning experience

preparation for the workplace - workplaces have the same cultural diversity as that of university classrooms

improved English language skills of international students

greater feeling of belonging - development of personal relationships

Benefits of Engagement

Eisenchlas and Trevaskes (2007) – People prefer to stay within familiar cultural groups

Greater numbers of students from particular regions and cultures also mean that the need for interaction across cultures is less urgent.

Morita (2004), O'Loughlin & Arkoudis (2009) - Students who do not believe that their English language skills are at the ‘adequate level’ will select not to participate

Watkins & Biggs (1996) – Attitudes of academics pointing to lack of critical analysis skills, language problems and plagiarism

Devos (2003), Eames & Stewart (2006) – large classes with increasing diversity can be frustrating

ie. No time, No Resources, No Common Ground, No specific Planning, Too much Content,

Barriers to Engagement

Hyland et al. (2008 p. 4) point out:

“The attitude of the academic is crucial in determining possibilities for intercultural dialogue: it is our [the academics’] beliefs about learning and teaching that guide the way we work, that influence whether we position ‘international students’ as needing to acquire a set of skills to assimilate with the dominant pedagogical approaches or whether we position ourselves – local and international students – as needing to learn and to be open to change.”

Empowering Academics

Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) funded Project

Focus• exploring the benefits of interaction, the obstacles

and examples of practice• investigating practices that can enhance interaction

within the learning environment

Data collection• online survey of academic staff • academic staff and students interviewed (focus

groups)

The Interaction for Learning Framework

1. Planning interaction

2. Creating environments for interaction

3. Supporting interaction

4. Engaging with subject knowledge

5. Developing reflexive processes

6. Fostering communities of learners

Creating Environments for Interaction

Strategies such as social tutorials, allocating seats or tables in classes and places in group formations all helped the mixing up of the class, opening up communication among students and increasing their confidence in communicating with students beyond their own cultural groups.

Most of the academic staff that participated in the focus group interviews identified this as important in the first week of classes.

Supporting Interaction

According to the findings, it is important to explain to students that: – Everyone is treated respectfully and their experience

is valued – They can learn from their peers through interaction

and explain how– Interaction can involve face to face or online

communication– Asking question is a good thing and can assist in

developing better understandings about the subject material

Engaging with Subject Knowledge

The aim of the third dimension is to engage students in interaction, which may assist in developing their conceptual understandings of the subject content, through exchanging ideas, analysing material, critiquing various approaches, as they may relate to the learning outcomes of the subject.

Developing Reflexive Processes

During the focus group discussion, a number of academics noted the importance of reflexive (bi-directional) process as a higher level of peer interaction for learning and cognitive engagement where learners seek the knowledge base available within the community of learners, reflect on similarities and differences of understandings, and seek interaction to co-construct knowledge.

Fostering Communities of Learners

The ultimate goal of peer interaction across cultural groups is to enable students to develop initiatives to move across different cultural contexts and take control of their learning.

Learners collectively form a community of actively engaged learners beyond classrooms.

Some Key Findings

• Finding common ground was considered a major obstacle by students

• The framework can guide academics in developing peer interaction across diverse student groups

• The framework can be used to document good practice for performance reviews

• The international/domestic distinction is not useful in current higher education context

• Fewer examples existed in the last two dimensions of the framework

Questions?