2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

0-7803-9028-8/05/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE.

Making Connections: Teaching Writing to Engineers and Technical Writers in a Multicultural Environment

Carolyn Boiarsky Purdue University CalumetBoiarsc@SBCglobal.net

Abstract

Teaching writing to engineering students representing Indian, Middle Eastern, Asian, and American cultures can be daunting as their cultural perceptions of time, gender, source of authority, individualism and risk taking, affect learning styles. However, despite cultural differences, many International students have no difficulty with much of American instruction and, in some cases, perform better than American students. Their ability to adapt to American instruction appears to depend primarily on the educational goals of their cultures.

Keywords: multicultural, training, engineering communication, classroom learning, international students

Introduction

Since the inception of the global economy, consultants in technical writing have been providing training, both in the United States and overseas, to multicultural audiences. In addition, instructors in institutions of higher education have been teaching an increasing number of International students.

The number of international students in many universities and other English-speaking countries has been increasing, with the 2000-2001 academic year seeing a 6.4% increase in enrollment, the largest one-year boost in 20 years. [1] Much of this increase in the past decade has been due to students matriculating from the Middle East, Asia and Africa. Nine of the top ten countries from which students are now coming are Asian. [2] The

number of students from South Korea has increased 17%, from China 12%, and from India 10%. This trend is especially true of colleges with specialties in computing, technology, and engineering, such as Purdue University, which now ranks first among public universities in international enrollments. [3]

Purdue University Calumet (PUC) in Hammond, Indiana, where I have been teaching since 1995, has followed in its parent university’s footsteps. Prior to 2001, PUC had a large number of students from Middle Eastern countries, such as Palestine and Jordan. Many of these students were enrolled in engineering programs. However, following 9/11, many of these students returned to their native countries. To compensate for this loss, the University has been involved in a concentrated effort to recruit students from other international populations, especially from Southeast and Far East Asia.

American campuses are not the only ones recruiting international students. Universities in Australia, Canada and the UK have recently begun to ‘aggressively’ market their campuses to students around the world. [4] Thus, consultants and university instructors from many English-speaking countries are being confronted with the dilemma of teaching students whose cultures are quite different from their own. Yet these cultures significantly affect the way students learn.

Cultural Effects on Classroom Learning

International students from non-Western cultures differ considerably from their American counterparts, and, in fact, they differ from each other in significant ways. Their conceptions of

47

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

women as instructors, their understanding of American classroom conventions and teaching methodologies, and their educational goals are as different as their languages and rhetorical strategies.

Thus my dilemma—should I make major changes to my requirements, curriculum, deadlines, and standards in order to provide for the cultural needs of the international students, or should I insist that the international students adapt my American version of college? Acutely aware that, if I adapt my teaching to the culture of the international students, the American students may be adversely affected, I have been searching for a way to provide for a variety of cultures in a single classroom in the same way technical writers have attempted to provide for the variety of cultures reading their documents.

For over a decade technical writers, concerned with reaching a global audience, have been studying how to write in a multicultural environment. [5, 6, 7] Much of what has been learned about cultural differences in language and rhetorical strategies can be applied to teaching in a classroom of international students. However, in addition, such aspects as curriculum, methodology, classroom conventions, authority, and evaluation of written texts must be considered. These are affected by various factors, including cultural perceptions of time, gender, dress, source of authority, individualism, risk-taking, life goals, relationship of education to community goals, and previous classroom experience. In this paper, I will discuss how the various aspects of instruction in my classes have been affected by the cultures of the international students.

BackgroundLet me begin by providing a description of the culture of the American students who attend PUC, a non-residential campus in Hammond, Indiana. The students are mainly from working class, East European backgrounds. A minority percentage is African-American and Hispanic. Well over half of the students are first generation college students, the majority of whom come from families that have not previously recognized academic literacy as a high priority. [8] Most students hold jobs, often full time.

Until 9/11 a number of students from the Middle East were enrolled in my course in “Report

Writing for Engineers.” Last year several Indian students were enrolled, and this year approximately half of the class is from India. Next year the University will be collaborating with several institutions in China and Korea to provide their students with an academic experience in the States. In the meantime, this past semester (Spring ’05) several students from Arab countries have returned to my class.

CurriculumI use a process-oriented, problem-solving approach to curriculum. Students are expected to engage in the writing process and understand the rhetorical strategies underlying technical writing tasks. I cover a limited number of workplace genres and subgenres, preferring that students acquire basic skills in rhetoric that can be transferred from one genre to another, rather than a narrow set of skills that they perceive relevant only to a specific type of document. I have found that the international students in my class have had no difficulty with this curriculum and that, in fact, I have been able to expand the number of genres and subgenres that I cover.

Expanded Content Because almost all of my American students hold jobs, often full time, and because many have families, they do not feel they have time to work on assignments outside of class. In addition, because they do not perceive their academic work as a high priority in their lives, except as a means to get a job, many are not willing to expend the time and effort required to learn more than is necessary for the required task. [8] To provide these students with opportunities to work on their assignments, I have set aside class time, time that would otherwise have been used to provide lectures on additional topics.

In addition, I find my American students need to be ‘spoon-fed.’ [9] They want to be told exactly what to do, i.e., what to read, what content they will be responsible for in their exams, how to put together their papers. Because of these needs, I spend class time reviewing for exams, re-explaining concepts that have been taught previously, going over assigned readings, and providing detailed instructions for assignments. The repetition and overly detailed instructions, usually caused by the students’ failure to do the assigned readings or to take notes during the lectures, further reduces the amount of information

48

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

and the types of genres that can be presented in a semester.

Far East and Southeast Asian students differ markedly in their perceptions of the importance of their academic work. Asian students consider their academic work at least as important as their jobs (they work in order to pay for the education that will enable them to obtain better jobs). Furthermore, they accept the responsibility for their own learning. Thus, they are more conscientious in attending class, taking notes, referring to their notes as they engage in assignments, and attending to deadlines. They do not need class time to do their assignments, even if they work. They not only don’t require the repetition of information, but become bored when it is offered. Thus, by teaching classes with an international majority, I have been able to increase the amount of information and the number of genres I present.

In-depth concepts Despite the perception that the previous classroom experience of Indian and Asian students is limited to rote learning and therefore surface skills, [10] recent research indicates that these students also engage in ‘deep transformational learning.’ [11, 12] I found this to be true.

One of the five value dimensions on which cultures differ, according to Hofstede [13 ] is “long-term orientation (the perspective of the people toward the future).” Indian students come out 7th on the LTO (Long Term Orientation) Index, developed by IBM. Their learning goals are long term; they are oriented toward job application in the future and, therefore, they attempt to acquire the concepts underlying the various skills they are learning. [13] According to Gupta [9], Indian students are expected to acquire not only the concepts underlying individual skills but also the broader concepts that underlie a broad spectrum of tasks that would be applicable to a number of different types of jobs.

On the other hand, the learning goals of many American students are short-term; they have a score of 17 on the LTO Index. [13] Many are not willing to spend the time and effort necessary to engage in problem-solving tasks. [8] This tendency is exacerbated by their K-12 classes which are exam driven, and not concerned with students’ understanding of ‘deep’ concepts. This situation

has been exacerbated by state assessment tests, and “No Child Left Behind” legislation. Thus, I have found a greater percentage of international students willing to exert the effort to engage in ‘deep processing’ and ‘problem-oriented tasks’ [14] than many American students. My consulting experience with Asian engineers is similar.

Methodology Like most American and Western European instructors, I have adopted the active, participatory model of learning. I use a variety of methods that include lecture, small group work, Socratic questioning, and whole class discussion. I expect students to participate, question each other and the authorities they read as well as their instructor. However, Asian, Southeast Asian, and Middle Eastern instructors in the main still use a passive ‘behavioristic’ model. Furthermore, according to Dennett, [15] Asian students have “limited interaction” with their teachers; East Indian students are taught “not to question their elders,” but to “treat them [their instructors] like God.”

I have found this to be true. International students are often reticent to express their views in a whole class discussion, especially if they disagree with the instructor. However, they become active participants, willing to express disagreement even with the instructor, when the class is divided into small groups and they are interacting with their peers. I have also found that as American students model the kinds of interactions that are appropriate for whole class discussion as well as ways to express disagreement with the instructor, many of the Asian students, especially the men, not only begin to participate but become willing to express strong opinions.

Classroom Conventions While International students appear to adapt easily to my curriculum and methodology, some have difficulty with such classroom conventions as meeting deadlines, attending classes, and arriving on time. Because I attempt to create a context that closely resembles that of industry for my writing assignments, I am a stickler for deadlines. On the other hand, I believe attendance is up to the students. If they skip class, they are responsible for obtaining the notes, handouts, and assignments for that day from one of the other students. I consider coming late to class rude.

49

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

However, my expectations regarding these conventions differ from those of many of my students, including the American students.Deadlines for assignments, class attendance, and the promptness with which students arrive at class appear to be dependent on a student’s culture. In addition, they may also be dependent on generational and/or class differences.

Deadlines I have found PUC students fairly cavalier about meeting deadlines. Because they perceive their jobs and families as superceding their academic work, many of them have no compunction requesting extensions for assignments and make-ups for tests if their jobs require overtime or travel or a member of their family is sick or they have planned a vacation. The age-old excuse, my grandmother died, now replaced by the more technologically correct “my printer died” is used extensively.

Middle Eastern students also follow this pattern. As these students belong to what Hall [16] refers to as a high context, polychronic culture, they perceive time as relative.

Cultures can be categorized according to high and low context [7]. Individuals living in high context cultures, such as Japan and the Middle East, share similar backgrounds and traditions and therefore need little information to know how to act in various situations. In contrast, individuals in low context cultures, such as America, have differing backgrounds and traditions and, therefore, need detailed information related to various activities. In addition, cultures also perceive time differently. [16] In a monochronic time system, such as the United States, individuals create and follow specific schedules, whereas in a polychronic time system, such as the Middle East or the Caribbean, individuals do not perceive time as a rigid sequence of activities to be followed. The differences relate to the significance a culture places on completing an activity within a time limit. Cultures that use a polychronic time system place less emphasis on completing a task ‘on time.’ In a polychronic time system, a wedding called for 3 p.m. may not start until 4 p.m., while in a monochronic system, it would begin at the time scheduled.

To standardize the various cultural perceptions of time, I have adopted what I call, “American business time.” Deadlines are set according to this

time and must be met, regardless of circumstances. I have found that, after the first deadline in which students often test the rigidity of the schedule, all students manage to meet the deadlines for their papers.

Middle East and Asian cultures place a priority on ‘saving face.’ Thus, when these students do not complete an assignment on time, they have ‘excuses’ that they hope will be accepted. When I do not accept the excuses, they ‘lose face’ and they do not miss another deadline.

Attendance and Promptness Students’ attendance and prompt presence in class is similarly dictated by their cultures. American students consider locating a parking space close to the class building as a higher priority than arriving in class on time. They perceive attendance at school the same as attendance at work, simply in terms of time lost, not learning lost [8]. International students from polychromic time cultures often attend class sporadically and arrive at various times within the period. On the other hand, those students from monochronic cultures usually have high attendance rates and are rarely late to class.

AuthorityAuthority in the classroom depends to a large degree on instructors’ presence as well as knowledge and experience. However, it is complicated by gender, especially in the academy and in relation to the fields of science, engineering and technology, which have traditionally been considered the domain of men. A female consultant in a male-dominated situation often finds herself in a hostile environment in which she is being silently challenged to prove herself.

Despite the women’s movement in this country, many working class men, like those in my engineering classes and the engineers in the workshops I conducted at nuclear power plants, come from male-dominated homes. These men not only test my right to tell them about their field but also my authority to evaluate them in their field. They challenge my knowledge at every opportunity, and they challenge my grading if they think they can win a confrontation.

International students who come from cultures that still practice male domination of the female are even less willing to grant me authority, especially

50

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

in terms of evaluating them. In a quest for a better grade, men from some cultures have not only demanded that I change their grades but have moved into my space to such a degree that one time two female students who had remained after class to talk to me asked if I wanted them to call security. Other students whose culture perceives payment for services as simply part of their economic system have offered me dinner and invitations to their homes. After requesting my help in a writing problem, another student, citing his religion, refused to shake my hand.

To maintain my authority, regardless of a students’ cultural bias, I have enacted a number of procedures that have in the main prevented what I perceive in my culture as confrontations, bribes and insults. These measures include:

(1) Disseminating a set of rubrics, based on primary trait analysis, for each paper assigned.

(2) Providing a grading scale, indicating (a) the number of points or letter grades I have subtracted for a particular error, and (b) the requirements that must be met to achieve a specific grade level.

(3) Conducting a class review of the errors made by a majority of students when I return the graded papers, thus eliminating the need to deal with each error on a one-to-one basis with students.

(4) Refusing to debate a grade but willing to discuss a student’s error.

In addition, for the first few classes, I wear dark colored business suits and heels. Regardless of the culture, a business suit connotes authority. More than that, for some cultures, it connotes respect. In Lithuania, my students commented that they felt a British guest lecturer had not respected them since he had worn jeans and tennis shoes.

Text Evaluation Perhaps the greatest dilemma writing teachers face is that of responding and grading the written texts of students for whom English is not their native language. No matter how proficient in English students are, there will inevitably be a few American idioms with which they are not familiar. [17] In addition, their culture’s rhetorical strategies in business writing may differ from their own. [18] Instructors need to determine whether to lower the grades of International students because of these errors. Complicating this question is the

recognition that American students are not expected to make these errors and should be penalized if they do.

Another related problem is what to do with the texts of foreign students who are not proficient in English grammar and syntax. As instructors of technical writing, we should not be responsible for teaching these students English. Furthermore, by the time students take these courses, they are expected to have mastered the basics of the language. Again we are faced with the question of whether we should lower their grades for failing to communicate in good standard written English or whether we should grade them solely on their ability to use the appropriate rhetorical strategies and follow the conventions inherent in the specific document they are writing.

My solution to this problem is based on a combination of common sense and second language research.

Non-proficient students Students who are not proficient in English should either be placed in special classes or should be able to obtain assistance from a University-sponsored Writing Center. As PUC does not have special classes, I always recommend that those for whom English is a second language go over their papers with a tutor in the University’s Writing Center before submitting any assignments.

Papers of International students that contain a large number of errors are returned without a grade. Students are told to revise the paper by the next session or receive an F. This gives students a second chance to get help at the Writing Center. Once the paper is revised, it is graded according to the same criteria as the papers of the American students.

Proficient students These students make few grammatical or syntactical errors. Most of their errors are idiomatic, often relating to prepositions and word use. I respond to these errors in one of two ways, based on Ferris’s continuum. [17] (1) If the error is one that the student should have known how to correct, I will cross out the error, write the appropriate form above it, and indicate the English rule related to it. For example, failing to make words plural (final /s/ morpheme error). Example: “Housewife [wives] today and housewife [wives] 50 years ago are the same.”

51

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

(2) If the student probably would not have known the appropriate form, and there is no rule to refer to (this is especially true of idioms), I will indicate the American version and explain that this is how Americans express this idea. Example: “If a student fails [in] to placing an article before a noun...”

In responding to the grammatical and/or syntactic errors of students, regardless of whether they are native born or foreign students, I follow the concepts espoused by Mina Schaugnessy. [19] Rather than count each individual error, I look for error patterns to determine (1) if a student has made a single error several times or (2) whether that student has made several different errors. A single error made several times usually indicates that the student does not know the rule related to it. Several errors which occur only once in a paper usually indicates carelessness and/or failure to proofread.

I respond to errors related to the first type either by explaining the rule and demonstrating the correct version or sending the student to the Writing Center for assistance. My response to errors of the second type is similar to my response to non-native students who are not proficient in the language. In this case, however, the native student receives an F. If the student revises the paper effectively, I grade the paper again and the final grade for that assignment is determined by averaging the two papers.

Both international and American students respond similarly to these methods of response. Some go to the Writing Center for assistance as soon as I suggest it. Others wait until their grades demonstrate the need for help. Still others do not bother to go at all. In this case it is not culture but individual goals that inform students’ behaviors.

Conclusion

While foreign students’ response to American classrooms is influenced by their cultures, it appears that they are able to adapt quickly and easily to the new culture if it aligns with their own cultural goals. There is an old adage, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” Most foreign students seem to have adopted this concept, thus allowing American instructors to continue to provide the same kind of classroom environment they have been offering to their American students.

References

[1] Hartle, Terry, House Subcommittee Testimony of ACE Senior Vice President Terry Hartle on Student Visas. www.acenet.edu/news/press_release/2001/11 november/hartle.calif.testimony.html

[2] L.A. Mossler, “International Students on Campus: Passports to a Rewarding Experience.”www.uvm.edu/vtconn/v21/mossler.html

[3] B. McMurtrie, “Foreign Enrollments grow in the U.S., but so Does Competition from Other Nations,” The Chronicle of Higher Education.Nov. 16, 2001.

[4] Correspondent “Number of students drops at US colleges.” Dawn.www.dawn.com/2004/11/22/int4/html

[5] D. C. Andrews, Technical Communication in the Global Community, 2nd Ed.

[6] B. Maylath, et al. Approaches to Teaching Non-Native English Speakers Across the Curriculum: New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 70 May 1997, Jossey-Bass.

[7] E. Thrush, “Bridging the Gap: Technical Communication in an International and Multicultural Society,” TechnicalCommunication Quarterly.” 1, pp. 271-283, 1993.

[8] C. Boiarsky, Ed. Academic Literacy in the English Classroom: Preparing Working Class and Underprepared Students to Succeed in College. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook. 2003.

[9] S. Gupta. “Comparing an education in India vis-à-vis one in the U.S. 1999. www.cecs.usi.edu/-sumitg/essays/IndianVsUSEducation.html

[10] R. Harris. 1997. “Overseas Students in the United Kingdom university system. HigherEducation. 29. 77-92.

[11] J.B. Biggs. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Society for Research into Higher

52

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

Education Open University Press. Buckingham, England. 1999.

[12] P. Rambureth, “Cross Cultural Learning Behavior in Higher Education: Perceptions Versus Practice,” Seventh International Literacy and Education Network Conference on Learning, RMIT University, Melbourne. 2000 www2.cddc.vt.edu/ultibase/articles/may01/rambureth.html

[13] G. Hofstede, Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. New York: McGraw Hill. 1997.

[14] S.S. Mayya, A.K. Rao, K. Ramnarayan, “Learning Approaches and Learning Difficulties: a comparison of Indian and Nepali Dental Science Students. Journal of Dental Education. Nov. 2002. 66 (11):1297-302.www.accelerated-learning-online.com/research/learning-approaches-learning difficulties-comparison.html

[15] M. Dennett, “The Effect of Cultural Bias on the Adult Student’s Self Esteem.” Adult Learning 6 29-30. 1995

[16] E. Hall. The Silent Language. 1959. Greenwich Conn: Fawcett Publications.

[17] C. Torres. “A Study of Instructor Feedback for L2 Errors.” Master’s Thesis. Purdue University Calumet. 2004.

[18] C. Boiarsky. The Art of Workplace Writing. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers. 1977.

[19] M. Schaugnessy. Errors and Expectations. Oxford, UK: Oxford Press. 1977.

About the Author

Carolyn Boiarsky is Professor of English at Purdue University Calumet, Hammond, Indiana. She is the author of two textbooks: Technical Writing: Contexts, Audiences and Communities and Writings from the Workplace. An STC Associate Fellow, she was a partner of Effective Writing Associates, a consulting firm that specialized in writing for the nuclear power industry. She has written several articles concerning rhetorical

strategies used by various cultures in their business documents.

53