20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Paper
A Culture of Respect: International Students at a Superinternational University
Alexander Kalgin, Isak Frumin
Constructor University Bremen, Germany
Presenting Author: Frumin, Isak
This project looks at the phenomenon of superinternational universities through the lens of national cultures and socialization. Superinternational universities are those where international students make up over 50% of the student population, and no single nationality accounts for more than 15% of students. We use the case of Constructor University Bremen in Germany to explore the interplay of national cultures at such an superinternational university. Constructor hosts about 1800 students of 120 nationalities, and international students make up 84% of the student population.
We focus on cultural socialization and its perception by students. Frequently, the position of international students during their study abroad is seen as that of recipients of the host country’s culture (Adams, 2023). This view may be metaphorically termed “the culture monopoly”. In this view, international students absorb the host country's values, traditions and beliefs. The host country’s national culture takes precedence. In the case of superinternational universities, there is a tension for such a model. For Constructor University, the national German culture is not dominant. In fact, the university may be labelled an “extra-territorial international university”, and its national cultures are mixing and fusing. In such a context, it is thus not clear in what direction the diverse national cultures evolve. Are they converging towards a synthetical international culture? Are they becoming broadly “Western”, “European”, “German”, “American” or “uniquely Constructor”?
In this context, students are not passively receiving the dominant culture of the host country. They are instead actively engaged in cultural exchange and contribute to the “polyphony of cultures”. The university assumes the role of the “mediator” or “manager” of diversity and implements measures to facilitate cultural cohesion (Binder et al., 2013).
Research question: What culture emerges out of the “melting pot” of national cultures at a superinternational university?
Objective: To assess the university culture using qualitative methods.
Theoretical framework: theory of organizational culture and socialization (qualitative part) (Schein, 1990).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe qualitative part with interviews aiming to document the subjective perception of socialization (Schein, 1990)
For the qualitative part as suggested by Schein, we conducted interviews with “motivated respondents” – by distributing an invitation in student mailing lists and via snowball sampling starting from the members of one of the university societies oriented towards research in higher education.
The qualitative pilot phase was completed in January 2024 with 15 semi-structured interviews (~30-60 minutes in length). Additional interviews will be collected in February 2024.
Qualitative part
Culture is conceptualized as Artefacts, Values, and Assumptions (Schein, 1990)
• Artefacts - something visible and observable
• Values - values are behind the artefacts and give them meaning, these are felt and shared
• Assumptions - unconsciously held beliefs, non-reflective deeper understandings that create the base of the culture
Key interest: cultural socialization. Socialization is the process of communicating culture to newcomers, the “indoctrination”/ “enculturation”.
Method: Reconstruction of the Constructor University culture in Schein’s methodology. We rely on motivated respondents ready to reflect on the culture. Students are recruited via email sent to university mailing lists and via snowball sampling.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe qualitative pilot phase was completed in January 2024 with 15 semi-structured interviews (~30-60 minutes in length). The quantitative part is expected to be completed in February - March 2024.
What has emerged from the qualitative phase is the uniqueness of the Constructor culture. It cannot be reduced to a national culture, respondents do not associate their university culture with Germany. Some consider the culture to be more American than European. What stands out, however, is the emphasis on the value of respect for others, which the interviewees emphasized. The culture of CUB can be described as a "culture of respect". Respect is the value attached to being a 'good student' at CUB; those who do not respect others are seen as outsiders.
Another key finding is the potential of this multicultural environment to produce a particular attitude towards others. "You are accepted for who you are, not where you come from". Respondents emphasized that their experience of socializing with people from so many different countries had taught them to see personality first and to avoid stereotyping people based on their nationality. Thus, in this culture, personality is more important than nationality.
The university makes considerable efforts to promote tolerance towards multiculturalism and to communicate the importance of the value of respect for others. These efforts were considered important by the respondents. Overall, respondents spoke very highly of the University's culture and showed great affection for its diverse environment.
ReferencesAdams, I. (2023). NARRATIVES OF INTERCULTURAL TRANSFORMATION: Student Perspective Transition. In Developing Intercultural Competence and Transformation: Theory, Research, and Application in International Education (pp. 322–341). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003444169-20
Binder, N., Schreier, M., Kühnen, U., & Kedzior, K. K. (2013). Integrating International Students into Tertiary Education Using Intercultural Peer-to-Peer Training at Jacobs University Bremen, Germany. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 1(2), 273–285.
Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. (Vol. 45, Issue 2). American Psychological Association.
20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Paper
Integrating Competence in Phenomenon-Based Learning into European Educational Capital through Curriculum-Based Approaches
Sirkku Lähdesmäki
University of Eastern Finland
Presenting Author: Lähdesmäki, Sirkku
Facilitating the exchange of research-based and student-centred teaching methods and good practice between European countries is crucial to promoting equitable education. Curricula and the legislation that governs them play a key role in the organisation of teaching. Understanding the content of European curricula is important to assess the application of teaching methods and to compare approaches between countries. This study focuses on a content analysis of the curricula of five European countries from the perspective of key concepts related to Phenomenon Driven Learning (PDL). The differences in the conceptualisation of curricula (Westbury, 2000; Vitikka, 2009) and their guiding influence on the implementation of teaching are important considerations that also justify the relevance of the study. Curricula define, chronologically, the precise objectives and content per subject that teachers must follow (Westbury, 2002; Vitikka, 2009). However, teachers can use their pedagogical decisions to determine how to create conditions conducive to learning, rather than simply acting as recipients of the curriculum in the Anglo-American curriculum tradition (Erss, 2017). In Northern European didactics, teachers' interpretations of the curriculum are given greater weight, and this broader professional perspective defines the approach used in this study (Locke et al., 2004; Erss, 2017). The aim of the study is to map and compare the national curricula of five European countries regarding the concepts of PDL. This aim will be achieved by examining how their national curricula identify and define the following concepts describing PDL: integration, contextualisation, authentic learning, teaching methods and holistic learning. The aim is to understand if and how the national curricula allow for purposeful planning of PDL. The project partners are Finland, Italy, Greece, Portugal and Spain. The research is anchored in the Erasmus+ project 2023-2024 and the research data was collected during the initial phase of this project in 2023. The project, through (PDL), aims to create a common, inclusive learning pathway at European level. Therefore, it is important to investigate whether the curricula of different countries provide the basis for a targeted implementation of PDL. This research-based analysis will provide a more solid basis for international exchange of educational knowledge.
Phenomenal Learning is a Finnish product that, according to Lähdesmäki (2021), is strongly based on Dewey's (1912) pragmatic pedagogy. The PDL process design model provides teachers with research-based tools to design well-structured and theory-based learning (Lähdesmäki, 2021; 2022). In this study the term Phenomenon-Driven Learning (PDL) is used (Lähdesmäki, 2021; 2022). It can be interpreted as having developed from two main theoretical roots (Linturi, 2014). The first is Dewey's theory of functional learning, and the second perspective is related to both constructivist and socio-constructivist theory (Silander, 2015). The PDL framework of this study is structured around six key elements, as outlined by Lähdesmäki (2021). These elements include a curriculum-based approach, systemic learning process, method-based learning, contextuality, holistic perspective and authenticity. These are central concepts for this research and provide a lens through which PDL can be clearly characterised (Lonka, 2018; Silander, 2015b; Tarnanen & Kostinen, 2021; Symeonidis & Schwarz, 2016).PDL is a flexible teaching approach because it is based on several different pedagogical methods rather than being a traditional method. It includes familiar elements from different learning approaches (Tarnanen & Kostiainen, 2020). PDL builds on the development of many essential skills such as self-direction, innovation, socio-emotional and interactional skills, collaboration, creativity and courage as it is based on a student-centred, collaborative, experiential and integrative approach (Lonka, 2018; Lähdesmäki, 2021). Based on the analysis, several common definitions were identified for each concept, such as active learning methods, relevance of the subject matter to the student, connection to the local context, accessibility and inclusiveness.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study uses the qualitative phenomenological-hermeneutic approach defined by Taipale et al. (2010) and applies the abductive method described by Niiniluoto (2018). It focuses on the theoretical concepts of PDL. Data collection was carried out using an anonymous Webropol questionnaire at the beginning of the collaborative project in spring 2023. The data consists of 57 pages, which are stored in a password-protected folder as a PDF file. The survey description and the data protection form were attached to the beginning of the questionnaire. The research questionnaire was collected at the beginning of the Erasmus 2023-2024 project and the research design was distributed to the representatives of the participating countries at the kick-off meeting of the project. It was decided that the links to the questionnaire would be provided to the group of teachers in the target country who responded to the questionnaire. The support questionnaire investigated the definitions of ten concepts in the National Curriculum Framework, of which five concepts relevant to the research question were selected for this study. For the survey questionnaire, generic concepts were selected that could be understood in different national contexts and linked to relevant phenomena in the six key elements of PDL.
The analysis followed a systematic and thematic approach to the analysis of curriculum texts from different countries, focusing on the identification and comparison of key concepts and themes in the context of PDL. Data analysis was carried out using theory guided content analysis. However, the first round of analysis was carried out by looking at the content of the data as such. First, the curriculum text of each country was read through and organised thematically according to each concept in order to identify different themes. Brief descriptions of these themes were written. Then, conceptual subcategories were created from these themes to characterise the central themes related to the concept of each country's curriculum text. From the subcategories, main categories were formed for each concept studied, describing the aspects, similarities and differences found in all the texts that could be identified. This systematic process was applied to each concept. The analysis revealed differences in the definitions of these concepts. The second round of analysis was conducted from a theory-driven perspective. Here the subcategories and their descriptions from the first phase of analysis were taken as a starting point and examined through the principles defined in the theory.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsIn order to compare the curricula of these five European countries, it is important to understand each country's unique approach and how this is reflected in the education systems. Although each has a different approach to the contextualisation of education, there are commonalities. These include making learning relevant to students' lives, adapting education to local and global contexts, and ensuring that it is inclusive and accessible to all students. The distinctive features of contextualisation can be found in each country's curriculum texts through the integration of local culture and environment, the emphasis on student-centred learning, and the adaptation of teaching methods to different needs and backgrounds.
In terms of authentic and holistic learning, they share a commitment to making education relevant, engaging and applicable to the real world. According to the curriculum texts, this is achieved through the involvement of experts, collaboration, contact with the world outside school, the creation of special learning environments and student engagement in authentic tasks.
In terms of teaching methods, all five curricula reflect an educational philosophy that values student-centred, active and experiential learning. It emphasises cooperation and collaboration, diverse and inclusive teaching, problem-based and inquiry-based learning, technology integration and adaptability. This reflects the professional perspective (Locke et al., 2004). There are similarities in approaches to integration, but the specific emphases, curriculum structures and levels of autonomy and flexibility vary (see Vitikka, 2009). These differences reflect the unique cultural, social and educational philosophies of each country (Westbury, 2002). The goal that unites the curricula is to provide students with a more coherent, meaningful and comprehensive educational experience. The fertile ground for this research also lies in the examination of curricula for the sharing of research-based teaching and training expertise across Europe.
ReferencesDewey, J. (1912). School and Society. University of Chicago Press.
Erss, M. (2017). Curriculum as a political and cultural framework defining teachers’ roles and autonomy. In T. Autio, L. Hakala, & T. Kujala (Eds.), Opetussuunnitelmatutkimus: Keskustelunavauksia suomalaiseen kouluun ja opettajankoulutukseen (pp. 193–221). Tampere University Press.
Linturi, H. (2014). Ilmiöpuu: Ilmiöpohjaisen oppimisen juuristoa ja oksistoa. In A. Rongas & R. Laaksonen (Eds.), Ilmiöpas (pp. 10–27). Kopijyvä Oy.
Locke, T., Vulliamy, G., Webb, R., & Hill, M. (2005). Being a ‘professional’ primary school teacher at the beginning of the 21st century: A comparative analysis of primary teacher professionalism in New Zealand and England. Journal of Education Policy, 20(5), 555-581. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680930500221784
Lonka, K. (2018). Phenomenal Learning from Finland. Otava.
Lähdesmäki, S. (2021). [Developing a model to guide the design of a Phenomenon Driven learning entity as a model for the ILO design process in student teachers' teaching practice]. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Jyväskylä]. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-39-8562-2
Lähdesmäki, S. (2022). Ilmiölähtöisen oppimiskokonaisuuden suunnittelutaito opettajaopiskelijan geneeriseksi ammattitaidoksi ILO-suunnittelumallin avulla: Lectio praecursoria. Kasvatus & Aika, 16(2), 109–117. https://doi.org/10.33350/ka.113424
Niiniluoto, I. (2018). Truth-Seeking by Abduction. Springer.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage.
Silander, P. (2015). Digital pedagogy. In P. Mattila & P. Silander (Eds.), How to create the school of the future: Revolutionary thinking and design from Finland (pp. 9–26). University Of Oulu, Center for the Internet Excellence.
Symeonidis, V., & Schwarz, J.F. (2016). Phenomenon-Based Teaching and Learning through the Pedagogical Lenses of Phenomenology: The Recent Curriculum Reform in Finland. European Doctorate in Teacher Education (EDiTE).
Taipale, J., Miettinen, T., & Pulkkinen, S. (2010). Johdanto. In T. Miettinen, S. Pulkkinen, & J. Taipale (Eds.), Fenomenologian ydinkysymyksiä (pp.9–22). Gaudeamus.
Tarnanen, M., & Kostiainen, E. (2020). Ilmiölähtöinen oppiminen. In M. Tarnanen & E. Kostiainen (Eds.), Ilmiömäistä! Ilmiölähtöinen lähestymistapa uudistamassa opettajuutta ja oppimista (pp. 7–19). Jyväskylän yliopisto, opettajankoulutuslaitos: Uutta luova asiantuntijuus -hanke.
Vitikka, E. (2009). Opetussuunnitelman mallin jäsennys. Jyväskylän Yliopistopaino.
Westbury, I. (2000). Teaching as a Reflective Practice: What Might Didaktik Teach Curriculum? In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a
Reflective Practice. The German Didaktik Tradition (pp. 15-40). Routledge.
Westbury, I. (2002). Didaktik and curriculum studies. In B.B. Gundem & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Didaktik and/or curriculum: an internationaldialogue. Peter Lang.
20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Paper
The Possibilities of the Educational Environment at a Specialized University to ‘Absorb’ the Impact of Forced Innovations Caused by War
Dalija Gudaityte1, Edita Butrime1, Liudmila Dulksniene1, Virginija Tuomaite2
1LUHS, Lithuania; 2KTU, Lithuania
Presenting Author: Gudaityte, Dalija;
Butrime, Edita
In times of war, forced innovation can affect the learning environment in a number of ways. In this case, it is important to pay attention to how the war and the circumstances related to it can shape the education system and lead to a change in the learning environment. In wartime, where the physical learning environment may be impinged, distance learning becomes an important tool to enable people to learn regardless of geographic location.
Distance studies include various learning formats, such as blended learning, flipped classroom, social and cooperative learning, simulations, game-based learning, synchronous and asynchronous video lectures, polling software or collaboration authoring tools (Casanova, Paguia, 2022; Kusel, Martin, Markic, 2020; Butrime, 2020; Petrauskienė, 2018).
In the last 20 years, the following features of ICT-based distance studies in higher education institutions have emerged (Casanova, Paguia, 2022; Nwanko, 2015; Bailie, 2015; Vilkonis et al., 2012; Garrison, Anderson, Archer, 2000; G. M. Moore, 1998; ):
- studies are regarded as a service, thus, the student is a customer;
- higher education institutions offering distance learning must take into account the expectations and experiences of students so that all distance learning activities and resources are directed to the highest level of student satisfaction.
- expectation levels of students participating in distance studies are the following: infrastructure (technology), teacher, ways of learning, course design, and evaluation system.
- distance education and learning are characterized by a transaction that occurs when a student and a teacher communicate in a virtual learning environment, and that communication may not take place at the same time. This leads to unique patterns of student and teacher behaviour.
- the following 3 types of interaction are distinguished: student - teacher, student - learning content, and student - student.
The educational environment at a specialized university is special in that most of the teachers working here do not have a traditional pedagogical education, so learning from experience while studying their own activities is very important. In this way, efforts are made to improve educational competence, and to create a learning environment based on equal relations between teachers and students, and meeting the expectations of learners (Jucevičienė et al., 2010).
This study also aims to determine how teachers at a specialized university can better respond to the learning needs of students from warring countries, who have chosen this university, by creating an educational environment.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe article refers to the concept and features of distance studies according to Casanova, Paguia, 2022; Nwanko, 2015; Bailie, 2015; Vilkonis et al., 2012; Garrison, Anderson, Archer, 2000; G. M. Moore, 1998. It also takes into account theoretical positions that highlight constructivist attitudes, educational environments favorable to student empowerment, the prerequisites for the emergence of deep learning, the specifics of modern learning and higher education (Barnett, 1990, 1999; Jucevičienė, Gudaitytė et al., 2010; Jucevičienė, Lipinskienė, 2001; Jucevičienė, Stanikūniene, 2002; Petty, 2006; 2008; Ramsden, 2000).
The research method is an in-depth interview with Ukrainian and Israeli students studying at our university who voluntarily agreed to participate in the study (N ₌ 10). The interview results were processed by employing qualitative descriptive content analysis.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe results of the study revealed which distance learning formats and features of distance studies are most acceptable to the informants, what support and psychological help they expect from teachers and the educational environment they create. The study allowed the teachers to understand the importance of developing flexible thinking in evaluating people and processes; to understand the relational nature of learning now and in the future; to create a system that can be applied in extreme conditions and times of change; and to provide opportunities for learners to learn in the most suitable way for them to achieve the learning goal.
References1.Bailie, J. L. (2015). Perceptions and expectations of online graduate students regarding synchronous events. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies 17. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1102866.pdf.
2.Barnett, R. (1990). The Idea of Higher Education. Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, 1900 Frost Rd., Suite 101, Bristol, PA 19007.
3.Barnett, R. (1999). Realizing the University in an Age of Supercomplexity. Buckingham, UK: Society for Research in Higher Education and Open University Press.
4.Butrime E. (2020). Virtual Learning Environments and Learning Change in Modern Higher Education During the Covid-19 Coronavirus Pandemic: Attitudes of University Teachers and Students. 13th annual International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation. 9-10 November, 2020. ICERI2020 Proceedings, pp. 8582-8589.
5.Casanova, V. S. and Paguia, W. M. (2022). Expectations, Experiences, and Satisfaction of the Graduate Students with Distance Online Learning Environment in OMSC Graduate School during the Covid-19 Pandemic. Journal of Practical Studies in Education, 3(1), 14-22.
6.Garrison, D. R., et al, (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6.
7.Jucevičienė P.; Stanikūnienė B. (2002). Universiteto dėstytojų edukacinė kompetencija mokymosi paradigmos kontekste. Socialiniai mokslai, 3(35). Kaunas: Technologija.
8.Jucevičienė, P.; Gudaitytė, D.; Karenauskaitė, V.; Lipinskienė, D.; Stanikūnienė, B.; Tautkevičienė, G. (2010). Universiteto edukacinė galia: atsakas 21-ojo amžiaus iššūkiams: monografija. Kaunas : Technologija. 924 p. ISBN 9789955259022.
9.Jucevičienė, P.; Lipinskienė, D. (2001). Edukacinė studentą įgalinanti studijuoti sistema mokymosi paradigmos kontekste. Socialiniai mokslai, 2(28). Kaunas: Technologija.
10.Küsel, J., Martin, F., & Markic, S. (2020). University students’ readiness for using digital media and online learning—Comparison between Germany and the USA. Education sciences, 10(11), 313.
11.Moore, G. M. (1989). The three Types of Interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-6.
12.Nwankwo, A. A. (2015). Students' Learning Experiences and Perceptions of Online Course Content and Interactions. Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. 188. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/188.
13.Petrauskiene, R. (2018). Elements of gamification and motivational aspects. ALTA ‘18 advanced learning technologies and applications, 38.
14.Petty, G. (2006). Šiuolaikinis mokymas. Praktinis vadovas. Vilnius: Tyto alba (in Lithuanian).
15.Vilkonis, R., et al, (2012). E-Learning at The Higher Education Institution: Research on Students’ Experience and Expectations. Mokytojų ugdymas. 2012. Nr. 19 (2), 114–132.
16.Petty, G. (2008). Įrodymais pagrįstas mokymas. Praktinis vadovas. Vilnius: Tyto alba (in Lithuanian).
17.Ramsden, P. (2000). Kaip mokyti aukštojoje mokykloje. Vilnius: Aidai (in Lithuanian).
|
