A CONCEPTUAL LINK BETWEEN STUDENT DIVERSITY AND CBLEs

As shown in section 1.2.4.2, there was a paradigm shift in the conceptualization of differences among people in educational studies. Compared to the 1960s when diversity was mainly used to designate differences related to race, ethnicity and gender (see Sefa Dei & Asgharzadeh 2005: 219), it now refers to the broader areas of social, physical, educational and geographical differences. These include differences related to ethnicity, race, class, gender, language, religion, age, sexuality, disability, ability, and place of birth (Dancy II 2010: 157; Sefa Dei & Asgharzadeh 2005: 6; UNDESA- IIAS 2001: 1; Mda 2000: 219). The meaning of diversity has often been expanded to embrace the concept of co- existence amidst differences aimed at mutual benefits. This underpins the current trends in diversity management which focuses on creating an organisational environment in

128

which heterogeneity and commonalities are equally celebrated and valued and in which individuals can use their potential to obtain mutual benefits (Wrench 2007: 4-5). The above conceptualisation of diversity has become a common phenomenon in education areas because the current globalisation in education has introduced a highly heterogeneous student population, not only in terms of academic backgrounds, but also in terms of socio-cultural life. This heterogeneity of students at international and national levels has led to the application of different diversity management strategies (see section 3.3).

In the international arena, globalisation has facilitated international scholarships for students. Students from different countries across the globe cross national borders to further their education in other countries. This phenomenon which implies the physical movement of students across geographical boundaries has been referred to in terms such as “internationalisation”, “across-borders”, and “overseas education” (Field 2009: 3; Varghese 2009: 38). International students may encounter psychological, academic, socio-cultural and life style differences while being expected to continually adjust themselves to the cultural, academic, social, and linguistic features of the host country (Anderson, Carmichael, Harper, & Huang 2009: 18). Addressing diversity needs of foreign students is assumed to serve the academic success of foreign students.

Diversity issues at national level are significantly different from those in the international arena. Particularly in developing countries, diversity is often linked to power relationships which determine social interaction in inter-group scenarios within and outside educational contexts. As mentioned, due to the massification of education, countries have facilitated access to education for “non-traditional students” who now stream to higher education institutions which were originally established for “traditional students” (Anderson et al. 2009: 18). This situation presumes the co-existence of heterogeneous citizens from varied ethnic, racial and cultural backgrounds. In multicultural societies where social and political inequalities prevail among different social groups, some students may experience discrimination based on their identity and students from dominant cultural groups may find it difficult to accommodate students with different cultural ties in the teaching and

129

learning environments. Goodman (2011: 15) contends that “privileged groups uphold their own attributes as preferable while distorting and disparaging the qualities of others”. This circumstance might instil mistrust, suspicion and hostility among different groups (cf. section 2.2.3.3.3). The dynamism of student populations necessitates a context specific theoretical perspective of border crossing which implies the mental and socio- psychological transformation of students across ethnic, linguistic and religious boundaries. In this study, as mentioned, the process of crossing one’s own as well as others’ identity boundaries for learning purposes is termed cross-border learning and the strategies employed to attain the transformation is referred to as CBLEs.

The assumption behind cross-border learning is that students’ interaction in multicultural teaching and learning environments is influenced by socio-cultural diversity factors (Strayhorn 2010: 141; Bray, Peter, & Stephens 1986: 131). Strayhorn explains such interaction as “the extent to which individuals from diverse backgrounds actually come into contact with others and interact in educationally purposeful ways”. This purposeful and meaningful contact would influence students’ CBLEs at personal and emotional, as well as interpersonal and social levels (Baber 2010: 221; Hurtado 2006: 250; Gallo et al. 1997: 212).

In a multicultural context, group learning activities imply heterogeneity of members and necessitate interpersonal interaction among group members. The behaviour a student develops as a result of interaction with students from other backgrounds and the effect of the interaction is known as educational outcomes of diversity (Gurin et al. 2002: 2). In constructive educational environments, these outcomes comprise both academic and social learning products. Academic learning outcomes refer to students’ active thinking and academic skills they acquire after an educational process whereas the socialisation outcomes imply multiple perspectives developed through interaction across racial, ethnic and cultural identity borders. Jarvis (2006: 57) emphasises that when cultures are shared and “we have learned the relevant knowledge, values, beliefs, etc. the culture becomes our own subjective reality and as such helps us determine the way that we perceive and experience the world, and consequently we learn with it and from it”. The learning

130

outcomes of the process includes knowledge concerning commonality and differences (Dancy II 2010: 82-83; Gurin et al. 2002: 4; McCown et al. 1999: 26).

As shown in the preceding sections, a study on diversity management and cross-border learning experiences at Ethiopian universities requires a viable knowledge and relevant information pertaining to Sociology of Education and learning theories to generate a synthesised context specific conceptual and theoretical framework, depicted below in Figure 4.1. The outer circle of the Figure with broken line encompasses vital diversity circumstances in the society. The three rectangles with pointer arrows to the interior parts indicate theoretical grounds that explain diversity studies in contexts. The three curved and bi-dimensional thick arrows show the interplay of theoretical perspectives that relate to the phenomenon that is studied: the relationship between diversity management processes and CBLEs. The four arrows from the thick arrows pointing to the interior of the diagram show the influence of the theoretical perspectives on the management processes and the development of CBLEs.

The eight arrows in the centre of the framework are used to indicate relationships among theoretical components relating to diversity management and cross-border learning in Ethiopia. In this regard, the bi-dimensional arrows are used to indicate that the two theoretical components have equivalent influence on one another whereas the nidirectional arrow is used to show that the component may have an impact on the other component but not vice versa. The arrows also reflect the network of interaction of diversity and learning related variables in the development of CBLE strategies in multicultural and multilingual contexts. In the study the directions of the arrows would also imply the analytical relationship between the study variables and the theoretical assumptions that relate to the empirical evidence.

131

Figure 4.1: A conceptual model for relating diversity management and cross- border learning Sociology of Education Interactio n theory Critical Social Theory Theories of Learning Neurologica l theoretical perspective and Psycho- social theoretical perspective Knowledge of Diversity Management (National and Global) (DVs) Diversity variables: ethnicity, language and religion (TDM) Transformational Diversity Management CBLEs (AL) Approaches to learning (DP) Diversity Perception (DMP) Diversity Management Provisions

132

Diversity Variables (DVs) are variables such as ethnic, linguistic and religious differentiation that students bring to a learning environment and which could influence students’ relationships and interaction in cross-border learning contexts. The diversity variables presume the construction of knowledge through cross-border interaction in social contexts. Diversity Management Provision (DMP) refers to underlying strategies set in place in an institution to address identified diversity issues which relate to DVs. The provisions are viewed from the transformational theory of diversity management (TDM) perspectives which presume the instalment of compelling learning environments in which students embrace both uniqueness and commonalities with enthusiasm and strive for mutual respect and learning benefits (see sections 3.5.2; 3.6.1 and 4.3.4.2). It is assumed that the extent to which the provisions are transformative may influence the degree to which CBLEs promote intended academic and social learning outcomes.

Approaches to Learning (AL) refer to the processes and activities students undertake to learn from the learning environment, including diversity experiences (Fry et al. 2009: 11; Hurtado 2006: 252). The processes may include what students bring to in-classroom and outside-classroom learning circumstances, the manner in which they handle their learning experiences and their personal learning intentions (Laurillard 1993: 286). These also assume the development of Diversity Perception (DP) which is seen as cognitive development that emerges from the involvement of students of different cultural and ethnic backgrounds in the construction of knowledge (Shizha 2005: 77). The Approaches to Learning and Diversity Perception variables are viewed from the social learning perspectives because student perceptions of their learning social environment may influence their approaches to learning which would influence their social interaction. Finally, the Transformational Diversity Management and CBLEs relationship (TDM- CBLEs) refers to the connection between diversity management strategies and students’ learning experiences to bring about academic and social learning outcomes that would enhance a holistic development of students and which implies the realisation of in-depth learning strategies

133

4.5 SUMMARY

In this chapter, relevant theoretical perspectives of Education Management, Sociology of Education and learning were linked to socio-cultural theories of learning to establish a multi-perspective view on the relationship between diversity management approach at higher educational institutions and concomitant cross-border learning outcomes. This chapter will serve as conceptual and theoretical framework in terms of addressing cultural values, namely ethnic, linguistic and religious variables and resultant social learning behaviour of groups at higher education institutions.

134

CHAPTER 5