The second Academic Attributes theme which emerged from participants’ responses focused on the nature of teaching practices in Hong Kong classrooms. For most participants, the quality of this aspect of their academic work was dependent on the effectiveness of shaping their teaching approaches to better match the characteristics of offshore students and classroom conditions. There was agreement amongst participants that high quality classroom teaching practices were required to transfer content knowledge in ways that made sense to students in their educational, cultural and workplace contexts. Although their approaches varied widely, there were three interrelated groups of skills and behaviours, each of which, if not unique to Hong Kong classrooms were, nonetheless, especially pertinent to quality teaching practices in that context. These groups are explored in the sub-themes: A2.1 Demonstrating Credibility and Expertise, A2.2 Communicating Effectively, and A2.3 Facilitating Classroom Interactions.
Sub-theme A2.1 Demonstrating Credibility and Expertise
A perception shared by at least two thirds of participants was that, stemming from their likely teacher-centred, educational backgrounds, Hong Kong students expected, and respected, that their academics would demonstrate high levels of expertise. It was generally agreed that a reasonable and professional way to address these expectations was by demonstrating academic credibility and expertise. As evidenced in participants’ comments, this process contributed to effective teaching practices. For example:
Managing students’ perceptions of our academic credentials and status makes the classroom easier, as they put more value on us, and what we have to offer. So you have to be much more overt in making that obvious to them offshore, than we ever would onshore (E1).
Getting respect from students by establishing our qualifications, content expertise, teaching style, and business experience, as quickly as possible, definitely helps keep their attention throughout the whole course (L1).
181
Further, the importance of team members presenting consistent information across classes was also linked to reinforcing the perception that all staff possessed relevant and comparable levels of knowledge and experience. Despite the commonly-held conviction in this study that displaying these characteristics contributed positively to offshore teaching practices, and that it was essential to set the scene during first encounters in classes, opinions varied as to the extent and means of meeting such student expectations.
Some participants emphasised their academic and institutional expertise, while others focused more on external business work experience, and consulting activities. For example, E6, L3 and N1 introduced themselves to students through their qualifications, research, and teaching achievements and experience. C3 and E3 suggested students felt more confident when academics showed they were thoroughly familiar with the course aims, objectives and, especially, assessment tasks. For E1 and E4, explaining the reasoning behind the inclusion and sequence of materials and activities, assisted in grounding the relevance of the content in an understandable framework. These approaches were judged by participants as ways to reassure and instil confidence in students, to show interest in student concerns, and to build a rapport between academics and students that was conducive to a receptive learning and teaching environment.
Others (C2, E2 and L2), incorporated relevant stories from their own work experience and consulting activities, with the intention of appearing knowledgeable about well- known companies and business leaders, especially those from Hong Kong, and other Asian regions. E5 incorporated up-to-date examples, especially from newspapers, to stimulate student interest, show respect for local organisations, and strengthen the impression of business credibility. E2, E3 and L4, incorporated regular references to current, broader, societal issues to show their familiarity with, and embed curriculum content from students’ contextual environment. E2 and N1 drew upon their past experiences of living in Asian countries as sources of anecdotes which underlined their cultural awareness and interest in relevant regional issues.
182
Three participants took a specific adult learning perspective, which focused on sharing expertise, where they explicitly encouraged students to think of themselves as ‘experts’. C4 expressed this approach as “building on the value Hong Kong students place on me as an expert, to support them in seeing themselves as becoming experts as well”. E6 advocated a similar approach which entailed “asking students planned and specific questions, so they could display their local knowledge, with me giving lots of assistance and feedback, to make links between theories, and their own work and life experiences”. E1 suggested encouraging students to realise that their existing knowledge was valuable expertise that could be further enhanced through sharing and critiquing with academics and peers. An important additional benefit was that academics had more opportunities to check for students’ understanding through the type of examples, questions and the two- way feedback, which arose in such interactions. However, these participants also identified that the ‘student as expert’ approach to enhancing their own academic credibility was most effective when students had substantial work experience and higher proficiency in English skills, and there was sufficient time available for detailed role modelling, guidance and reassurance from academics. These conditions were not often available in Hong Kong programs.
Sub-theme A2.2 Communicating Effectively
The frequent references to miscommunications and misinterpretations between academics and students, apparent in participants’ interviews, suggested effective communication was fundamental to ensuring quality teaching practices. There were general assumptions that students’ English language capabilities, and their educational and cultural heritages would, inevitably, contribute to communication problems, and that good teaching required academics to be competent in culturally-sensitive written, verbal and non-verbal skills. However, participants identified two specific communication nuances that were necessary for clear and meaningful two-way exchanges of information with students, and, indeed, with other offshore stakeholders. Accordingly, this sub-theme was cascaded into two categories. These are: A2.2.1 Effective Communication Skills, and A2.2.2 Using Stories and Metaphors.
183
Category A2.2.1 Effective Communication Skills
In addition to basic communication skills, the specific skills for communicating effectively in Hong Kong classrooms included: nuanced verbal skills, techniques to elicit feedback and explore cultural norms, and precise written communication.
Ten participants monitored their own and students’ voice tone, pitch and speed, to aid in interpreting whether communications were understood as intended. As L4 said: “sometimes words get lost in translation, but the tone of voice will convey a message. I speed up my speaking to spark enthusiasm, and use a deeper tone to emphasise key points”. Most participants chose simple words and language to explain complicated concepts or jargon, although some found this conscious effort to be a frustrating and tiresome process (C1, E4, L1). Primarily in reaction to student complaints that academics with pronounced, non-Australian, ‘foreign’ accents, which were difficult to understand, and arguably, to protect their credibility, non-Western participants reported being acutely aware of slowing their speech, clear articulation and accurate pronunciation. An unanticipated consequence of these concentrated efforts to ensure effective communication, for some participants, was that they needed a few days after their teaching trips to ‘regain’ their usual vocabulary, and to stop consciously searching for simple words, in their onshore classes.
Feedback from offshore students was valued by participants as an informative gauge of effective communication. Their responses revealed that on-going, informal types of feedback were more highly regarded than formal grades and surveys, as indicators of quality teaching and learning. However, obtaining this feedback in practice was challenging for most participants. For example, in contrast to the prolific use of open- ended questions in onshore class plenaries, and the effective learning outcomes they generated, discussions in offshore programs were more likely to be initiated by a logically structured series of closed questions, which were targeted at small groups, instead of at individual students. Indicative examples of such techniques were:
184
The best academics at getting feedback in the classroom are those who get students to talk by role modelling, and quite overtly and specifically explaining how to ask questions. They stop to point out good examples or better ways of giving and receiving feedback in a constructive, supportive way. But, the short duration of offshore programs do limit opportunities for this type of practice when there’s a lot of content to cover (E1).
I’ve found more indirect approaches easier, like encouraging anonymous feedback in suggestion boxes or putting post-it notes up on a discussion wall. I’ve had success with generating collective feedback in small groups, especially by encouraging the students to discuss in their own preferred language first. That was a safer option for the students, and was more productive (C3).
Role playing was another indirect, low confrontation technique used to explore controversial diversity issues, such as notions of culture, religion, gender, age and seniority. Role plays designed to mimic problematic issues in classroom settings were also effective, although, as C2 and E3 experienced, Hong Kong students engaged more willingly if the scenarios were couched in hypothetical rather than realistic situations, and role guidelines were unambiguous. This approach provided a safe place in which to practice acceptable behaviours. E5 regularly turned awkward situations into discussions about managing cultural differences cultural norms for non-verbal behaviours, such as interpersonal proximity and eye contact. E1’s scenario was especially memorable:
I realised these issues were vital to good cultural communication many years ago, when a really enthusiastic young lecturer tried to get a class of Asian students to join in a ‘group hug’. This resulted in bewildered students and an embarrassed academic ... but, I’ve never done it again!
While participants’ examples largely focused on verbal communication and body language, four participants raised the importance of written communication to quality teaching. E3 described this concern as, “careful written wording on our part is just so vital in assignments and exams, as even an everyday expression like ‘illustrate your answer with an example’ can end up with a ‘drawing’, which makes perfect literal sense from a student’s points of view”. Written feedback, including electronic forms, caused inadvertent confusion or offense when seemingly neutral acts such as marking in red,
185
capital letters, or using directive language, were taken by students as criticism, rather than constructive feedback.
Finally, while the majority of participants perceived difficult cultural elements of communication as blockages which detracted from effective learning, and had the potential to undermine their credibility in the eyes of students, for others, they were learning opportunities. It is likely, however, that many academics, especially those with less offshore experience, would need expert guidance and support to develop the necessary range of skills to engage with students in unearthing and examining cultural differences in communication.
Category A2.2.2 Using Stories and Metaphors
The second effective communication category involved stories and metaphors to more clearly explain complex concepts, and to help students transfer and situate new learning in their own lives and workplaces. As E2 expressed, “being an effective communicator is about having the ability to assist students to decipher concepts in a way that makes sense in their world, and they can apply in practice”. In Hong Kong, participants frequently used verbal examples from their own knowledge and experience to clarify concepts, and to translate the idiosyncratic wordings and colloquialisms in prescribed textbooks and other resource materials, most of which were of Western origin. E4 and E2’s examples of two stages of translation underlined the complexity of figurative language:
The students asked the meaning of ‘get your team together for a ‘pow-wow’, in the textbook. We wouldn’t say it in like that in Australia either, so I had to come up with a description of a ‘pow-wow’, and then think of an image of collaborative teams sitting around that made more sense to me and them. I baulked at getting into ‘passing the peace pipe’! (E4).
Stories are often based on metaphors which can have very localised expressions, so you can end up ‘using a metaphor to explain a metaphor’ which can become even more convoluted and confusing (E2).
186
Many insights were shared about how to best use this type of communication. Representative examples were:
I like to explain idioms and check understanding, so I ask students to give me back a similar example in their own words, just to make sure (C1).
My advice is to be very careful about the metaphors and stories you choose, especially in case studies and exams. I ask a local staff member to see if it’s likely to be culturally, politically and racially acceptable (E5).
Two superficially light-hearted, yet insightful and memorable, examples illustrated the confusion possible when using metaphors. When explaining the limitations of conducting meetings in too small an office, C4 told students that “‘you need at least enough room to swing a cat’, which caused misunderstanding, curiosity, and some amusement for the class”. L4 became aware of the repetitive use of a figure of speech only after receiving feedback from a local staff member, who’d been confided in by a student, that “apparently my class became quite concerned about my ‘fear of dying in Hong Kong traffic’. It seems I had a habit of saying something like, ‘let’s just make sure you’re all clear on the assessment requirements, in case I get hit by a bus’. We all laughed about that”.
C3, E1, and E4 took a different slant on metaphors and stories in that they used themselves as visual images to model appropriate behaviours, and to convey status. They dressed professionally to emphasise an expert image. N2 described the importance of conveying a strong message about expected professional standards, by physically presenting oneself as punctual in attendance and professional in attire and behaviour. It instilled confidence, and showed self-respect and respect for the students.
E5’s vignette emphasised the negative impacts when academics lacked awareness of, or did not pay sufficient attention to, how others would interpret their personal appearance:
Carefully choosing how you appear works as both a conscious and unconscious message for students about what we value and the effort we put in, but some academics don’t get the importance. I’ve actually seen a lecturer turn up to an offshore class wearing Lycra bike shorts, while the students were all in business clothes. No colleagues or students said anything to their face, but there was a lot of gossip. They weren’t asked to teach in Hong Kong again.
187
The above anecdotes demonstrated that, while participants relied on the use of stories and metaphors, including their own visual appearance, as a powerful communication technique, its effectiveness depended on awareness of cultural specificity and appropriate adaptation to context.
Sub-theme A2.3 Facilitating Classroom Interactions
Participants generally expressed firm opinions as to the best or right ways and styles that academics should teach and students should learn. The majority favoured a more learner- centred, then a teacher-directed approach, and were open to some degree of mutual adaptation in style by themselves and their students. Regardless of their preferences, there was general acceptance that a relaxed, informal, supportive classroom atmosphere, with effective interactions, was fundamental to quality teaching and learning. The two main approaches to encourage verbal engagement were using humour and incorporating structured small group activities into classroom and assessment tasks.
Several participants had received positive responses from students by using humour, as it was a safe and non-threatening way to foster an atmosphere of fun and informality. E3 liked to begin by making jokes about local situations, for example, getting lost or eating really hot food. L3 planned funny role plays to demonstrate culturally uncomfortable situations, such as, giving negative feedback to subordinates, in a face-saving way. E6 and N2 favoured visual images with simple captions, such as YouTube, clips of cartoons and movies, and humorous training films to stimulate interest and discussion, and to reduce language barriers. C2 and E5 encouraged students to make their own audio-visual presentations, as they found students were often adept with technology, and this approach was less confronting than face-to-face presentations in front of the class. It also had the benefits of being easily shared amongst current students, and used as examples to guide future students. Actively enabling an interactive classroom environment in these ways did, however, impact on individual participants in different ways. The self-described extraverts enthused that they were energised by such active engagement with students,
188
but, by contrast, it proved physically and mentally tiring for others. L4 described this as “each new session can be like cranking up the engine every time, as I have to work at shifting the natural inertia in the large group so as to get more interaction and discussion”.
The second approach to encouraging interaction involved the incorporation of small group activities into classroom and assessment tasks. This approach appeared compatible with the teaching style preferences of most participants, as eleven of them explicitly advocated group activity as the optimal form of learning in Hong Kong. There were several positive comments about small group work:
Small group work matches neatly with students’ learning preferences, and their social and cultural norms (E5).
It’s comparable to the emphasis we place on teamwork at home, so there’s consistency in that aspect (E4).
Two way advantages are that group work helps to overcome some language obstacles, as students chat more easily in their first language, and we all get some time-out from concentrating so hard on understanding each other (C1).
Although small group work was accepted as an effective means to augment the quality of teaching and learning for participants and their students, there were, nevertheless, downsides to this approach. For example, as noted in Theme S4, sharing experiences in groups could help students feel more confident, but individuals could also hide in groups, when the more senior ones, who were already more capable, did most of the talking, and those who most needed the practice could avoid speaking (C4). Participants described their conscious efforts to ameliorate the effects of this hierarchy of interaction amongst students. They frequently emphasised the importance of verbal communication skills in the business world, and that all students should practise these skills in the safe environment of the classroom. N1 allocated team membership, rotated roles, and monitored involvement, in order to ensure a range of opportunities for practice. E1