The visits with ICC and ELS this week were extremely helpful and useful. Honestly, the service learning of this course has been a great way to see spaces where the readings and theories can be applied. Additionally, it is easy to see where some theories seem to fall short in comparison with others. For instance, Hofestde's dimensions are extremely useful in identifying broad differences and similarities between our cultures. However, they fall short in situations that complicate the flexibility and fluidity of personal and national identity. This is where Appadurai's flexible scapes are applicable. The two theories fill the gaps in each other's work and make a more well rounded approach to culture.
At ICC, it was interesting to sit around the table and talk about ways we might put on a panel for international students. As far as I could tell, the Chinese professors had a little bit of input on the panel, but we dominated the conversations. I think their advice would be valuable. Also, it would have been really nice to have more international students involved. I liked the building itself and Kelley was really relativist in her approach to the panel itself. The way we are approaching the International Week I think is really a great idea and I'm glad we got to visit and develop a plan to talk about culture at the university.
As for my visit to ELS, it was really eyeopening. One of the things I noticed was that there was a divide in the classroom. Apparently, there were "groups" that were separated almost right down the middle of the room according to nationalities. However, when the activities began I noticed a huge amount of collaboration being implemented between the groups. It seemed to be of the students own will and it was really a great thing to see! They were joking with each other and the teacher, but were still intent and excited about learning. The class we observed was classified as "advanced" so they were reading entire magazines and identifying concepts that might be complex like cause and effect. Things that seem common to insiders in the culture were being exposed in ways that I hadn't really thought of before. The prevalence of mobile devices in the room was large. There were a lot of students using their devices to look up certain things or just generally texting. There's always some sort of globalizing technology that seems to permeate culture. I think looking at ways to incorporate this technology in our own classrooms will help a bit with our culture's resistance to outside cultures and values.
I think it's important to note that we both identified a lot of the same things happening in this classroom because that validates some of these dimensions or scapes! I had not thought about how the dimensions might not have been all encompassing and I think there is something to be addressed about mediascapes and the way technology was used in this classroom. That is, the teacher only used a whiteboard and a magazine, but the students were using cellphones with any number of Apps.
ReplyDeleteNice to hear that the SL component to your course is working well for you. I agree--it helps us see in practice what we're reading about in theory. Such work requires digging to make things jive; that is, sometimes the theory really doesn't fit well or make sense until we apply it in unique ways. How might we get the Chinese faculty involved during our April 14th international week plans?
ReplyDelete