|
Transfer
Report - James Cambridge
|
|
| CONTENTS |
|
| WHY
CONDUCT THIS RESEARCH PROJECT? |
I am interested in finding
answers to two questions.
-
How, in an age of globalisation, is an effective
organisational culture created out of the diverse cultural values of its
members?
-
Which of the conceptual frameworks available
best describes and analyses contrasting cultural values in an organization?
I recognise that these are questions which
have universal applicability to the study of human relations in the areas
of management and organizational research. I have chosen to use so-called
‘international schools’ as the laboratory for my enquiries. This is because
I have direct experience of working in this sector of education in the
Yemen Arab Republic and the Kingdom of Lesotho, as well as in the non-governmental
organization sector in South Africa, and because in ICERG there is a research
group at this University which acts as the cradle for the growth and development
of an emerging theoretical framework about these institutions. |
|
I write "so-called ‘international
schools’" because I think that the expression ‘international school’ is
meaningless to the extent that the term represents no single identifiable
entity. They are not all institutions in which international education
is conducted; the relationship is more complex than that (Hayden and Thompson
1996). These institutions are very diverse; they cater for globally mobile
expatriates only, expatriates and host country nationals together, and
host country nationals only. They have ‘encapsulated’ missions to replicate
the educational culture of a different country, and ‘inclusive’ missions
(Sylvester 1998). International schools are located as the same city as
the families of the students, and the students leave their home country
to attend them. Stateless children, ‘third culture kids’ and transient
expatriates attend these schools (Langford 1998). They comprise residential
and non-residential schools. I reject the prescriptive approach to defining
these institutions by specifying what they ‘ought to be’ in terms of universal
statements. I propose that these schools do not comprise a single unitary
population, but are members of a community of overlapping populations of
different types of institutions consisting of:
-
transplanted national school cultures serving
globally mobile expatriates (which I consider to be schools in an international
context);
-
transplanted national school cultures or a
simulacrum - such as the programmes of the International Baccalaureate
Organization - serving host country nationals (schools offering international
education), and;
-
the simulacrum of a transplanted national
school culture serving globally mobile expatriates, and possibly also admitting
host country nationals (the popular image of an international school),
as well as:
-
the ideological enthusiasts (the United World
Colleges, notably).
It is not beyond the scope of this taxonomy
that institutions might be combinations of these categories. A framework
to map the territory will be discussed later. |
|
I regard the programmes
of the International Baccalaureate Organization to be a simulacrum (that
is an entity that has the appearance, and many but not all of the essential
characteristics, of something else) of a national education system. I use
this form of words because I think that, for practical purposes, the IBO
programmes are the equivalent of ‘a national education system for those
people who are not being educated within a national education system’.
These people may comprise globally mobile expatriates but they also include
the students in schools which offer an international education to host
country nationals - such as the Kodaikanal International School, in Tamil
Nadu, India, which I have visited. I have a hunch that the motivating force
in many schools is the pragmatic, economistic approach to the curriculum
that it is designed to apply to the widest possible client audience, comprising
students who are bound for university education in the developed world.
These schools tend to be in the private sector of education where they
are defending a niche market position by offering an enhanced curriculum
(Murgatroyd & Morgan 1993). |
|
This statement may seem
hard-nosed and cynical, but it is not so. International schools are epiphenomena
of the global spread of capitalist values. The emerging markets for international
education are in China and India where, in the coming century, I think
that their own young dynamic ‘cultures of capitalism’ are going to eclipse
those of Europe and the Anglo-Saxon world, which are ageing and becoming
economically uncompetitive. It is a matter of demographics because these
countries are where the world’s young people are, and they are just as
desperate to join the armies of consumers of global popular culture as
their peers in other more developed economies - and they are declining
in the proportion of the population which they occupy.
However, I readily admit the existence
of a ‘hair shirt’ faction who think that international schools and international
education are about ‘internationalism’, ‘international understanding’ and
‘community service’. They follow a model of progressive education that
seems to have been in vogue in the 1930s, ‘like nudism, vegetarianism and
sandals’ (as George Orwell wrote) but whose time, it is claimed, has now
come. Look at the example of the life and times of Kurt Hahn (Peterson
1987; Suttcliffe 1991). His vision of education is a response to the existence
of poverty and political oppression in the world, whereas the other form
of international education is a response to emerging affluence and entry
into the global consumer economy. The dilemma to be reconciled between
the two approaches is whether one is to be the surfer or the wave. Do the
fundamental tenets of the curriculum assume that the school can change
values or does it follow them? |
METHODOLOGICAL
ISSUES |
Each school is unique,
and yet the dilemmas which are being reconciled in every one of them are
the same. International schools (for the sake of convenience, I shall now
call them all ‘international schools’) are theatres in which a variety
of intercultural encounters are rehearsed between administration, teaching
staff, support staff, students, parents and the local community. The form
and content of these encounters will have a profound effect on the procedural
and transformational quality of the structure and activities of the institution
(Sallis 1996). How can we describe and analyse the cultures at the level
of individuals and the organization? |
|
There are numerous way
of attempting to answer this question. One approach is to conduct a self
study, by asking the question ‘How do I describe and analyse the cultures
at the level of individuals and the organization?’ which would be located
within the paradigm of action research. Although my immediate concerns
as a research student are about how I construct my own world view, this
is a staging post towards answering a different question about how others
interact to construct theirs, so this methodology is rejected for the time
being. However, it may be of value in the future. |
|
Another approach is
to study a small group of people within a particular school intensely.
I have chosen to study the values of teachers because I think that they
are located between the hammer of the educational leader’s vision for the
organizational culture, and the anvil of the parent and student cultures
and subcultures. An ethnographic account of their actions, or a transactional
account of their communications, in terms of linguistics, may shed light
in particular ways on what the organizational culture is and how it is
formed, and what the constituent cultures comprise and how they interact.
However, it will be from a single case, or at best a small number of cases,
and who knows how representative they might be? On the other hand, I have
had the opportunity to visit, and observe the organisational cultures of,
a variety of international schools, including Kodaikanal International
School, Mahindra United World College of India, the United World College
of the Atlantic, and St Clare’s, Oxford. I have interviewed teachers at
these institutions and I intend to visit others before I have completed
this research project. |
|
A third approach is
to adopt the methodology of cross-cultural psychology, by subjecting individuals
to psychometric testing before and after an experience. The literature
of this type of research is vast (Harry Triandis appears to be the doyen
of this field). This is an honourable endeavour but I do not think that
it is appropriate to my research question because it is too narrowly focused
and it tends to be laboratory based, and not located in messy reality. |
|
However, I am also more
interested in the bigger picture. While the cultural values of particular
populations are of interest to me, I see them more in the context of how
they interact with others to form an organizational culture. Thus, I need
to study a wide variety of cases, and the best way to do that appears to
be by conducting a survey among the teachers of a number of different sorts
of schools because, I conjecture, there may be patterns of similarity or
difference that can be discerned. This approach is the domain of theorists
such as Geert Hofstede, and Charles Hampden-Turner & Fons Trompenaars,
and it is their frameworks which I intend to test in my research project. |
|
It is well known that
individuals from different countries have contrasting concepts of the nature
of teaching and learning, subject content, pedagogy, the aims and purposes
of educational assessment, and the nature of the relationship between adults
and young people. I have conducted preliminary interviews with experienced
practitioners in the field of international schools who have informed me
of their perceptions of the nature of the cultural differences to be found
among the teachers and students of international schools. |
|
My research question
is expressed as the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between
the distribution of responses to the statements of educational values in
my data collection instrument and a menu of proposed explanatory variables
comprising: gender, age, nationality, home language, declared religious
affiliations, country where educated, previous work experience, number
of years in present employment, task area of present employment, curriculum
taught, and subjects taught. Is there no difference between personally
held values and the values of the organization within which the respondent
works? Furthermore, I wish to test the construct validity of the dimensions
proposed by Hofstede (1986) which form the explanatory framework for interpretation
of the responses to the statements of educational values which form my
questionnaire. Do the paired statements at describing extremes in four
dimensions display reliability and construct validity by being polar opposites? |
|
Objectivist and subjectivist
approaches to social science are discussed by Cohen & Manion (1989).
My research project is conducted assuming that the external world is objectively
knowable (realism) and that it is possible to relate observable phenomena
to causes (positivism), since it is assumed that constructs such as cultural
attitudes may be related to and determined by other variables (determinism).
This research is conducted in the nomothetic paradigm, assuming that it
is valid to draw generalisations from a mass of observations. Thus, I have
chosen to conduct a survey which relates responses to Lickert-type attitude
statements to a selection of demographic data about the respondents which
I hypothesise may be explanatory variables. Oppenheim (1992) argues that
cross-sectional designs, of which this survey is an example, are appropriate
in studies in which little is known and the researcher has no control over
events. |
THE UNDERPINNING
THEORETICAL BASIS
OF THIS RESEARCH |
In this section, I wish
to discuss:
-
the nature of international schools and a
framework for identification of such institutions;
-
conceptual frameworks for comparative organizational
research;
-
Hofstede’s dimensions and methodology;
Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars valuing
processes, as an alternative framework for the description and analysis
of contrasting cultures, as applied to educational values.
|
| International
schools |
It is difficult to give
an exact definition of international schools and schools offering an international
education because of their great diversity. As Hayden & Thompson (1995)
argue, it is by no means certain that all international schools offer an
international education or that an international education is to be found
exclusively in international schools. Most definitions tend to be prescriptive
by stating what such institutions ought to be, whereas I think that
it would be far more useful and practical to indicate what such institutions
are. Matthews (1989) proposes a framework that distinguishes between
those schools which offer a pragmatic response to the educational needs
of populations of globally mobile expatriates whose size does not make
the establishment of a school dedicated to a particular national grouping
an economically viable proposition. Matthews contrasts this view with that
of constituents of the United World Colleges movement, which are more ‘ideological’
about their internationalism, seeing themselves as agents of change in
the world (Sutcliffe 1991). UWCs tend to be residential institutions, with
students leaving their families to attend them, rather than serving the
needs of students where they live with their families. However, not all
UWCs fit this model. Sylvester (1998) identifies contrasting ‘encapsulated’
and ‘inclusive’ school missions for international schools. Others, such
as Terwilliger (1972) are very prescriptive in their definitions by even
specifying, for example, the composition of the governing board of the
school. Hayden and Thompson (1996) propose a set of ‘universals of international
education’. |
|
I have an open view
of international schools and am prepared to recognise any institution that
identifies itself as an international school as one. All international
schools are unique, and I think that their uniqueness is generally an outcome
the following factors:
geographical location;
-
cultural context within that geographical
location;
-
circumstances of their foundation;
-
history of the institution following foundation;
-
cultural values of the teaching staff;
-
cultural values of the clients of the school
(the students and their parents).
Other factors such as curriculum are important,
but they will be likely to lead to convergence with other institutions,
although they may also contribute to a school’s uniqueness in its specific
location. Of the above list, the present research project concentrates
on the cultural values of the teaching staff. |
|
Cambridge & Thompson
(2000) propose a framework for the identification of international schools
and schools offering international education based on sources of information
about them, many of which are overlapping. The point about this approach
is that it is inclusive and non-prescriptive, and it serves as a provisional
framework for selecting and classifying institutions for research purposes.
The continuing growth in the number of schools affiliated to either International
Schools Services (ISS) or the European Council of International Schools
(ECIS) suggests a desire for many institutions to identify themselves within
markets which serve particular constituencies. Figure 1 presents an initial
proposal for a conceptual framework which identifies a number of sources
of data about schools in an international context comprising publications
about the United World Colleges (UWC), European schools (Euro), schools
in national systems (Nat), and directories published by ECIS, ISS and John
Catt (Bingham, 1997). The shaded area represents schools which offer 'an
international education', however that is defined. Certain institutions
which are listed in the directories may not be regarded as offering an
international education because they cater for clients who are not culturally
diverse or because they are ‘encapsulated’ outposts of a specific national
culture; they are located outside of the shaded portion of Figure 1. |
|
|
|
Figure 1: Sources of information
about schools in an international context
I have tried to identify as many sources
of information as possible, but this framework should be considered as
a provisional statement which is subject to revision as other sources are
identified and more information becomes available. Each domain in Figure
1 indicates the possible sources of information about schools located in
it. Note that the area of each domain bears no relation to the size of
each population of schools. |
|
Schools which are listed
in the ISS Directory of Overseas Schools occupy domains 1, 2, 3, 5, 9,
11, 12, 13 and 14 but some schools may not provide an international education
(9, 11, 12). This perspective is supported by the compilers of the directory
themselves, who state that :
inclusion is based on two closely defined
criteria: 1) the use of English as the major language of instruction, and
2) the adherence to an American curriculum, either alone or combined with
a national or British curriculum. In some cases, where a school with a
strictly British curriculum shows a significant enrolment of American students,
it has been included, as have schools which are truly international and
offer the International Baccalaureate program. (ISS, 1986).
There is overlap between schools listed in
this directory and the ECIS directory, some of which may be classified
as schools providing an international education (1, 2, 3, 5), and some
that might not (9, 11). Schools in domains 1, 5 and 9 may be listed in
both the ISS and John Catt directories. There may also be overlap with
schools listed in publications unspecified here.
Schools which are listed in the ECIS International
Schools Directory occupy domains 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 but
some schools may fail to match criteria for classification as providing
an international education (8, 9, 10, 11). There is overlap between schools
listed in this directory and the ISS directory, some of which may be classified
as schools providing an international education (1, 2, 3, 5), and some
that might not (9, 10). There may also be overlap between schools listed
in this directory and the John Catt directory, some of which may be classified
as providing an international education (1, 5, 6, 7), and some that might
not (8, 9). There may also be overlap with schools listed in publications
unspecified here. |
|
Schools which are listed
in the John Catt directory occupy domains 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17 and
18. Some institutions may provide an international education (1, 5, 6,
7, 16, 17), whereas others may not (8, 9, 18).
The United World Colleges, which are clearly
identifiable as schools providing an international education in the form
of the International Baccalaureate programme, occupying domains 3, 4, 5,
6, 14, 15 and 16. Some institutions may advertise in the ECIS directory
only (4), the ISS directory only (14), or the John Catt directory only
(16) or in pairs of the three directories (3, 6), or all three of them
(5) or none (15).
The European schools occupy domain 19 and
are located entirely within the grouping of institutions which provide
an international education.
Some schools operating within a state system
may be classified as schools providing an international education (20),
whereas others in the same system may not meet the criteria for inclusion
(21).
Schools which do not advertise in the directories
specified above occupy domain 22; they may stand alone or may be part of
a more tightly coupled group of schools. This amorphous domain is likely
to comprise many schools, and groups of schools, with which there has previously
had no contact, nor do we have knowledge of them. |
Conceptual
frameworks
for comparative
organizational
research |
I have previously argued
that culture can be interpreted as a raw material (input variable), a product
(output variable) and as a process linking inputs to outputs (Cambridge
1998). Schein (1985) identifies three levels of culture comprising basic
assumptions (taken for granted, invisible, preconscious), values (at a
greater level of awareness), and artifacts and creations (visible but often
not decipherable). Culture is ‘software of the mind’ (Hofstede 1991), that
is the complex network of values, attitudes and assumptions shared by a
group of people. Hofstede proposes an ‘onion’ diagram as a metaphor for
culture manifested at different levels of depth comprising symbols, heroes,
and rituals (which are visible to the outside observer) and values (which
are not directly observable). Smircich (1983) argues that culture is a
process; not only is culture what the organization has, it is also what
the organization is. For the purposes of this research project, culture
is operationalised in terms of an inventory of attitude statements about
work-related values in the context of education. Cray & Mallory (1998)
propose a conceptual framework which describes and contrasts three styles
of comparative organizational research comprising the naive comparative,
culture-free and culture-bound approaches. |
|
|
Naive comparative |
Culture-free |
Culture-bound |
| Key research issues |
How managerial functions
differ |
Structural similarities |
Value differences, behavioural
differences |
| View of culture |
The basic explanatory variable |
Explains residual variance |
One key explanatory variable |
| Dynamics |
Differentiation |
Convergence |
Differentiation, transference |
| Theoretical base |
None |
Contingency theory |
Selected theories mainly
from sociology and psychology |
| Major criticisms |
Atheoretical, non-cumulative |
Basic theory tautological;
leaves too much unexplained |
Weak theoretical links;
lack of links between values and behaviours |
| Examples |
Hampden-Turner & Trompenaars
(1993) |
Hickson et al (1979) |
Hofstede (1980, 1991) |
Table 1:
Three approaches to cross-cultural
research (Cray & Mallory 1998)
|
|
The culture free approach
is based on contingency theory and concentrates on the identification,
description and analysis of structural similarities. It assumes that there
will be convergence in organizational culture in similar structural situations
because of functional similarities. For instance, the management structures
of oil refineries will tend to be similar because oil refineries all perform
the same functions. To what extent is it the case that cultural values
follow organizational structure and function in the context of international
schools? One might assume that, because they are organizations dedicated
to managing cultural diversity and preparation of students for the same
courses, there ought to be much convergence between the cultural values
of teachers in different schools. A school is a school is a school. |
|
A second approach assumes
that culture is the basic explanatory variable when comparing and contrasting
different organizational cultures. This view is described by Cray &
Mallory as being a naive comparative approach because it is non-cumulative
and lacking a theoretical foundation. However, they also point out that
‘the approach is naive in the sense of being untutored of uninformed by
theory, rather than silly or foolish. Some of the studies that fall into
this category are quite sophisticated, in terms of both the methodology
employed and the depth of understanding generated’ (Cray & Mallory
1998). The framework for identifying ways in which dilemmas are reconciled
by managers of organizations (Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars 1993), is
given as an example of this approach.
The third approach assumes that while culture
is one key explanatory variable, it is not the only one. Cray & Mallory
argue that the key difference between the culture-bound and culture-free
approaches lies in explanation:
The naive comparative approach attributes
differences in behaviour or attitudes - to the extent that such differences
are explained at all - to concepts such as culture, national character
or social factors. Causal links are not specified. |
| Hofstede’s
dimensions and methodology |
Hofstede (1980, 1991)
describes a monumental study conducted into the work-related values of
employees of the IBM corporation in 50 countries and regions. This work
led to the identification of nationality as the strongest single explanatory
variable. Differences in national cultures were described in four dimensions
comprising Power Distance, Individualism, Masculinity and Uncertainty Avoidance.
Hofstede constructed scaled indices and arranged countries in rank order
in each dimension. There are numerous criticisms of Hofstede’s methodology,
particularly the confounding of nationality with culture (Lachman 1997,
Tayeb 1994, Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars 1997) but his dimensions have
been adopted as a paradigm by other researchers (Søndergaard 1994).
To quote Hickson (1996), he had ‘frail data, but robust concepts’. |
| Hampden-Turner
and Trompenaars valuing processes |
Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars
(1993) propose that the cultural values of seven major capitalist countries
can be described and analyzed as dilemmas about how we relate to other
people, time and the external environment. They argue that all cultures
are confronted with the same basic problems but differ in how they solve
them; indeed, this is how we recognise different cultures. The valuing
processes which make up those dilemmas comprise:
-
Making rules and discovering exceptions, contrasting
the need for universally applied rules with the need to recognise particular
exceptions to them.
-
Constructing and deconstructing, which contrasts
integrating (building up a world view by looking at whole patterns, relationships
and wider contexts) and analysing (breaking down phenomena into their component
parts).
-
Managing communities of individuals, contrasting
the needs of the individual with the needs of the community.
-
Internalizing the outside world, contrasting
personal judgements, decisions and commitments (inner direction) with the
signals, demands and trends of the outside world (outer direction) as guides
to action.
-
Synchronizing fast processes, contrasting
views of time as a sequence and as synchronization.
-
Choosing among achievers, contrasting attribution
of status to individuals by what they have achieved (status by achievement),
with some other characteristic important to the institution such as age,
seniority or gender (status by ascription).
-
Sponsoring equal opportunities to excel, which
contrasts treating employees with equality with the establishment of authority
through hierarchy.
A fuller account of how these valuing processes
may be applied to the description and analysis of international schools
is given by Cambridge (2000). Whereas the statements in that account are
tentative, I propose that they provide a set of hypotheses which may be
applied to and tested in the context of the organizational cultures of
international schools. It is also worth remarking that I have attempted
to classify Hofstede’s statements according to the valuing processes of
Hampden-Turner & Trompenaars, and that statements that appear together
in the same dimension in Hofstede’s framework appear to be resolved in
different valuing processes. |
| CONSTRUCTION
OF THE DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENT |
The data collection
instrument consists of two sections: an inventory of 60 Likert-type statements
based on Hofstede (1986) and a form soliciting personal details about the
respondent. Please refer to the appended sheets. Responses to the Likert-type
statements are on a five point scale comprising (1) Strongly Agree, (2)
Agree, (3) Neither Agree nor Disagree, (4) Disagree, and (5) Strongly Disagree.
Respondents are invited to indicate their views about each item in two
ways: ‘What do you think about the item personally?’ and ‘How does the
institutional culture of the school where you work encourage you to think
about this item? Does it encourage you to ...’. This gives 120 responses
which are entered onto an answer sheet which is formatted to be read by
an Optical Character Reader and saved as comma separated numerical data.
Respondents appear to have found this style of questionnaire acceptable
and ‘user-friendly’. Those with whom I have talked have reported that they
found it easy to use. I acknowledge the assistance of Mr Alf Hall of BUCS
for his assistance in preparation of the OCR formatted sheet. |
|
Hofstede (1986) contains
a list of 80 statements in pairs in four dimensions. I have edited these
to give the 60 statements in my data collection instrument. Editing comprised
three stages:
-
unpacking Hofstede’s statements in cases where
he confounded different issues in one statement;
-
selecting statements which were to be included
in my data collection instrument, and;
-
rewriting the statements so that they were
applicable to international schools.
I attempted to reconcile the dilemma between
keeping as close to Hofstede’s own wording of statements, on the one hand,
and completing rewriting them, on the other.
I do not intend to discuss the statements
exhaustively in this paper, but a couple of examples should suffice to
illustrate the issues under discussion. Hofstede’s statement:
Stress on impersonal "truth" which can
in principle be obtained from any competent person
confounds two issues. It was unpacked and
rewritten as two statements making reference to two discrete values in
the data collection instrument:
12 Education at school can be obtained
from any competent person.
14 Education at school is the acquisition
of impersonal ‘truth’.
The following statement could not be included
in the data collection instrument:
Acquiring certificates, even through
illegal means (cheating, corruption) is more important than acquiring competence
because who would believe any answer that
a respondent gave to it? Individuals who indulge in cheating and corruption
are not going to advertise their activities.
The personal data collected in the accompanying
form asked for responses about the following: gender, age, nationality,
home language, declared religious affiliations, country where educated,
previous work experience, number of years in present employment, task area
of present employment, curriculum taught, and subjects taught. Data in
response to these questions were collected either in tick boxes (for example,
age data were collected by cohort in five classes) or write-in responses.
A code book was also prepared for the conversion of these qualitative data
into ordinal numerical variables. For example, the UNDP Human Development
Index rankings of countries have been used as numerical codes for identifying
passport nationality of respondents.
Data collection instruments were subjected
to two iterations of piloting, first with teachers with international school
experience who were participating on MAEC courses at the University of
Bath, and second with students on MAEC courses at the University of Bath
whose first language was not English. In this way, I intended to ensure
that I created a data collection instrument which was valid and reliable
for my intended sample population of respondents, comprising teachers in
international schools not all of whom are first language English speakers. |
Analysis
of
quantitative
data |
A variety of descriptive
and inferential statistical methods will be used to analyse the numerical
data generated by this survey, including measurements of correlation and
difference, and factor analysis.
Hofstede et al (1993) propose that data
from N individuals from n social systems or cultures may
be analysed in four distinct ways:
-
A pancultural analysis, pooling the
data from all N individuals together, regardless of the culture
they belong to;
-
A within-culture analysis, limited
to the individuals within each of the n cultures;
-
An ecological analysis, performed on
the aggregate measures of the variables for each of the n cultures
(usually the means, but sometimes also the standard deviations taken from
the individuals constituting each unit), as well as on the external variables
which exist only at the culture level;
-
An individual analysis, performed on
the pooled data for the N individuals after elimination of the culture
level effects. [...] Individual analysis considers precisely that part
of the variance in the data which had been eliminated in the ecological
analysis. It is a way of pooling the within-culture analyses across all
n
cultures or units.
I admit that I am still coming to terms with
the implications of some of these categories. |
CONTRIBUTION
OF THIS RESEARCH
TO THE FIELD
IN GENERAL |
This research will make
a contribution to at least three areas of study:
-
the debate about globalisation;
-
the understanding of intercultural relations,
by contributing to the validation of Hofstede’s dimensions;
the understanding of organizational culture.
|
| Globalisation |
International schools,
and other schools offering international education, operate in a context
of increasing globalisation, which has been described as ‘the widening,
deepening and speeding up of world-wide interconnectedness in all aspects
of contemporary social life’ Held et al (1998). Three ways of interpreting
globalisation have been proposed. Trends in each may be identified in the
activities of international schools.
One approach is the hyperglobalist thesis
that globalisation is ‘the denationalization of economies through the establishment
of transnational networks of production, trade and finance’ (Held et al,
1998). This is a trend which results in the application of same standards
everywhere, so that international schools may be identified as being part
of a process of cultural homogenization. For many globally mobile expatriates,
this would be an attractive proposition because international education
may be compared with other globally marketed goods and services such as
soft drinks and hamburgers; a reliable product conforming to consistent
quality standards throughout the world.
A second approach is sceptical about globalisation
because it argues that the world economic order is no more globalised now
than it was in the past. The tasks of governments are to regulate and facilitate
international trade. International, national and regional markets are converging,
but there is no evidence to support the view that superstates that transcend
national frontiers are emerging. Furthermore, identification with national
and regional cultures is becoming more - not less - prominent at the present
time. Certain countries appear to tolerate rather than encourage expatriate
educational institutions in their territories, and may legislate to prevent
the participation of their own citizens in them. International schools
therefore offer an opportunity for the provision of an encapsulated education,
based on the transplanted educational values of other national systems
and insulated from the local cultural environment (Sylvester 1998).
A third transformationalist approach to
globalisation brings together the global with the local. In a world where
the electronic media facilitate rapid and widespread communication, distribution
of cultural difference may depend less on geographical dispersion and more
on the distribution of wealth and resources. Members of the socio-economic
elite in a country may have less in common in some respects with their
poorer compatriots than they have with their peers in another country.
On the other hand, they will still share certain national cultural values
and ways of seeing the world with their compatriots, identifiable with
what Hofstede (1991) calls ‘software of the mind’. Members of the local
socio-economic elite may select an international education for their children
because they lack confidence in their home country’s educational system
and/or because of the opportunities for advancement which are offered,
leading to entry into the higher education systems of other countries.
International schools may offer scholarships to widen the participation
of host country nationals from a range of social classes, alongside their
fellow students from the globally mobile expatriate community. |
| Intercultural
relations |
Hofstede four dimensions
offer one framework for description and analysis of different cultures,
but a contrasting view is provided by Hampden-Turner & Trompenaars
seven ‘valuing processes’. These authors have challenged each others’ perceptions
in the literature, and I think that this research can make a contribution
to this debate, because the questionnaire items are based on Hofstede’s
statements of educational values in four dimensions. |
| Organizational
culture |
Is it true that multiculturalism
in education can be ‘a substantial monoculturalism as to values, mitigated
by tolerance of exotic detail’ (Zaw 1996)? It is proposed that the present
research project will lead to the development of an inventory of statements
of educational values which could be applied to a number of frameworks
for the description and analysis of organizational culture, and which identify
‘values’ as one of the key variables.
Hambrick et al (1998) propose that organizational
effectiveness, however that is defined, is influenced by national and cultural
diversity in terms of the values of members of the organization, demeanours
(how members of the organization behave), cognitive schema (how they conceive
the world), and their degree of facility with the working language of the
organization. They argue that an effect is exerted on the ‘creative, computational
and coordinative tasks’ of the organization, which can be either enhanced
or diminished by increased diversity.
Lachman, Nedd and Hinings (1994) propose
a framework to describe and analyse the processes that lead to construction
of an effective organizational culture, which is based on a contingency
model of the organization. This means that the factors in the environment,
specifically cultural values and resources availability, interact at the
levels of the individual and the organization to produce outcomes identified
as: socialization, legitimation, adaptation, reinforcement and integration.
Cambridge (1998) discusses how this framework might be applied to the description
and analysis of international schools. |
| REFERENCES |
BINGHAM, D. (1997)
The John Catt Guide to International Schools 1997 Saxmundham: John
Catt Educational Ltd
CAMBRIDGE, J (1998) Investigating
national and organizational cultures in the context of the international
school, in: HAYDEN, M.C. & J.J. THOMPSON(1998) International Education:
Principles and Practice London: Kogan Page).
CAMBRIDGE, J (2000) International
Schools, Globalisation and the Seven Cultures of Capitalism, in: HAYDEN,
M.C. & J.J. THOMPSON (Eds) (2000) (IN PRESS)
CAMBRIDGE, J & THOMPSON JJ (2000)
‘Towards the construction of a framework for the description and classification
of international schools and other schools in an international context’Collected
Original Resources in Education, 23
COHEN, L. & L. MANION (1989)
Research
Methods in Education London: Routledge
CRAY D AND MALLORY G (1998) Making
Sense of Managing Culture London: International Thomson Business Press
EUROPEAN COUNCIL OF INTERNATIONAL SCHOOLS
(1997)
The International Schools Directory 1997-1998 (Saxmundham,
John Catt).
HAMBRICK, D, DAVISON, S, SNELL, S, AND
SNOW, C (1998) When groups consist of multiple nationalities: Towards
a new understanding of the implications Organization Studies 19,
2, 181-205
HAMPDEN-TURNER C AND TROMPENAARS F (1993)The
Seven Cultures of Capitalism London: Piatkus
HAMPDEN-TURNER C AND TROMPENAARS F (1997)
‘Response to Geert Hofstede’ International Journal of Intercultrural
Relations 21, 1, 149-59.
HAYDEN, M.C. & J.J. THOMPSON (1995)
International
Schools and International Education: A relationship reviewed,
Oxford
Review of Education, 21, 3, pp. 327-45.
HAYDEN, M.C. & J.J. THOMPSON (1996)
Potential
difference: the driving force for international education
International
Schools Journal XVI, 1, pp. 46-57.
HELD D, MCGREW A, GOLDBLATT D, AND PERRATON
J (1998) Global Transformations Oxford: Polity Press
HICKSON, D (1996) ‘The ASQ years
then and now through the eyes of a Euro-Brit’, Adminstrative Science
Quarterly 41, 2, 217-28.
HOFSTEDE G (1980) Culture’s Consequences:
international differences in work-related values Beverley Hills: Sage
HOFSTEDE, G (1986) ‘Cultural differences
in learning and teaching’ International Journal of Intercultural Relations
10, 3, 301-20.
HOFSTEDE G (1991) Cultures and
Organizations London: Harper Collins
HOFSTEDE G, BOND M, & CHUNG-LEUNG
LUK (1993) ‘Individual perceptions of Organizational Cultures: A Methodological
Treatise on Levels of Analysis’ Organization Studies 14, 4, 483-503.
INTERNATIONAL SCHOOLS SERVICES (1986)The
ISS Directory of Overseas Schools 1986 /87 (Princeton, NJ, International
Schools Services).
LACHMAN, R. (1997) Taking
Another Look at the Elephant: Are We Still (Half) Blind? Journal of
Organizational Behaviour 18, pp. 313-316.
LACHMAN, R, A. NEDD & B. HININGS
(1994) Analyzing cross-national management and organizations: a theoretical
framework, Management Science 40, 1, 40-55.
LANGFORD, M. (1998) Global Nomads,
Third Culture kids and international schools, in: HAYDEN, M.C. & J.J.
THOMPSON(1998) International Education: Principles and Practice
London: Kogan Page
MATTHEWS, M. (1989) The uniqueness
of international education International Schools Journal 18, 24-34.
MURGATROYD S & MORGAN C (1993)Total
Quality Management and the School Buckingham: Open University Press
OPPENHEIM, AN (1992) Questionnaire
Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement London: Pinter
PETERSON ADC (1987) Schools Across
Frontiers La Salle Illinois: Open Court.
SALLIS E (1996) Total Quality
Management in Education (Second Edition) London: Kogan Page
SCHEIN E (1985) Organizational
Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
SMIRCICH L (1983) Concepts of culture
and organizational analysis Adminstrative Science Quarterly 28,
339-358
SØNDERGAARD, M (1994) ‘Research
note: Hofstede’s consequences - a study of reviews, citations and replicatiuons’
Organization
Studies 15, 3, 447-56.
SUTCLIFFE, D (1991) ‘The United
World Colleges’ in JONIETZ P & HARRIS D (Eds) (1991)World Yearbook
of Education 1991: International Schools and International Education
London: Kogan Page
SYLVESTER, R (1998) Through the
lens of diversity, in: HAYDEN, M.C. & J.J. THOMPSON(1998) International
Education: Principles and Practice London: Kogan Page
TAYEB, M (1994) Organizations and
National Culture: Methodology Considered Organization Studies 15,
3, 429-446
TERWILLIGER, R (1972) International
Schools - cultural crossroads The Educational Forum XXXVI, 3, 359-63.
THOMPSON J (1998) ‘Towards a Model
for International Education’ in Hayden M and Thompson J (Eds) (1998)
International Education: Principles and Practice London: Kogan Page
TROMPENAARS F AND HAMPDEN-TURNER C (1997)Riding
the Waves of Culture (Second Edition) London: Nicholas Brealey
ZAW S K (1996) ‘Locke and Multiculturalism:
Toleration, Relativism and Reason’ IN FULLINWIDER RK (Ed) (1996) Public
Education in a Multicultural Society Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press |