University of Applied Sciences, Fulda

Part Two

On the subject of relationships, the Ugandan student says: ". . . first of all what was very foreign is the relationship between the professors and the students . . . it’s incredible . . . for us in Uganda, a lecturer is a lecturer, a man who determines your mark . . . and some of them actually demanded for respect and you know the fact I could never think of going to have a drink with my professor, that was impossible . . ."
One of the legacies of colonialism is the feeling of being a second-class citizen, feeling a sort of inferiority. This was also confirmed in conversations with the interviewee, who happened to be a good friend of the writer. ". . . of course, the teaching habits here are different, totally different, in a way that,– I guess it’s the intellectual level, it’s, is different, like I find the professors here talk, and the students talk at a much more intellectual level than we do . . . that in this system here the—professors give you room to–to give your opinion, so and it’s not like it’s right or wrong, it’s yours. And you can say it, whereas in Uganda, it’s like, like somehow you have to agree with the professor or you become enemies or you become something like that. So that’s very different in the education system."
Changing cultural frames is very difficult: ". . . [about establishing contacts], I can’t hide like in those days in a class. I am the only African, so I can’t hide, but it is still like professors there are kind of, the professors are still professors for me. And even though they greet me merrily, I’m like, oh my God, I still have, ha ,ha, this feeling, it’s funny . .

Chapter 5

Conclusions and Suggestions

“The educational environment is a microcosm of the larger society and reflects its values , traditions and practices. Just as sojourners must learn the general rules, regulations and skills for adapting to life in a new culture, they must also develop the ability to apply these to their specific operational domains for student sojourners , this requires special attention to the educational setting”(Ward, p.156).
This study is about the culture shock the international students might experience as a result of the differences and diversities in the educational systems. Seventeen students were interviewed , and the interviews were analysed to find out first, more about the cultural background of the education system familiar to the interviewees, and second positive and negative in German education system. The analysis was based on the elements of culture proposed by Hofstede and Edward T. Hall; that is the power distance, collectivism versus individualism, masculinity versus femininity and high context versus low context. In this chapter the final analysis and categorisations will be presented.
Almost all the students, regardless of their cultural background, found the teaching system in Germany very different; Especially when teaching was limited to ‘Referate’, presentation system.This criticism was common irrespective of cultural varieties.
Those students who come from a collectivist culture with a high power distance, are simply not used to participating actively in the process of
teaching. The teacher in these cultures is the one who has the authority, be it on issues related to knowledge or organisation. The content of presentation is what the student understands in a certain subject. The students ,therefore, feel uncertain about the validity of their presentation, since they believe they do not have the necessary knowledge to talk about a new subject. Also, in collectivist countries, the personal opinion of the students are not only not asked, but also in many cases it is inappropriate to comment on subjects one is not so much familiar with.
For those students from individualist cultures, such the US, the “Referat” is also strange. Their cause of their dislike is , however, different. It is not that these students have problems with expressing their ideas. On the contrary, it is one of the practices in American universities to discuss as much as you can in the classroom. In a study done by Mc Cargar (1993), many Asian students believed that the American students speak a lot in the classroom because they want to “show off”.
The standpoint of these students is based on the American pragmatism. Americans are not much interested in the history and background of an issue as long as they can find an immediate answer to the problem at hand. “Referat” in a German standard, should go deep in the roots and provide enough base for the listeners to develop the theme according to their individual interests and understandings. Americans are used to simplifying abstract issues as much as possible; again rooted in the longing to solve the immediate problems. The students are, thus, willing to receive enough information, in a simple language, from the professors, and not to go so deep in something which is still new and complex .
German education, on the other hand, is based on defying authority of a certain thought or opinion. Every point of view is taken seriously, even if they are still not solid enough for a strong argument. Moreover, in German presentation system, the professor assumes that the student has done a thorough research on the theme. The rationale behind the presentation system is, therefore, that the classroom is divided into smaller groups, each of which is relatively good in one aspect of the whole picture. These “experts”, then, exchange their knowledge of facts in presenting the themes in the classroom, and can further complete the puzzle through discussions.
This reminds the writer of the story of the elephant. An elephant was placed in a dark room, and the members of a group were asked to go in and touch whatever is in the room and identify the animal. Naturally, each person who went in was able to touch a small part of the body of the animal; hence different interpretations of what kind of animal is in the room. Now, if each individual had explained the part s/he had touched to the others, most probably at the end the puzzle could have been solved and they all could at least share one picture of the animal. In other educational systems, it is the other way round. First, the whole picture is explained ,and then the students can look for more details.
The individual responsibility is quite high in such a system. Furthermore, other aspects of German culture, such as love for details (Gründlichkeit) put the students, especially those coming from more regulated systems, under pressure. The students coming from former East bloc, and the Asian students, felt left alone. They complained of lack of guidance. This, however, is in contradiction with the comments made by the same students, that the professors were willing to help and open to any questions that they had.
The writer assumes that the cause of misunderstanding lies in the fact that in German culture the meaning of “giving guidelines” is different. Information will not be fully provided, unless one asks for it. The guidelines are probably given but they are too general for some of the students. Going back to the short story, the guideline given there was that, the creature in the room is an “animal”. The rest is left to the students to discover.
The Chinese students look up to the teacher as a role-model, an authority and a ‘parent’; or as the Chinese interviewee said,” they are upper class”. Authorities determine what one has to do in detail. The student in this system is more receptive. And, as ‘parents’, the teachers put everything in order, and decide on what is necessary.
In a classroom where ‘Referats’ are given, the students should learn to listen to their fellow students, who rank the same. It is difficult to have confidence in someone who probably knows as much as the others. This can cause lack of concentration and a rejection of the others’ arguments, even before its validity is determined.
Some of the interviewees, proposed a solution to the issue of “Referat” system. They suggest that the teacher should fill in the gaps, when necessary; that is a combination of professor’s lecture and Referats by the students, which was practiced in one of the classes. This combination was again not satisfactory because the students required a “referee” who could approve of the validity of the other students’ presentations; once again approval of the authority. This, however, was not achieved because the teacher did not act as the one who knows everything and gave the students the chance to argue and support their individual positions.
In an international classroom, nevertheless, one should take other factors into consideration. Limited language skills of some of the participants made it extremely difficult for the others to follow what was being presented, especially when the presentations were in German. Furthermore, not all the students felt responsible enough to do thorough research on the subjects, or in some cases it was not clear for the students how to do a research. This could explain the difference between the German students who found the content of the program and the amount of work they had to do very heavy and demanding and those coming from more strict systems, such as Russia, who felt they did not have enough to do. Unfortunately, this can cause the feeling ,in some of the students, that the program is not serious enough, and that they are not prepared for a future career in the field.
The relationship between the professors and the students was regarded by most of the students as positive. They found the professor “very open” and “friendly”. Nevertheless, this positive attitude does not exclude a negative reaction. The openness and friendliness, resulting in some informality in the classroom, can be perceived as lack of respect for the professors and cause insufficient focus in classroom activities. The reflection of losing one’s faith in the authority of the teacher was the confusion in addressing the teachers with “du” or “Sie”.
The requirement of such an open atmosphere of learning and teaching is active participation of all the members of the group. In many cultures, especially the collective ones, the opinion of individual is not of great importance. The group sets the rules and the individual is safe as long as the rules are followed. Moreover, since the group is the basic unit, most of the individuals coming from
Asian and African countries are more reluctant to be singled out. They are unwilling to draw attention to themselves, even if they have their own individual opinion on the theme being discussed.
The quietness of the collectivist student shows their respect for the teacher, as the authority, and maintains the formal distant relationship with them. Form the teachers perspective, quiet collectivist students may be perceived as uninterested or withdrawn. From the point of view of the students, the frequent interruptions of other students may be seen as rude and unmannered. The Polish interviewee, for instance, regarded some of the questions of the students as “embarrassing” and believed in Poland one would never dream of asking such questions.
Another source of difference is the lack of encouragement. This issue is closely related to the evaluation system. In most of the countries, the evaluation is based on exams , and the individuals are ranked according to their marks. The actual result of such a system is the creation of a competitive atmosphere. Competition in collectivist cultures, though it might be assumed to the contrary, is of great importance. this is the only opportunity for the individual to gain her/his distinct identity .
The above argument does not assume that in German system of education, there is no competition but, that the encouragement methods are different. The collectivist as well as those from individualist cultures need a visible target; i.e. the good grades in the exams and verbal approval of the teachers. The existing evaluation system, therefore, does not seem serious enough.