Challenges and Recommendations for Teaching Online

A large portion of my students are Brazilians who I teach mostly online. One positive aspect of teaching Brazilians is that large amounts of theological and missiological literature is available in Portuguese. There are excellent online social science research sources such as the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) and the Brazilian Institute of Research and Data Analysis (IBPAD). When some subjects are more difficult for students to source, experts recommend providing electronic files through a platform such as Moodle or Canvas (Ott, 2021, p. 235). Research indicates that many Majority World contexts primarily emphasize learning by memorization versus critical thought (Ott, 2021, p. 236). Therefore, a Western teacher like me must take care not to take for granted that students will engage texts critically. 

One of the most prevalent cognitive concepts is field articulation in which field-dependent learners perceive holistically and field-independent learners tend to isolate items from context (Ott, 2021, p. 115). Majority World learners tend to be more holistic/(FD), and Westerners more analytic/(FI) (Ott, 2021, p. 122). Research indicates that online learning favors (FI) learners, so it is helpful to provide (FD) learners clear lecture outlines and instructions on note taking (Ott, 2021, p. 238-9). Consequently, as a US-American I need to be sensitive while teaching online courses to my Brazilian students. 

No matter what the demographic of my students, certain limitations of online learning must be faced. These include the lack of empathy and human touch that today’s “cyber youth” experience. Thus, teachers face the challenge of providing what experts call “high-touch learning environments” (Goodwin, 2016, p. 81-83). Though the purpose of the internet is to connect people across the globe, it often perpetuates prejudice and superficial cultural caricatures (Levmore and Nussbaum, 2010). Analysts describe contemporary learners as “lonely but fearful of intimacy” whose digital connections offer “the illusion of companionship without the demands of friendship” (Turkle, 2011, pp. xiv, 1, 3). As an online teacher, I face the task of finding texts that “deal with more authentic and substantial human experiences and contextualize specific subject-matter skills” in multiculturally meaningful ways (Gay, 2018, p. 152). 

Lessons from Western Professors in Saudi Arabia

I have lived outside my native US-American culture for most of the past 30 years. Often, I notice my fellow US-Americans overseas illustrating points with irrelevant cultural references. Sports examples are the most blatant, for example when US-Americans refer to baseball or football, aka gridiron elsewhere. For all nationalities, there is an art to teaching with a translator, which entails avoiding plays on words, culturally unique expressions, and many jokes. 

Western university teachers who sought to apply culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) in Saudia Arabia found it difficult to link students’ motivation to learn with personal ambition. Students didn’t feel that a college education would significantly impact dreams linked to profession, therefore Western teachers had to engage different aspirations (Alghamdi, 2014, p. 212-213). 

Western teachers were able to capitalize on Saudi culture’s respect for teachers. Students showed genuine excitement to learn from teachers who them esteemed as sources of valuable knowledge (Alghamdi, 2014, p. 214). One challenge, however, was the fact that over 5 years of higher education Saudi students became “disengaged from their environment”, “disconnected from the traditions of their elders”, and “adrift in uncertainty” (Alghamdi, 2014, p. 214). The primary reason Western teachers have been sought out by Saudi universities is to prepare students to engage in a knowledge-based economy. Therefore, I would recommend that Western teachers work to identify Saudi mentors who have successfully engaged in knowledge-based work locally and globally. These mentors may be few but invaluable as a resource to build upon as examples for Saudi students. 

Western teachers faced the challenge that the modernist view of knowledge contrasts with the Saudi “traditional absolutist view of knowledge” (Alghamdi, 2014, p. 216). The focus on memorization in Islamic culture conflicted with the Western curriculum aiming to teach students to view knowledge “critically and not passively” (Alghamdi, 2014, p. 216). Saudi students believed that the aim of a university degree is to “graduate and obtain jobs regardless of their knowledge content and changes in ways of thinking” (Alghamdi, 2014, p. 216). 

I agree with the position that (CRP) should aim to develop people who fully participate in their native societies producing life-enhancing knowledge and technology (Alghamdi, 2014, p. 220). I agree with the assessment that Western teachers in Majority World setting should be “exploring the communities in which their students live, connecting learning to students’ everyday lives, participating in community events, and collaborating with community members on projects both within and outside the school” (Alghamdi, 2014, p. 220). 

Culturally Relevant Teaching – Biblical Basis and Challenges

Christian advocates of culturally relevant teaching (CRT) describe the approach as a: “Pedagogy of opposition that is committed to collective empowerment” grounded on students’ academic success, cultural competence, and critical consciousness of the social order (Ladson-Billings, 1995, p. 159-165). James 2:1-7 on favoritism is cited as a biblical basis for opposing a pedagogy that extends favor to individuals or groups for self-serving aims (Stulac, 2003, para. 5). Christian educators rightly apply (CRT) to factors such as “race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation” (Swenson, 2016, p. 2). These teachers also give the Good Samaritan parable as convincing evidence that Christian educators should show love and mercy as they relate to students and design curriculum (Swenson, 2016, p. 3). The prophetic themes against injustice are also argued to be relevant to Christians’ call to live in contrast to “worldly standards” and “confront the injustices in their institutions” (Gilliard, 2013).

One of the weaknesses of (CRT) is the possibility of buckling under the weight of the project of collecting materials that present “diverse perspectives based on factors such as race, culture, socioeconomic status, gender, age, and profession” (Swenson, 2016, p. 6). If imagining the diverse subjects of academia, one confronts the significant additional pressure (CRT) places on Christian teachers. Then there is the question of evaluation regarding (CRT)’s goal of creating “cultural competence” in students (Swenson, 2016, p. 6). This includes the goal of leading students to recognize the liabilities of their cultural backgrounds, such as white privilege and historical injustices committed between ethnic groups present in modern nation-states (Swenson, 2016, p. 6). These are controversial issues that touch on the idea of identity and guilt, which must be treated delicately. Perhaps a dialogical approach is preferable to a didactive, prescriptive one to free teachers from the liability of imposing their perspectives on students. 

Micah 6 is cited as biblical basis for teaching students “critical consciousness of societal injustices” and calling students to be agents of change (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Visible Thinking Routines (Ritchhart et al., 2011) using various media to engage students in discussion is an excellent strategy, but one that can lead to destructive controversy if nor conducted with sensitivity. A helpful suggestion is that students interact with discussion points regarding social justice in online chat rooms prior to class (Swenson, 2016, p. 8). Also, if (CRT) only generates discussion without practical impact this is unfortunate. The suggestion that students use (CRT) to work on a “specific classroom management issue” has the potential to provide an empirical experience of what it is like to engage social justice issues in real life (Swenson, 2016). 

Helpful Insights from (CRT) for my Context

Research indicates the effectiveness of song, drama, and role playing, which is something that I feel I could employ more in my teaching (Ott, 2021, p. 248). Role-playing is something that I would like to employ more, including “improvisation around a real-life situation” or giving students a “situation (case) that they must act out” (Ott, 2021, p. 253). 

Massive open online courses (MOOCs) have been praised as “means of democratizing education, overcoming the elitism of higher education, and making it more universally accessible and affordable”, but dropout rates are 90 to 94 percent and nearly 80 percent are from affluent countries (Reich and Ruipérez-Valiente, 2019). In teaching Majority World students, I have observed the value placed on courses that can count toward a degree. Therefore, I would prioritize teaching MOOC courses for credit. Findings show that “students from all cultures preferred asynchronous elements over synchronous ones” (Ott, 2021, p. 276), given factors such as time zone, internet quality, and language difficulties. This runs counter to my presumption regarding Majority World learners such as Brazilians, who I would have thought preferred live online classes. But universally relevant factors leading to the asynchronous preference include “technical difficulties, low audio quality, necessity to be online at certain times, lack of opportunities to interact in live meetings, and their language abilities” (Wang, 2007, 302–3). 

Most of my teaching involves mission studies, for which establishing performance standards of culturally diverse students is a challenge. Experts suggest one way of leveling the playing field is to have students read texts from diverse cultures. I’m inspired by the method of asking students to decipher “culturally encoded messages, and convert them from one expressive form to another, such as from poetry to explanatory essays, and from narrative autobiography to conversational dialogue” (Gay, 2018, p. 158). The prospect of finding teaching materials, techniques, and assessment criteria that are responsive to the “cultural heritages and personal experiences” of students (Gay, 2018, p. 160) is an inspiring challenge for me. 

A significant discovery for me was the coping strategy described as code shifting – “altering expectations, ways of thinking, outward appearances, speech, and behaviors to accommodate situations and audiences” dominated by privileged European Americans in the U.S. (Jones and Shorter-Gooden, 2003). I was inspired by the example of teachers who “translated cues” derived from a culture’s “values, communication and social interaction patterns, and performance styles” (Gay, 2018, p. 215). In these cues, teachers found instructional methods that improved their students writing skills. I want to follow the example of teachers who used these methods to expand their students horizons with code shifting, elaborated as follows:

to learn the writing and speaking conventions of mainstream society and schools; connecting their oral creative strengths to the demands of academic reading and writing; and using their skills in storytelling, oral interpretation, role-playing, improvisation, script-reading, and call–response to improve performance in school-based reading and writing (Gay, 2018, p. 216). 

The paradigm of cooperative learning is also relevant to teaching missions studies to culturally diverse students. I often teach Latin-Americans, who research finds benefit from “working collaboratively with one another in small groups” and from feeling like they belong to a “classroom community” (Gay, 2018, p. 217). I’m encouraged by findings regarding the social benefits of cooperative learning: “improved understanding of diversity, and better helping, caring, and supportive relationships with peers” (Gay, 2018, p. 219). Studies indicating the value of “social scaffolding” that is a “network of personal supports” (Mehan et al., 1996) motivates me to encourage students to find ways of connecting their learning to their families, local communities, and faith traditions. 

References

Alghamdi, Amani K.H. (2014). “The Road to Culturally Relevant Pedagogy: Expatriate teachers’ pedagogical practices in the cultural context of Saudi Arabian higher education”. McGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l’éducation de McGill, vol. 49, n° 1

Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. (Lower Level LC1099.3 .G393 2018; Third edition.). Teachers College Press; Biola Library Catalog. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=cat09700a&AN=blc.oai.edge.biola.folio.ebsco.com.fs00001149.5fa32307.b7c3.5027.b081.5fe7ee113c2a&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=s6133893

Gilliard, D. (2013, March 23). What does Micah 6:8 really mean? [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.redletterchrisians.org/what-does-micah-68-really-mean/

Goodwin, B. (2016). “High touch” is crucial for “high tech” students. Educational Leadership, 74(1), 81–83.

Jones, C., & Shorter-Gooden, K. (2003). Shifting: The double lives of Black women in America. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Ladson‐Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159‐165.

Levmore, S., & Nussbaum, M. (Eds.). (2010). Offensive Internet: Speech, privacy, and reputation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Mehan, H., Hubbard, L., Villanueva, I., & Lintz, A. (1996). Constructing school success: The consequences of untracking low-achieving students. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Ott, C. (2021). Teaching and learning across cultures: A guide to theory and practice. (Lower Level LC1099 .O83 2021). Baker Academic, a division of Baker Publishing Group; Biola Library Catalog. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=cat09700a&AN=blc.oai.edge.biola.folio.ebsco.com.fs00001149.eca6bcdd.ba4a.5f1a.a161.26d8b7e3511a&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=s6133893

Reich, Justin, and José A. Ruipérez-Valiente. 2019. “The MOOC Pivot.” Science 363 (6423): 130–31.

Ritchhart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. San Francisco, CA: Josey Bass.

Stulac, George M. (2003). IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Vol. 16). Leicester, England: IVP Academic. 

Swensen, Danny R. (2016). A Faith­Based Context for Culturally­Relevant Instruction. The ICCTE Journal. Vol. 11 (il). 

Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Wang, Minjuan. 2007. “Designing Online Courses That Effectively Engage Learners from Diverse Cultural Backgrounds.” British Journal of Educational Technology 38 (2).