The key concepts below which appear in the research study are clarified to avoid ambiguity and to illuminate the context in which they are used.
1.14.1 Cross-border learning experiences
The concept “cross-border learning” has been drawn from the phenomenon of crossing over a delimited geographical or socio-cultural boundary in learning (Ituarte & Davies 2007: 74). The geographical concept of the term designates the process of passing over national and regional boundaries for educational purposes. The socio-cultural perspective of the concept is often expressed as frontier education (Krupat 1992: 5), cross-border education (Knight 2011: 16), border crossing (Cleghorn 2005: 106), cross-boundary learning (Pless & Maak 2004:130), and cross-cultural learning (Ramburuth & McCormick
39
2001: 334). The socio-cultural aspect of cross-border learning is relevant for this study. In this study cross-border learning can be defined as the academic and social cognitive process that takes place when students of different ethnic, linguistic and religious backgrounds work co-operatively and comfortably and share their knowledge, experiences and viewpoints for mutual learning benefits (Burgess 2007: 204; Pless & Maack 2004: 134; Hawkins &Heather 2001: 181). Thus, the concept cross-border learning experience refers to engaging learning activities during which students cross both their own identities and those of others to develop knowledge and skills, as well as mutually beneficial in inter-group relationships with out-group counterparts.
1.14.2 Social diversity
Social diversity has often been associated with racial, ethnic, and gender differences (Sefa Dei & Asgharzadeh 2005: 219). The concept, however, has now been developed to encompass wider areas of differences such as race, ethnicity, gender, culture, language, religion, physical traits, sexual orientation, birthplace, economic status and education (Cross 2004: 391; UNDESA-IIS 2001: 1). In educational environments, these social differences affect the cognitive and affective development of students (McCown et al. 1999: 98). In this study, the term “diversity” is expressed in terms of intercultural interaction and co-existence of students from different socio-cultural backgrounds in an all-inclusive tertiary education learning environment (David 2010: 5; Sefa Dei & Asghrzadeh 2005: 220).
1.14.3 Diversity management
Diversity management is a relatively recent phenomenon in the field of Education Management. It focuses on the development and implementation of management strategies for creating an inclusive and supportive learning environment that would ensure peaceful co-existence and collaborative learning partnerships in ethnically, linguistically and religiously diverse higher education student populations (Dancy II 2010: 3). It is measured in terms of the appropriateness of the approaches applied to address diversity
40
by means of management processes that can promote students’ social cohesion (Cox (1994) in Dancy II 2010: 86).
1.14.4 Ethnic group
The concept “ethnicity” has remained controversial and elusive in academic circles. It is often used to describe natural and biological sameness, while in some contexts it stands for a latent commonality among a group of people sharing the same origin and traits (Spencer 2006: 45; Smith 1997 in Hussein 2005: 3). For Schmid (2001: 10) ethnicity is a sense of uniqueness from other people in terms of culture, language and history. Giddens 1989 in Gillborn (1990: 40) views an ethnic society as a group of people who consider themselves as culturally distinct from other groups in a society and who are, at the same time, seen by those others to be so. The terms ‘ethnicity’ and ‘ethnic group’ are used in the study to designate a dynamic group that has its own common origin, history and culture (Woolfolk 2010: 157; Hussien 2005: 3).
1.14.5 Group
The concept “group” is used in this study in two forms. It is used to depict a collection of people who interact regularly based on shared interests and also to indicate a collection of people who share any ethnic, linguistic or religious identity and have some sense of belonging that sets them apart from other groupings of people (Stolley 2005: 83-84). Sameness, in terms of the latter, is often expressed by the term “in-group” while otherness, in this regard, is indicated by the term “out-group”. In-group therefore refers to a group of people with whom one identifies and feels a sense of belonging and loyalty whereas “out-group” implies other students, who on the basis of their homogeneity in terms of ethnic, linguistic and religious differences, or a combination of any of these variables, consider themselves to be a homogeneous group (Gupto, Castelo-Rodríguez, Martínez, & Quintanar 2009: 251).
41
1.14.6 Non-dominant group
The concept “non-dominant” is borrowed from Human (2005: 3) who uses it to refer to identity groups other than dominant groups. The term is often used to substitute the concept “minority” which is often viewed as a negative connotation. In this study context it is used to designate student groups from ethnic groups other than the Oromo, Amhara and Tigrean students.
1.14.7 Student
Learning and understanding can take place in different environments. Those who come to know are often referred to as learners or students. The concept “learner” designates a person who acquires knowledge in an informal or formal educational situation. Moon (2004: 5) considers the word “student” to be distinct from “learner”. He argues that a student is a person involved in a formal education process whereas a learner may not find him/herself in a formal educational situation. For the purpose of this study, the term “student” is used to refer to higher education students.
1.15 SUMMARY
In this chapter, the historical development of addressing socio-cultural differences in educational environment was outlined along with relevant trends of social changes in educational environments at global, regional and national levels. In this regard, a research gap was identified in terms of the relationship between management processes and the development of CBLEs that would, if researched, contribute to the cross-cultural development of multicultural higher education student populations. The gap was substantiated by a brief review of significant research outputs in the area of diversity management and learning, and the research problem was presented. Based on the description of the research problem, an overarching research question and related research sub-questions were posed, along with the objectives of this study. Methodological matters that guided this study were presented in terms of the research
42
approach and data collection methods. The sampling strategies, data analysis, conceptual and theoretical frameworks, trustworthiness and ethical considerations were outlined in terms of this study. The next chapter focuses on a contextual review of this study and aims at illuminating the contextual significance of the study project.
43
CHAPTER 2
TREATMENT OF SOCIO-CULTURAL DIFFERENCES OF STUDENTS IN THE