Culturally responsive teaching knowledge and practices of online faculty in educational administration: a pilot study

1.1 Definition of culture

Culture permeates learning and is central to the higher education; however, the concept of “culture” is complex and defined in numerous ways. Brooks (1975) and Nostrand (1974) viewed culture as a static entity made up of observable and learned characteristics, whereas the more recent models view culture as dynamic and changing (Moore, 1991). Educational leadership, social and behavioral researchers defined culture as the collective norms, rituals, and behaviors that groups of people share (Ryan, 2010). Culture drives what we do, how we think, and how we interact with one another. Particularly in the school setting, school culture has been considered as a set of values, norms, and beliefs that works as a soft strategy in sustainable school improvement (Lee & Louis, 2019; Thapa, Cohen, Guffey, & Higgins-D’Alessandro, 2013). Lee and Louis (2019) identified academic press, student support, trust and respect, optimism, professional learning community as the key elements of a strong school culture. Furthermore, Bridwell-Mitchell (2018) argued that a strong school culture is a connected one with interwoven elements. A school with a strong culture consists of a large number of overlapping and cohesive interactions between people so that the fundamental beliefs, shared values, norms, and patterns/actions of the school can be widely spread across the school community.

Deardorff (2010) noted that culture can be understood as a shared set of norms, values, and beliefs that influence people’s interactions and behaviors. These aspects of culture, such as values and beliefs, may not be easily observed compared to other aspects, such as language and behavior (Hall, 1976). For Bennett (1998), the observable characteristics of culture (termed objective culture), are related to cultural products people make and consciously transmit from generation to generation, such as food, holidays, stories, and clothing. Meanwhile, the unobservable aspects, referred to as subjective culture, are related to behavior, values, and ways of thinking that are informally learned and unconsciously shared. For the purpose of this study, we will focus on both the objective and subjective aspects of culture. Issues concerning the social and cultural dimensions of educational tasks in the higher education setting will be examined to discuss how to meet the needs of culturally diverse learners.

1.2 Cultural response teaching and leadership frameworks

Aronson and Laughter (2016) completed a synthesis of the research on the theory and practice of culturally relevant education across content areas. Two primary strands emerged from the literature. One of the strands focused on teacher practices (i.e., Geneva Gay’s research) and the other focused on teacher stance and standards (i.e., Gloria Ladson-Billings’ research). Faculty in teacher education and educational leadership programs purport to adopt and use Culturally Responsive Teaching Knowledge (CRT) and Culturally Responsive Practices (CRP) in the design and delivery of their online courses. However, Sleeter’s (2012) research on “Confirming the Marginalization of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy” confirmed the absence of CRT, CRP, and attention to cultural differences and ethnic diversity in many online courses.

Ladson-Billings (1995b) acknowledged that teachers use culturally relevant pedagogy to develop sociopolitical consciousness, which includes one’s obligation to recognize issues of race, class, and gender in themselves and to incorporate these issues in their teaching. Building on Paris’ (2012) theory of culturally sustaining pedagogy, Ladson-Billings (2014) extended her research to more global cultural identities and other disciples such as arts, literature, music, athletics, and film.

Villegas and Lucas (2002) integrated Gay’s five essential elements and their (i.e., Villegas and Lucas) salient characteristics of CRT to develop an adapted theoretical framework of culturally responsive teaching that is relevant for pedagogy development in British University Business Schools. Villegas and Lucas’s adapted framework is presented as five pillars of culturally relevant teaching, which are: (a) Pillar 1: cultural consciousness, (b) Pillar 2: resources, (c) Pillar 3: moral responsibility, (d) Pillar 4: cultural bridging, and (e) Pillar 5: higher education curriculum (p. 7). Moreover, Villegas and Lucas used this adapted theoretical framework to facilitate the development of culturally responsive teaching practices for ethnic minority students in the Business school and the wider university.

A culturally responsive school culture is not complete without culturally relevant leadership. Based on Ladson-Billings’ (1995b) culturally relevant pedagogy framework, theories of social justice leadership, inclusive leadership, and culturally responsive school leadership (Khalifa, Gooden, & Davis, 2016; North, 2006; Scanlan & Lopez, 2012; Theoharis, 2007, 2008; Theoharis & O’Toole, 2011) were framed to prepare educational leadership for social justice. Capper, Theoharis, and Sebastian (2006) conceptualized the preparation of leaders for social justice through two dimensions: critical consciousness, knowledge, and practical skills that focus on social justice on the horizontal dimension, while curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment oriented toward social justice on the vertical dimension of the framework. In responding to the schooling needs from the larger school environment perspective, Khalifa et al. (2016) discussed the importance of critical self-awareness, teacher preparation, school environment, and community advocacy in building culturally responsive school leadership to address pressing issues under the multicultural context.

1.3 Social constructivism

Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky, regarded as the father of social constructivism, believed that knowledge was constructed through dialog and interaction with others (Vygotsky, 1978). He argued that knowledge is co-constructed in a social environment and that in the process of social interaction, people use language as a tool to construct meaning. Social constructivism is a broad-based epistemological approach to understanding how social and interpersonal influences jointly construct one’s understanding of the world (Burr, 2003; Gergen, 1985). In educational practices, students construct knowledge through their interactions with the instructor and others. They negotiate meaning through learning activities. Therefore, the instructor’s role is to use various technologies and instructional activities that aim at deepening students’ understanding of the subject matter in the learning environment (Swan, Garrison, & Richardson, 2009). Understanding that human development is socially situated and knowledge is constructed through interaction with others, we use the socio-constructivist approach in the design and delivery of our online course. We used a sense of community and social ability as two critical factors influencing learners’ level of online participation and social interaction (Rovai & Wighting, 2005).

1.4 Community of Inquiry Model (CoI)

Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) synthesized a wide body of educational research to develop what is known as the Community of Inquiry Model (CoI). The CoI Model addresses the interaction of individual learners and their instructors. The CoI Model is based on the constructivist theoretical principles. This model consists of three independent dimensions, which are social presence, teaching presence, and cognitive presence. The concept of social presence was defined by Garrison et al. (2000) as “The ability of participants in a community of inquiry to project their personal characteristics into the community, thereby, presenting themselves to others as real people” (p. 89).

Teaching presence denotes the design elements of an online course that “allows for instructor facilitation and pedagogical direction to learners in the social and cognitive processes” (Anderson, Rourke, Garrison, & Archer, 2001, para. 4). Cognitive presence is “the extent to which the participation in any particular configuration of a community of inquiry are able to construct meaning through sustained communication” (Anderson et al., 2001, p. 12). One way to increase cognitive presence in online courses is to design activities that begin with a triggering event in the form of a problem or dilemma. Students brainstorm ideas and share the information about the dilemma with their online peers. Culturally relevant teaching practices or pedagogy was not included in this model; however, teachers in online courses could certainly use these cultural constructs in the design and delivery of their courses.

1.5 Culturally relevant teaching, cultural differences, and ethnic diversity

In this section, the researchers provided an analysis of several empirical research studies. These authors investigated how faculty members accounted for cultural differences, diversity, and culturally relevant teaching in the development of online course content in higher education.

A search through the EBSCO Host database was conducted to locate peer-reviewed empirical studies published in the U.S., the UK, Australia, Canada, and other countries on the topic of developing online courses with attention to diversity, cultural differences, and international students in the context of online education. Most of the articles reviewed used a qualitative research design with either case study or other basic qualitative research method with only two quantitative studies using the survey method.

For the purpose of this literature review, the researchers purposefully selected qualitative empirical research studies where the context for teaching and learning was online, at the higher education level, and included a culturally diverse student population. McDermott (2017) conducted a qualitative study to explore the extent to which faculty in one Irish higher education institution considered the cultural nature of the students in the design and delivery of online courses. McDermott purposively selected three faculty members as the participants. The results of the study revealed that culture was not considered either in the design or delivery phases of the participants’ courses. McDermott concluded the article with recommendations on how to address these deficiencies and provide professional development support for online faculty.

Jabbar and Hardaker’s (2013) research focused on the role of CRT for supporting ethnic diversity in British University Business Schools. 10 faculty members and administrators with a minimum of three years’ experience in higher education were purposefully chosen to participate in in-depth interviews of the study. The researcher explored the role of culturally responsive teaching in U.K. higher education and whether/how methods and techniques of pedagogy formulation were used to support the learning of ethnic minorities. The results revealed the need for faculty to adopt an approach to teaching online courses that is culturally responsive and engage their students through their cultural values and heritage.

Both Jabbar and Hardaker’s (2013) and McDermott (2017) employed qualitative research methods to study CRT in the design and delivery of online instruction. Their findings were quite similar in that the participants did not consider using culturally relevant teaching and pedagogy in developing their courses. Similarly, Zhang and Kenny (2010) explored the learning experiences of three international students enrolled in an online master’s program offered by a large university in Canada. The findings revealed that the lack of familiarity with the North American culture and colloquial language made it difficult to participate in online activities in the online environment. Zhang and Kenny suggested that distance education course designers should be aware of the needs and expectations of international students and adapt their teaching to culturally diverse student population. Faculty members should combine the design principles from both traditional and constructivism theories to address the needs of ethnically diverse students. Correspondingly, Kang and Chang (2016) argued that online learning is never a “value-free transaction and self-referenced learning event” (p. 789). Cultural impacts should be strategically incorporated into online course design, e.g., providing collaborative team projects to enhance peer-to-peer interactions, using nonverbal and visual forms of communication methods, and providing accommodation in the areas of language and life to help student sojourners complete cultural transition.

Milheim (2014) administered a short-answer written, web-based survey from December 2012 through February 2013 to explore how cultural differences manifest themselves in online courses. In addition, this researcher sought to identify how instructors perceived their roles with respect to facilitating discussion across multiple cultures. A total number of 41 faculty or instructors who had taught at least one, fully online course responded to the survey. It was commonly acknowledged that culture plays a critical role in the classroom, however, it was difficult to identify differences in the online setting due to a sense of anonymity and masking of culture. Such masking could have a significant impact on the communication that occurs in the courses. In this case, students’ self-identification of their culture became important.

More recently, Prieto (2018) administered a quantitative online survey to 91 psychology educators to determine their attitudes toward incorporating diversity content into courses. Findings indicated that as instructors’ personal acceptance of culturally diverse students increased, instructors’ level of “backlash” attitudes toward those students decreased, and instructors attached a greater level of importance to incorporating diversity issues into their course content. Given the fact that university student populations are increasingly becoming more culturally and ethnically diverse in the U.S., the student population in the online classes mirror the larger macro system. We see more students of different genders, ethnicities, languages, and cultural backgrounds in online learning community. For example, we are now seeing an increase in the number of non-traditional students who work full time with families. However, the empirical research reviewed above indicated that most of the online faculty were not cognizant of culturally relevant teaching theory and educational practices. More empirical research needs to be conducted to examine whether or not online faculty have the culturally responsive knowledge and skills to support the learning of ethnic minority university students in the United States.

3.1 Instrument

Culturally Responsive Teaching Knowledge and Practices of Online Faculty instrument (Heitner & Jennings, 2016) was used to measure CRT and CREP in this pilot study (see Appendix). This instrument was developed based upon Gay’s (2010) theoretical framework to measure the extent to which online faculty consider, value, and address culturally responsive teaching in their work on a 5-point Likert scale. The Culturally Responsive Teaching Knowledge and Practices of Online Faculty instrument contains five sections. Section One (i.e., knowledge about culturally responsive teaching) asks participants to rate their current knowledge of 12 culturally responsive tenets and approaches from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). Section Two (i.e., Value/importance of culturally responsive teaching) asks participant to rate their opinion of the importance of the same 12 items from 1 (not at all important) to 5 (extremely important). Section Three (i.e., Use of culturally responsive educational practices) rates the extent to which faculty use the same 12 items (i.e., practices) from 1 (never) to 5 (all the time). Section Four (preparation/skills to use culturally responsive educational practices) looks at faculty’s self-perceived level of preparation on those 12 items (i.e., practices) from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). Section Five examines faculty’s agreement with their knowledge, value, practice, Knowledge/skills/abilities (KSAs) from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

An expert panel consisting of 10 faculty and students of racial/ethnic/religious minority, military, LGBTQ, and international cultures reviewed the instrument items for face validation. Content validity was assessed through interview responses. Cronbach’s alpha for all subscale of this instrument were found to be between 0.895 and 0.97, and subscale intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.526 to 0.833. In addition, construct validity was assessed in the Campbell-Fiske Multitrait-multimethod matrix analysis in which correlations between the responses to the same groups of questions across respondents from the private, not-for-profit, public, and for-profit sectors were examined. Twenty-seven out of 36 inter subscale correlation was found to be significant, ranging from 0.322 and 0.882. In the current study, the Culturally Responsive Teaching Knowledge and Practices of Online Faculty instrument was administered via Qualtrics to a pilot sample of online faculty of Master’s and Doctoral online programs in Educational Administration, Instructional Administration, or Educational Leadership. Demographic information of the participants (i.e., gender, ethnicity, and age) was also collected in the survey. It took about 30 min for participants to complete the survey.

5.1 Limitations

Many of the empirical research studies synthesized in this literature review consisted of a small number of participants. In fact, one of the limitations of this pilot study was the small sample size and results of this study should be taken with caution. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric statistical tests were used in this pilot study due to the sample size limitation. Additional research should be conducted with university faculty who have been successful with incorporating multiple cultural ways of learning and teaching in their online courses. A much larger sample size that covers a wide range of ages, geographic locations, program and institution types and sizes is greatly needed to enhance generalizability of the study. According to Spillane (2016), researchers may follow the recommendations below to increase the response rate for survey research.

1. Keep It Simple: Address the information you need with 15 or least clear, concise questions.

2. Send Personalized Invitations: Use your influence. Acknowledge potential participants personally with an email invitation from you. Include your name and the importance of the response.

3. Communicate Value: inform potential respondents of the value they’ll take away or be a part of the contribution to the knowledge base.

4. Establish Expectations: Let respondents know how long they should set aside for the survey. Ensure the actual time to complete the survey is correct. Many respondents will take at least 20 min to complete a survey.

5. Send heads up and follow-up dates: Communicate in advance to let your respondents know a survey is coming their way. After the initial invitation, people may take the survey right away, but in all likelihood, many will not. A great way to increase response rates is to send at least two follow-up emails over a period of time reminding potential respondents and keeping the survey top of mind.