Supporting Cross-Cultural Competence and Global-Mindedness in Pre-Service Teacher Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By stepping beyond the ?comfortable and familiar, ? pre-service teachers enrolled in a Bachelor of Education program at a university in Western Canada travel to an international host country destination to engage with diverse cultures, traditions, and practices and to volunteer teach. This ?Teaching Across Borders? program option provides interested students the opportunity to deeply engage with and experience a culture vastly different from their own, in support of a deepened cross-cultural understanding and an enhanced global-mindedness, while earning a professional teacher designation credential. In support of providing a pedagogically informed and robust cross-cultural experience, a literature review and synthesis of current, scholarly debates was taken up, focusing on the impact and influence of travel abroad initiatives when international travel study constitutes a component of coursework for adult learners enrolled in university education programs. Asserting that international travel and study abroad programs have the potential to advance cross-cultural competencies and cultural sensitivities of learners, Hammer and Bennett (2002) referred to the beneficial effects on knowledge, skills, and attitudes when participating students engage with cultures of difference in support of exploring and critically reflecting on tightly held notions, beliefs, and assumptions that inform their philosophy and future practice as developing professionals. Adding to the discourse, Button, Green, Tengnah, Johansson, and Baker (2005) contended that ?differences in placement programmes, such as duration, preparation and debriefing were found to have affected the reported overall international placement experience? (p. 315) of participants. Kehl and Morris (2007-2008) further elaborated and argued that the level of global-mindedness achieved and experienced may be directly related to and impacted by the duration of study abroad initiatives. From another perspective, cross-cultural border crossing initiatives, however well intentioned, run the risk of becoming a ?cultural invasion? and, therefore, educators, program administrators, and participating students must consider ethical questions around the reciprocity of the relationship (Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich, 2002). Reciprocity refers to a give and take, an inhale and exhale of sorts, to being open and present, to offering up, and to receiving what is being given to and to what is being offered by others. Questions that informed this critical exploration of the literature included: What constitutes a meaningful cross-cultural experience for learners enrolled in university programs? What factors, program elements, and experiences deepen and expand learners? cultural sensitivity and global-mindedness?
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".