Introduction
Classrooms across North America are becoming increasingly more culturally and linguistically diverse as new immigrants enter the United States and Canada (NCES, 2004; Statistics Canada, 2001). It is a sobering conclusion, however, that teachers must know about their students’ cultures and languages or their students will fail in school (Gunderson, 2000a). This chapter contains information about cultures and how they are related to the teaching and learning of literacy. It is vital to remember that these discussions should not in any way lead to conclusions that can be generalized to large, broad populations or groups of human beings. The chapter includes discussions of some cultural differences that appear to charac-terize small groups in a particular geographic region. The conclusions can be used, however, as a guide to identify features that may also be important in other areas for teachers to explore.
Culture
Perception and Culture
This author once worked with an adult student from Indonesia who was attending the university as a graduate student. One rainy afternoon he brought with him a small umbrella with a floral pattern. When asked where he had borrowed it, he responded that he had purchased it himself. Why did he buy a woman’s umbrella, he was asked. He was aghast! He had no idea that there were women’s and men’s umbrellas.
Cultural backgrounds are different. The same Indonesian student was asked to read an article about bedtime stories in a graduate class. He had absolutely no concept of what the term meant. After some explanation, he was able to read and comprehend the passage. He was amused at the concept of parents reading books to children at bedtime. When this author first read a newspaper item about curling, he had no idea what the article was about. The reporter, writing for an experienced audience, never once used the word curling. The text was filled with words like “short brooms” and “rocks,” and they were all totally outside this author’s understanding.
Indeed, the text was not understandable for anyone without knowledge of curling in their background. Cultural background is significant in the way human beings understand and make sense of the world. A major difficulty, however, is that there is little agreement on what the word “culture” represents.
79
What Is Culture?
There has been considerable debate and controversy related to defining the term
“culture.” Fifty years ago, Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1954) identified 160 different definitions of the term. Larson and Smalley argued that culture was somewhat like a map or a blueprint that
guides the behavior of people in a community and is incubated in family life.
It governs our behavior in groups, makes us sensitive to matters of status, and helps us know what others expect of us and what will happen if we do not live up to their expectations. Culture helps us to know how far we can go as individuals and what our responsibility is to the group. Different cultures are the underlying structures which make Round community round and Square community square.
(1972, p. 39) Condon (1973) proposed that culture “is a system of integrated patterns, most of which remain below the threshold of consciousness, yet all of which govern human behavior just as surely as the manipulated strings of a puppet control its motions”
(p. 4). Vontress (1988) concluded that each of us lives in five cultures that inter-mingle: the universal, the ecological, the national, the regional, and the racio-ethnic.
Culture is more than a sum of its constituent parts, and each of us is more culturally complex than we know or can describe. Culture allows human beings to survive by providing the mental constructs through which to categorize the world.
Murdock (1945) describes seven characteristics of cultural patterns: 1) they originate in the human mind; 2) they facilitate human and environmental interactions; 3) they satisfy basic human needs; 4) they are cumulative and adjust to changes in external and internal conditions; 5) they tend to form a consistent structure; 6) they are learned and shared by all the members of a society; and 7) they are transmitted to new generations. Culture can be viewed at a “macro level,”
a broad generalization consisting of shared features across a group, and at a
“micro level,” particular features related to an individual or a very small group of individuals.
A discussion of culture often includes descriptions, discussions and arguments for and against including such issues as race, ethnicity, socio-economic status, eco-nomy, gender, religion, and political philosophy. Often, culture is defined relative to the discipline of the individual doing the defining. In essence, culture is defined within the parameters of a particular academic culture. Sociolinguistic definitions differ from anthropological definitions, which differ in turn from ethnolinguistic definitions, and so on. Sociolinguists, for instance, focus on the language use that distinguishes communities. An individual, in this view, is a member of multiple cultural groups that can be identified by language and language use. Individuals are able to “code-switch” as they move from one community to another. Subgroups or subcultures can be identified by their use of jargon or “restricted codes.”
Individuals are “marked” by their membership in groups, so that an individual’s
language signals social status, gender, age, and so on. Culture affects the way an individual perceives the world, both on a macro and on a micro level. In particular, culture has a direct relationship with one’s beliefs about, attitudes toward, expectations for, and views of teaching and learning and the importance of learn-ing to read and write.
The notion of culture developed in this book is specific to the author’s purpose;
it is proposed that culture is the ideas, customs, language, arts, skills, and tools that generally characterize a given group of individuals in a given period of time, particularly as they relate to its members’ learning in North American schools. The discussions that follow will include information about religious background, which often relates to what an individual believes about the value and place of learning to read; parental reasons for coming to North America, since they often reflect attitudes toward the importance of school and schooling; family dynamics, which reveal such features as gender roles; language (including phonological, syn-tactic, semantic, and pragmatic features that are informative about students’
learning of English); and social patterns such as the role of eye contact in com-munication, particularly across generations. The complexity is that students do not simply adapt to a new culture or become bicultural. Rather, they acquire and reject some features of the new culture, retain and reject some features of their first cultures, adapt some features of the first culture to the second culture, and become socialized into a system that is uniquely individual, imbued with first- and second-cultural features in a way that is often predictable (Gunderson, 2000a).
Culture is a social phenomenon. When individuals move from one culture to another there are both micro- and macro-level consequences. There are a num-ber of views concerning the consequences of entering a new culture. Ishiyama (1995), a counselling psychologist, notes that “Migrants inevitably face cultural, sociopolitical, and linguistic differences and various emotional and interpersonal consequences when they move to an unfamiliar culture” (p. 262). He goes on to define “cultural dislocation” as “a subjective experience of feeling displaced or not at home in a given sociocultural environment” (p. 263). He cautions that coun-sellors must know about cultural dislocation in order to provide appropriate services to individuals who have difficulties in a new culture. Micro-level features, according to Schumann (1978a, b), may include such phenomena as culture shock, motivation, and ego permeability. In 1986, Schumann categorized acculturation relative to the group of individuals involved; those who wish to assimilate fully into a culture and those who do not wish to assimilate.
Schumann (1978a, b) proposed that two factors affect the degree to which an individual learner acculturates: social distance and psychological distance. Social distance represents how well learners become members of the target-language community; that is, how well they are able to achieve contact with them. Psycho-logical distance represents the degree to which a particular learner is comfortable learning the second language. Variables related to social distance include social dominance, integration pattern, enclosure, cohesiveness, size, cultural congruence, attitude, and a learner’s intended length of residence. Psychological distance is related to language shock, culture shock, motivation, and ego permeability.
In Schumann’s view, culture shock is often one of the most difficult experiences immigrants encounter. According to Schumann and others, an individual new to a culture begins to go through a process called acculturation, during which there are “stages” that represent the degree to which that individual becomes part of or adapted to the new culture. This is a view that suggests that immigrants or non-mainstream individuals must adapt to a new culture.
Culture Shock
Thus, “acculturation” is a term that refers to the notion that an individual from one culture must adapt to a new culture. The term “assimilation” refers to the case in which an individual’s first culture is submerged in the new culture and there is often a loss of first-cultural values, beliefs, and behavior patterns. Acculturation is often associated with an individual’s success in learning a new language. Indeed, many authors have suggested that failing to acculturate is often associated with failure to learn a second language (Ellis, 1986; Schumann, 1978a, b).
It has been observed by some that “normal” acculturation occurs in four stages:
euphoria, culture shock, recovery, and acculturation. It is important to emphasize that these so-called stages are not particularly precise or accurate. “Under normal circumstances, people who become acculturated pass through all the stages at varying rates, though they do not progress smoothly from one stage to the next and may regress to previous stages” (Richard-Amato, 1988, p. 6). There is variation in acculturation both between and within cultural groups.
Overall, a number of factors appear to affect the degree to which individuals become acculturated: nation of origin, reasons for immigrating, age on entry, amount of prior schooling, economic status, difficulties related to travel, extent of disruption and trauma related to war, and a family’s immigration status.
Schumann’s (1978a, b) model “seeks to explain differences in learners’ rate of development and also in their ultimate level of achievement in terms of the extent to which they adapt to the target-language culture” (Ellis, 1994, p. 230). Schumann observes:
We are concerned with variables which involve the relationship between two social groups who are in a contact situation, but who speak different lan-guages. One group is considered the second-language learning (2LL) group and the other the target language (TL) group.
(1986, p. 380) Acculturation, according to Schumann, means “the social and psychological integration of the learner with the target language (TL) group” (1986, p. 379).
However, a number of researchers view the notion of acculturation as a nega-tive one.
Recently, second-language researchers have suggested that this view is a negative one (see, for instance, Duff & Uchida, 1997) because it characterizes the second-language learner as one who must give up a first culture. Socialization theorists have a more positive view. A central notion of language socialization theory is that
children and other novices learn to function communicatively with members of a community by organizing and reorganizing sociocultural information that is conveyed through the form and content of the actions of others (Schieffelin &
Ochs, 1986a, b). This theoretical framework views the acquisition of linguistic and of sociocultural competence as interdependent. Schieffelin & Ochs (1986b) conclude that as children learn to become competent members of their society, they also learn to become competent speakers of their language. Acquiring pragmatic competence—that is, the ability to use and interpret language appropriately in contexts—is an essential part of the language socialization process, because without pragmatic competence it is extremely difficult to participate in ordinary social life. In many respects, what is appropriate in a particular context is related to pragmatic cultural features. The language competence for giving advice, for instance, varies culturally (Matsumura, 2003).
Teaching and Learning
Teaching and learning—that is, schooling—is not culture-free. The Primary Program in British Columbia, for instance, begins its section on children’s intel-lectual development with the following quotation:
If intelligence develops as a whole by the child’s own construction then what makes this construction possible is the child’s curiosity, interest, alertness, desire to communicate and exchange points of view, and a desire to make sense of it all.
(YEAR 2000, 1988) Such a statement is based on the assumption that the development of “questioning”
children who have a plurality of views and openness to them is meritorious. This is a value that is by no means universally shared, either by all Western teachers or by a number of students. Gunderson (2000a) concludes that “North American educators continue to view education within a ‘mainstream’ viewpoint, one that focuses on European values and beliefs, even though their school populations grow increasingly multi-cultural.”
Teaching and learning differ considerably around the world. In the People’s Republic of China, for instance, students begin school when they are 61⁄2years old.
Free public education is available in every part of China, in government-supported public schools, company schools, or recently established private schools built mostly for the affluent. School hours are normally from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. for five and a half days a week (Gunderson, 2007). There are several hundred languages and dialects spoken in China. Initial instruction involves the use of Pinyin, which is a form of the International Phonetic Alphabet (i.p.a.) used to transcribe speech sounds. Students are taught reading and writing in Putonghua (Mandarin), regardless of their L1s. The written language is the same in all of the schools, which makes it comprehensible across languages and dialects. On the other hand, students in Hong Kong often begin school at 3 years of age and they learn to read Chinese through rote memorization of traditional Chinese characters, although
since the return of Hong Kong to China this approach has begun to change in many schools. Children from Hong Kong have often studied English from age 3.
To teach beginning reading skills in China, teachers use Pinyin, which is made up of 26 Roman letters, 59 International Phonetic Symbols, and four accents that mark tone. In addition, Chinese characters have been simplified, beginning in 1958. The use of Pinyin as a bridge to the learning of simplified Chinese charac-ters is a feature of China but not Taiwan or Hong Kong. These differences have political significance. During Chinese New Year celebrations in Richmond, British Columbia, for instance, a parent from the People’s Republic of China volunteered to produce large posters for display in and around one of the secondary schools.
There were strong objections from parents from Taiwan, who complained that the signs were “communist” (Carrigan, 1998) because they used simplified Chinese characters.
There are a number of views of teaching and learning developed in schools in China that influence students’ learning in North American schools. Many students expect to be involved in activities that focus on rote memorization, attention to facts and details, teacher-centered instruction, and a focus on grades. Unfortunately, when such students enroll in North American classrooms these differences can cause serious difficulties. Li (2006), for instance, found that the Chinese parents she studied rejected the teaching and learning going on in their children’s school and opted instead to rely on outside school activities to give their children the skills they believed to be valuable. Interestingly, the visible minority in the school con-sisted of the white teachers, who were in a lower socio-economic group than were the Chinese families who were the visible majority. In essence, these families viewed Freire’s banking metaphor of teaching as the preferred one.
Significant Cultural Variables
Learners from different cultures enter schools in North America with backgrounds that are complex. In many cases their expectations and their success are affected negatively because of differences between their cultures and the cultures of school and of their teachers. What an individual thinks about reading and writing is often determined by his or her first cultural views. It becomes even more complex because a student must also come to know about the culture related to school and schooling. For purposes of this book the following variables will be considered:
Significant cultural variables
• Privacy
• Cooperation/competition
• View of time
• Body movements
• Personal space
• Eye contact
• Physical contact
• Gender roles
• Individual vs. group family orientation
• Non-verbal communication norms
• Conversation rules (turn taking)
• Spirituality
• Fate vs individual responsibility
• Perceptual style (field dependence/independence).
Cognitive style
• Analytic
• Methodical
• Reflective
• Global.
Relational, Intuitive, Interpersonal
• Expression of emotion
• Family structures
• Roles of family members
• Educational expectations
• Perception and acceptance of individual differences
• Childrearing practices
• Modes of cultural transmission.
Diversity of ESL Students
Schools across North America enroll millions of students from all of the cultures in the world. In each cultural group, traditional beliefs, values, and customs may be retained to varying degrees by different individuals. Factors such as social class, religion, level of education, and region of origin in the home country (e.g., rural or urban) contribute to differences within immigrant groups. These factors influ-ence the beliefs of the student and the student’s family about teaching and learn-ing, their help-seeking behavior, and their expectations of teachers. While there are usually shared beliefs, values, and experiences among people from a given group, there is also a widespread intra-group diversity. The degree of acculturation does not necessarily correlate with length of residence, and integration in one or more aspects of life does not imply a rejection of traditional ways. It is important to remember that every culture is dynamic. The existence of intra-group diversity precludes generalized assumptions about individual beliefs and responses to speci-fic circumstances, and necessitates assessment on an individual basis. However, knowing about some of the key characteristics in the traditional cultures of specific groups may provide the beginning of a framework for mutual understanding and an improved ability to work effectively with students categorized as having limited proficiency in English. The key characteristics will help the teacher design system-atic ways to explore cultural features that may affect his or her English literacy instruction.
The Role of Ethnicity and Race
Ethnicity, or race, is often related to culture in direct ways; but often it is not.
Immigrants from Japan are almost always ethnically Japanese because there are few individuals from Japan who are not. Juan Hashimoto, on the other hand, is a Spanish-speaking immigrant from Peru whose grandparents were Japanese speakers from Osaka. Ethnically he was Japanese, but by most other behaviors he was Peruvian; he spoke only Spanish and knew little of the customs and practices of his grandparents, who had been farmers in Japan. As an 18-year-old, Juan was interested in finding a job. His aspirations for school and schooling were focused on this goal.
He had no intention of enrolling in a post-secondary institution (Gunderson, 2007).
Three hundred and thirty-five students in the Gunderson (2007) study indicated that Hindi was their first language. There were considerable differences among this group, however. Hindi speakers from Fiji, for example, speak a kind of Hindi that is more similar to that spoken three hundred years ago than it is to the Hindi of India today. Many are farm workers and a large number are Christian. The culture they identify with is Indian-Fijian, and while it contains artifacts of Indian culture such as the celebration of Diwali (the festival of lights), it also contains Fijian beliefs and traditions such as the sharing of “grog” by Fijian males, a kind of male bond-ing ritual involvbond-ing a drink made from the kava root. School and schoolbond-ing are generally not viewed as central to the success of Indian-Fijians, particularly for women. But this view has changed dramatically in the past ten years.
Students from the subcontinent of India who indicated they were Hindi speaking differed from each other in many ways. Students from Mangalore, for instance, part of the region of Goa, are most often Catholic and have family names Westerners often associate with Portugal, such as D’Souza, D’Silva, and Peirera.
They often speak Konkani as a home language, but they have learned both English and Hindi in school; however, they usually report Hindi to be their L1 for various reasons, but mostly because it is the “national language.” On the other hand, Punjabi speakers, typically from northern India, report that they speak Punjabi, while they too have learned Hindi in government schools. Many Indian immigrants bring to Canada beliefs and traditions related to gender. It is not traditional in some Indian groups to view education as particularly important for females. Many immi-grants from India continue to believe in arranged marriages. The local Indian-Canadian and Indian-American newspapers are often filled, even in the new millennium, with advertisements seeking marriage partners.
Caste Effects
In various parts of the world the social status of human beings within a particular society is marked by caste. In North America, social status markers are somewhat less obvious; however, generally socio-economic status, level of education, and profession mark one’s status as, for instance, “middle class” or “upper middle class.”
Some societies mark status differences in their languages. In Bali the notion of caste was borrowed from the Indians who explored the region and is built into the language. The title “I” /i/, for instance, is the marker for the lowest caste, so that someone named “I Ketut” is from a family of the lowest caste. Almost as interesting