Learning considered within a cultural context: Confucian and Socratic approaches.

Abstract

for their comments on an earlier version of this article. We are especially grateful to Anna Lehman for planting the seed that grew into this framework and to Del Paulhus for the valuable discussions that helped clarify and improve the framework.

Technology-supported learning innovation in cultural contexts

“…Crosscultural comparisons revealed important differences in beliefs about learning (see Tweed & Lehman, 2002). Compared to their Western counterparts, Chinese students and instructors are more likely to treat texts and the instructor as highly authoritative sources of knowledge, expecting the instructor to provide more structure and guidance.…”

“…Instead, they value active, effortful, and reflective learning. Deep engagement and reflection are conceived as core qualities of a good student (Gerbic, 2006;Jin & Cortazzi, 1998;Stevenson and Stigler, 1992;Tweed & Lehman, 2002). Qualified teachers often model effortful and reflective learning behaviors, stimulate learners' thinking and reflection by asking thought-provoking questions, and design and use informative assignments to promote flexible understanding of knowledge (Lee, Liu, & Lee, 2003;Stevenson & Stigler, 1992).…”

“…These cultural attributes are demonstrated as collective, intuitive understanding of what learning is about and how it should be approached in practice, as well languages, signs, and social norms that mediate learning and teaching. A wide range of phrases have been used in the literature to characterize learning cultures: beliefs about knowledge and learning, learning orientations, power structures in classroom, social organization of learning, valued learning outcomes, knowledge content, learning strategies and activities, technology integration, time and spatial configurations, and so on (e.g., Bielaczyc, 2006;Little, 1990;Tweed & Lehman, 2002). Conceptualizing learning culture as a complex, social practice system helps us to understand the relationships among the above items, and further enlightens the differentiation between macro-level properties of a learning culture and specific, micro-level characteristics associated with particular components.…”

Understanding the Cultural Construction of School Mathematics

“…In this respect, it is widely thought that mathematics teaching in the West differs from that in the East. For example, a number of researchers have emphasised the influence of Socratic and Confucian philosophies on the culturally West and culturally Chinese educational traditions (Leung, 2001;Tweed & Lehman, 2002;Watkins, 2000). Indeed, in respect of mathematics, Leung (2001) proposed six dichotomies that distinguish between East Asian and Western mathematics classrooms; product (content) versus process, rote learning versus meaningful learning, studying hard versus pleasurable learning, extrinsic versus intrinsic motivations, whole class teaching versus individualised learning, teacher competence in relation to the subject matter versus pedagogy debate.…”

Editorial Introduction

“…In this respect, it is widely thought that mathematics teaching in the West differs from that in the East. For example, a number of researchers have emphasised the influence of Socratic and Confucian philosophies on the culturally West and culturally Chinese educational traditions (Leung 2001;Tweed and Lehman 2002;Watkins 2000). Indeed, in respect of mathematics, Leung (2001) proposed six dichotomies that distinguish between East Asian and Western mathematics classrooms; product (content) versus process, rote learning versus meaningful learning, studying hard versus pleasurable learning, extrinsic versus intrinsic motivations, whole class teaching versus individualised learning, and teacher competence in relation to the subject matter versus pedagogy debate.…”