Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji joeb.84.2.84-89
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Using Cultural Diversity in Teaching Economics:
Global Business Implications
Darryl J. Mitry
To cite this article: Darryl J. Mitry (2008) Using Cultural Diversity in Teaching Economics:
Global Business Implications, Journal of Education for Business, 84:2, 84-89, DOI: 10.3200/
JOEB.84.2.84-89
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.84.2.84-89
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 46
View related articles
Citing articles: 3 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 22:46
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
UsingCulturalDiversityinTeaching
Economics:GlobalBusinessImplications
DARRYLJ.MITRY
NORWICHUNIVERSITY
NORTHFIELD,VERMONT
ABSTRACT. Globalizationandincreasingcross-culturalinteractivityhaveimplicationsforeducationingeneralandmay
alsopresentvaluablepedagogicalopportunitiesinthepracticeofteachingeconomics
forbusinessstudents.Therefore,theauthor
investigatedthispropositionandoffers
someempiricalobservationsfromresearch
andteachingexperiments.Inthisarticle,
theauthordescribesaprocedureforusing
cultural-diversitymeasuresinteaching
economicprinciplescourses.Theauthor
performedexperimentstotesttheimpact
ofateachingapproachthatexplicitly
includescultural-diversitymeasurements
inclassroomdiscussionsandstatistically
testedstudent-learningoutcomesusingthis
approach.Thefindingssupportthecontentionthatavaluableopportunityexiststo
enhancetraditionalteachingapproachesby
introducingmeasuresofculturaldiversity.
Theauthorconcludeswithanalyticalcommentsandsuggestionsforfurtherresearch.
Keywords:culture,economics,
globalization,teaching
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
84
JournalofEducationforBusiness
T
he 21st century’s expansion and
convergenceoftechnologyandthe
burgeoning entry of developing economies into the global supply chain have
broughtforthanewconcept:Theworld
is flat (Friedman, 2005). Much press
has been given to the idea that ubiquitous inexpensive telecommunications
networks and lower cost transportation
eliminated the major impediments to
international competition. Indeed, the
word globalization and the term flat
worldhavebecomeanessentialpartof
the common vocabulary. Therefore, I
hypothesizedthatgrowthinglobalbusinessdevelopsamoreculturallydiverse
environmentandrequiresamoreworldly approach in teaching principles of
economicscourses.Ibeganbylooking
at the educational core of economics
andstandardpedagogicalpractices.
StandardPedagogicalPractices
There are currently 3,375 universities in the United States (Cybermetrics
Lab,2008).Moreover,Americahashad
significant influence on curricula and
pedagogical practices in several thousand additional universities around the
world. Most often at the educational
corearethecustomaryclassesonprinciples of microeconomics and macroeconomics. On campuses across the
UnitedStatesandWesternworld,there
isaratherunifiedapproachtopresenta-
tionsofthebasictheoriesofeconomics:
thedescriptionsofdemandandsupply,
underlying relations, capitalist ideology,andinstitutionalinfrastructure.This
type of presentation is infused within
themostdominanttextbooksdistributed
throughouttheworld.
Historically, the shared values of
Westernculturehaveprovidedafundamentalandcommonlevelofunderstanding between students and professors
of economics. Therefore, in the classrooms, students and instructors have
probably paid too little attention to the
elementary ceteris paribus assumptions that so often refer to—but leave
somewhatunattended—theassumptions
dependentonunderlyingculturaldiversity. For example, when an economics
instructorpresentsthedemandfunction,
heorsheoftenreferstotastesorpreferences as one of the causal factors, yet
explores it no more deeply than to say
that people may have different tastes.
When the instructors present Indifference Curve analysis, the students are
intriguedorperhapsmesmerizedbythe
technical aspects, but they may gain
no greater understanding of the nature
of the underlying culturally dependant
factors. However, there are variables
relatedtoculturaldiversitythatarepowerfully explanatory. In an earlier time,
when developed countries were mostly
concerned with Western homogeneous
societies, the single-culture practice
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
may have been quite adequate. During classroom presentations, almost
everyone could sleepily ignore some
of the underlying substance of models
without much concern. Most students
came from Western cultures, sharing
similar customs, beliefs, and practices,
andtheycouldunderstandablyrelateto
thebroadertheory,asitappliedtotheir
domesticeconomies,withoutexploring
thedetailsofthebasicculturalassumptions (hidden deep in the mysterious
ceterisparibusconditions).
However, the globalization of business, growth of online distance education, and the new entrants into the
Western world of capitalism are cause
forawakening.Atleasttwomajorconditions violate the assumptions in the
usualapproach;wemaybroadlyidentifytheseasculturaldiversityandspatial–
geographicvariation.
Forstudentstogainprofitableskills,
theyneedtobeabletoapplythebasic
economicmodels.Itisunfortunate,but
even a casual observation would indicate that many students are not doing
wellinthisregard.Inaddition,national
standardized test results show that students’ overall test performance in economics has been lower than in other
subjects,withtheexceptionofsciences
such as physics (Educational Testing
Services, 2006). Today, students also
need to learn how to synthesize economics with other business tools in a
global context. The other disciplines
associated with the functional areas of
business have been avidly incorporatingtheimplicationsofglobalizationfor
teaching(e.g.,coursesinfinance,management, accounting, and marketing).
More importantly, these areas of business study have classroom discussions
that tend to encompass the practical
applicationofglobalcultures.However,
for most students in the principles of
economics courses, this same attention to diversity is not part of the presentation. Of course, students can take
courses in international trade theory
and learn about international exchange
rates,trade-offercurves,andbalanceof
payments, but again the presentations
rarely,ifever,includeexplorationofthe
ceteris paribus from a globally diverse
culturalperspective.Thisimposesalimitation on students’ ability to learn and
applythetheoreticaltoolsofeconomic
analysis in a practical and insightful
way.Becausestudentshavelessunderstanding of cross-cultural implications
ofthetheories,wecanunderstandwhy
they would have less understanding of
the applicability of the models, both
domesticallyandinternationally.
Furthermore, the cognitive task of
integrating economics with the global
businessdisciplinesisoftenleftentirely
tothestudent.Somegraduatesofbusiness schools have assumed executive
positionsinglobalcorporateenterprise
andblunderedbecausetheyneverreally
learned how to use the power of the
economic models. This is regrettable
and may be costly to corporations and
economies in general. Therefore, in
teachingeconomics,instructorsneedto
better prepare the students by offering
themaframeworkwithsimplesynergy
among the disciplinary languages of
economics,business,andculturalstudies. This requires a slight modification
of the usual approach. For example, I
have studied the reforming economies
of Eastern Europe for many years. My
researchhasuncoveredinterestingfindings that are quite useful for understanding management problems and
economicthinking.Suchresearchoften
involves collating not only economic
aggregates but also surveys of cultural
values (Hofstede, 1980, 1991, 1998,
2003).Theseindexesofculturaldimensions, as identified by Hofstede and
others,arequiteusefultoresearchersin
thehumansciencesbecausetheinstruments are well documented, validated,
andhavealonghistory(Bradley,1999).
Therefore,Idecidedtoutilizesuchdata
duringusualpresentationsofeconomic
principles. Essentially, the data of culturaldistinctionsisusedtoidentifyand
explain the underlying ceteris paribus
conditions during the presentation of
theeconomicmodels.
UseofCultural-DiversityIndexes
Oneofthereasonsprofessorsofeconomics have tended to shy away from
explicit consideration of the impact
of cultural diversity has been the perception that useful quantifiable data is
unavailable.The summaries of cultural
data presented herein came from more
than 5,000 survey participants in Russia,Belarus,andUkraine.Discussionof
themethodologyforimplementationof
thesesurveysisreportedindetailelsewhere(Bradley,1999;Hofstede,1991).
These instruments have more than 4
decadesofprogressivedevelopmentand
applicationinthestudyofculture.The
mostimportantconsiderationforteachingeconomicsisthatthedatasupporta
quantifiable means to incorporate discussionsofculturaldifferencesunderlyingeconomicvariables.Themostrecent
data, discussions, and implications for
teachingeconomicsarefirstreportedin
thisarticle.
ApplicationofDiversitytothe
ClassroomExperience
When considering the traditional approach to teaching demand and
supply functions, I found that student
understandingofnonpricedeterminants
isgreatlyenhancedwhenthediscussion
of how cultural differences may affect
theparametersofthemodelsareincluded.Similarly,thediscussionsrevealhow
thesefactorsmayimpedetheprogressof
economic development in these different countries. I used cultural-diversity
discussionsintheclassroomtoexplore
the framework of economic theory by
introducingthecultural-valuemeasures,
particularly those of Hofstede. There,
the details are customarily identified
asfollows:
1.Uncertainty Avoidance (UA) measures the extent to which ambiguity
anduncertaintyaretolerated.
2.Power Distance (PD) measures the
extent to which unequal distribution
ofpowerisaccepted.
3.Individualism (IND) measures the
extent to which the culture is based
onindividualinterest.
4.Masculinity(M)measurestheextent
towhichvalueisplacedonassertiveness and a focus on ambition and
materialgoods.
5.Long-Term Orientation (LTO)
measures the value that is placed
ontime.
Forexample,Table1showsthemuch
lower scores on IND and M from the
culturesoftheEasternEuropeancountriesascomparedwiththeUnitedStates.
November/December2008
85
TABLE1.DifferencesinCulturalValuesMeasures
Country
UnitedStates
Russia
Belarus
Ukraine
IND
PD
UA
M
LTO
91
31
58
51
40
43
44
23
46
103
100
57
62
–5
–3
13
29
24
22
56
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
Note.IND=individualism;PD=powerdistance;UA=uncertaintyavoidance;M=masculinity;
LTO=long-termorientation.
Economic theory in the United States
is grounded on the IND score’s being
high, but the score on IND is found to
beverylowfortheRussianandEastern
European economies. Therefore, with
low IND scores, the incremental material rewards commonly used as productiveinducementinWesterncultures
may not work as well in this type of
Easternculture.Theconclusionismore
than inference when viewed side-byside with the other cultural differences
ascomparedwiththeUnitedStates.
For example, there is a strongly
negative opposition of the measure for
MaterialisticmotivesandSelf-assertiveness (which are subsumed within M)
for the Russian culture as compared
with that of the United States (a large
differencebetweenscoresof–5and62,
respectively). This helps the students
to see the implications for the consumers’demandfunctionsasrelatedto
thedisciplineandpracticeofmarketing
in a global environment. Discussions
takeonamoreanimatedthoughtfulness
when the subject of demand and price
elasticity are addressed in light of culturaldiversity.Likewise,thisdatahelps
thestudentstounderstandthemanagerial practices that may influence the
supplyfunctions.Thedifficultyofmanagement practices associated with the
supplyfunctionsoflaborinthisglobal
context is illuminated and explained.
Forexample,thescoresfoundinRussia
are definitely not associated with the
same level of ambition for acquisition
of material goods; therefore, the labor
supply responses to incremental material rewards could be expected to be
weaker.Asstudentsconsiderthesetypes
ofimplications,theygainunderstanding
from the thoughtful contemplation of
cultural diversity. Therefore, students’
86
JournalofEducationforBusiness
understandingofnonpricedeterminants
is significantly enhanced by including
thediscussionofhowculturaldiversity
may affect the parameters of the economicmodelsandconsequentimplicationsfordevelopment.
TheculturalscoresinthepresentarticlerevealthattheEasternculturesplace
alowvalueonindependentaction,assertiveness, accountability, and individual
performance.TheWesternexpectations
forentrepreneurialbehaviorandpersonal accountability will likely clash with
the culturally determined response of
workersintheseculturesandtherefore
affect the shape of the supply function
forlabor.
Another example can be found in
the measure of UA in Russia, which
is extraordinarily high when compared
with that of the United States (103 vs.
46). Therefore, Russia exhibits a low
tolerance for uncertainty and the risk
taking that is clearly associated with
Western business practices. The Russians would prefer to avoid the higher
risks normally associated with economic development (e.g., investment,
marketing, management practices). In
accordance, we find that the low score
onINDcorrespondstoandischaracteristicofriskavoidancebehavior.Ahigh
tolerance for risk taking is a hallmark
ofWesterncapitalists’approachtobusiness,management,andeconomicdevelopment,butitisantitheticaltocultural
dimensions found in Russia (or Belarus). Once again, I would expect that
this type of information and culturally
augmented approach would be helpful
to students learning economics as they
becomeawareofthetheoryofeconomicsandallthenonpricedeterminantsin
the equations. The importance of the
ceterisparibusassumptionsineconom-
ic functions becomes more apparent to
thestudentsconfrontedwiththeseglobaldistinctionsanddiverserealities.The
students can better understand some
of the reasons for the higher material
standard of living in the United States.
They come to more fully appreciate
why American workers are so materially productive and consumptive. It is
culturally understandable. Of course,
from a purely theoretical standpoint, it
doesnotmatterwhetherthesemeasures
replicate cultural diversity exactly; it
only matters that relative differences
exist, so cultural diversity can be used
intheclassroomtoexploretheimplicationsofapplyingeconomicmodels.
This type of cross-cultural analysis,
presentation, and discussion assists the
studentsastheyattempttoconceivethe
implications for other economic concepts as well, such as those of productionfunctionsandproductionpossibility
frontiers. Therefore, I expect that this
typeofinformationandcultural-diversity
approach to teaching will be helpful to
professorsandtheirstudents.
Cross-culturalanalysisisatechnique
that embraces an integrative approach
bydiscussingtheimplicationsofcrossculturaldifferencesonthefundamental
modelsofeconomics(suchanapproach
isdependentonneithertheideaofculturalconvergencenorthatofdivergence).
The traditional approach to presenting
economictheoryintheclassroomdoes
not effectively transcend the diverse
cultural aspects of the many emerging,
reforming, and developing economies.
Likewise,itfailstoilluminatetheweak
performance of many economies. As
Bogorya (1985) stated, people attach
to communications their own system
of values, beliefs, and attitudes, which
combine with their culturally determined behavioral code and create an
ethnocentric unilateral system preventing genuine understanding. However,
with quantifiable measures, such comparisons are more easily grasped, and
thepowerofeconomictheoryleadstoa
higherlevelofunderstanding.
Eachcultureperceivestheinformation
inadifferentcontext,resultingnotonly
in confusion but wasteful mistakes. In
thepast,Westernbusinessandeconomicthoughtdidnothavetodealwithsuch
acomplexarrayofculturalperceptions
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
in a global organizational pluralism.
However, globalization means that
understandings of these factors influenceoureconomicaxiomsandarevery
important.Byincorporatingthesetypes
of cultural-diversity discussions in the
context of teaching economic theory,
instructors do a better job of communicating the universal realities of our
economicmodelsandtheirapplicability
andusefulness.
In recent years, economists discoveredthatnaturalandculturalgeography
is an important area of study (Fujita
& Krugman, 1995). This should have
been expected in light of the increasing globalization of business. In the
classroom, students can be introduced
to data files of cultural–geographic
information and then be asked to consider the relations to the constructs of
economic models. If this opportunity
arises, I find that the students swiftly
conclude that physical and cultural
geography are complementary to their
economicstudies.Theyunderstandthat
geographic fertility is a potential antecedenttoeconomicdevelopment.Conversely, geographic infertility is a lack
ofnaturalandculturalresources,which
canobstructeconomicdevelopment.
Usingthecultural-diversitydatailluminatesthecriticalimportanceofsuch
underlying factors in economic theory,
as well as empirical findings in questions of economic development. This
isastronglyintegrativeperceptionand
helps the student to develop a broader
perspective capable of including more
knowledge into every equation. Likewise, cultural attitudes toward savings
andinvestmentaffectdevelopmentpossibilities, as do (a) cultural attitudes
toward labor versus leisure and (b) the
cultural choices derived from the individual tendencies versus the collective
tendencies. However, most economic
educators have not yet discovered the
significant nuances in cross-cultural
value differences and—often unaware
thatsuchquantifiabledataexists—they
continuetoteachtheprinciplesfromthe
bibles of domestic Western textbooks
with a much narrower view of peoples
and places than reality would warrant.
Eventheupperdivisioncourses,suchas
comparative economics, tend to examine only the institutional differences
among economies without addressing
theunderlyingculturaldeterminants.In
schools acrossAmerica, even graduate
business students are not well versed
in the application of economic models because they have only gained a
minimal understanding of the models
under the strict ceteris paribus conditions,whichareoftenunexplored.Many
times I have heard students and even
somebusinessprofessorssay,“Theeconomicmodelsareinapplicablebecause
they are unrealistic.” Such unfortunate
pronouncementswouldnotbethecase
if they learned the real power in the
economic models. In the 21st century,
teaching practices are moving more
toward interactive pedagogy (Becker,
2000). Classroom discussions on these
cultural-diversity issues offer much
opportunity for deeper exploration and
understanding.
LearningAssessmentMethodologyand
MeasuringImpact
Thetheoreticalargumentforacultural-
diversityapproachtoteachingeconomics is supported by the aforementioned
a priori arguments. Nevertheless, a
question remains: What is the extent
of impact on the students of economic
principles and their learning experience? To investigate whether students
learn any better with this approach, I
tested undergraduate business students
ineconomicprinciplesclasses.
For the experiment, I tested two
groupsofstudentsinprinciplesofeconomics classes. The first group was
treatedtotheusuallevelofpresentation
anddiscussion,andthesecondreceived
treatments that included discussions of
cultural diversity (as described in the
presentarticle).Fortheculturaldiscussions, I used the cultural-value dimensions from my studies and others cited
inthepresentarticle.
The research testing methodology
thatIusedissupportedbymyinvolvementwiththeexperiment,hashistorical
groundinginthecasestudymethods—
as suggested inYin (1994)—and with
the developmental research methodologyconsideredbyGummesson(1991),
Andersen (1995), and many others. In
this approach, the researcher plays a
dual role, because in such research,
a valuable input is typically provided
through the researchers’ experiences. I
havemanyyearsofexperienceinteachingeconomics.
The students in Group 2 encountered
the same basic principles presentations
but with the addition of the cultural-
diversitydata,andtheywereencouraged
todiscusstheunderlyingimplicationsfor
thecustomaryceterisparibusconditions.
To ensure comparability of classes, it
wasimportanttodetermineifeachofthe
groupswasequivalentforpurposesofthe
studyorifothervariablesneededconsideration. Therefore, the group membershipswerecomparedalongdemographic
lines and academic backgrounds. Variablescollectedincludedgender,ethnicity,
age,andacademicbackgroundbasedon
GPA.A profile of the students reflected
the homogeneous nature of the general
student population in the school. The
GPA, variance, and distributions were
essentiallythesameforbothgroupswith
nosignificantdifference.Thisisnotsurprising, because the student population
is characterized by specific standards of
university enrollment serving a population of business students with a rather
narrowagerangewithinthesameschool.
Atfirst,therosterhadshownthatamuch
older student had enrolled in one of the
classes,butthisstudentdroppedtheclass
beforethefirstmeeting.
Therefore, the characteristics of the
twogroupsofstudentswerefoundtobe
equivalent for purposes of the experiment. The character of these students
reflected the profile of the overall student population enrolled in the basic
economics courses. Both study groups
receivedthesamelecturepresentations,
withtheonlyexceptionbeingthatGroup
2 students were exposed to culturaldiversityvalues.Bothgroupsweregiven
the same standard objective economics
exam questions, and these exams did
not include any explicit references to
theculturaldataorrelatedmaterials.All
the exams were the typical objectivebased economics tests, with all questionstakenfromthetextbook’sstandard
test-banks as supplied by the textbook
publisher. I admit that some questions
in these standard exams may not be
the best evaluators of students’ abilitiestoapplyeconomicanalysis(Buckles & Siegfried, 2006). Nevertheless,
November/December2008
87
thelargescaleandubiquitousnatureof
these standard exams serves to support
theuniversalityoftheresearchfindings.
The student standard economics
examscomprised80observationson40
studentsintheexperiment.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
HypothesisTesting
The null hypothesis tested was the
following: “The mean score of students
receivingculturaldiversityaugmentation
equalsthemeanscoreofstudentsreceiving the usual instructional presentation,
ceterisparibus.”Therefore,Ihadthenull
hypothesis and straightforward inferentialanalysestestingthestandarderrorof
thestatisticandusingthetdistributionat
the.05levelofsignificance.Thedifferences in mean scores were statistically
significant, therefore rejecting the null
hypothesis where the computed t(38)
value was 2.03 and exceeded the criticalvalueof1.69.Thesedifferencesand
scores indicate that the degree of learningwasindeeddifferentbetweenthetwo
groupsofstudentsandthatthestudents
in the cultural augmentation Group 2
scored significantly better on the standardeconomicstests.
Of course, one would intuitively
tend to agree, given the difference in
scoresforthesetests.Furthermore,the
additional responses to student-learningenrichmentquestionsonanentirely
separate posttest of student responses
to their learning experience showed
thatGroup2ratedhigherthanGroup1
in learning experience. Because these
enrichment results were measured as
ordinaldatainLikert-typescalescores
rangingfrom1(lowest)to5(highest),
theappropriatemeasureofcentraltendencyisthesimplemode,andnotthe
mean. Thus, the students in the usual
course scored 4, whereas the students
inthesecondgroupscored5.Notethat
these responses, higher for Group 2,
areconsistentwiththeaforementioned
objective test scores on the standardizedeconomicstests.Theself-reported
data might otherwise be considered
anecdotal, but alongside the objective
economics test scores, these learning
outcomes are supportive. Nevertheless, the finding that the students in
Group 2 consistently surpassed those
in Group 1 in their understanding of
88
JournalofEducationforBusiness
economic principles, as determined
fromthestandardizedeconomicstests,
ismoreimportant.Itisastrongerindicationthatthisglobalcultural-diversity
approachbetterservesthestudentsand
providesthemwithmaterialthathelps
them to master the standard learning
objectives.
Weekslater,anothertestwasadministered.Theposttestscoresshowedthat
groupperformancewasagainmeaningfullydifferent,witht(38)=2.20exceedingthecriticalvalueforsignificanceat
.05.Therefore, posttests indicated that,
on average, the culturally augmented
Group 2 students were better able to
remember the economic concepts and
usethetoolsofeconomicstosolvetest
problems (as per differences in mean
scores). Moreover, the statistical finding supports the logical justification of
increasedretention.
After the conclusion of this experiment, I performed a replication of the
study abroad. The research design for
examining this teaching approach was
identical to the U.S. experience and
was undertaken at the State Financial
Economics Institute, Crimea, Ukraine.
The procedures were the same except
that the local instructor of economics
taughtbothoftheseclassesinhisnative
language. (Class size was similar to
the U.S. size, with approximately 20
students per class.) Once again, the
differencesinmeanscoreswerestatisticallysignificantatthe.05level.This
replication further supports the importance and universality of this teaching
approach.
Conclusion
Inthepresentarticle,Ireportedfindings of research on teaching economics by using information on cultural
diversity.Idemonstratedhowaculturaldiversityapproachtoteachingeconomicprinciplesmaysignificantlyimprove
student learning of the principles of
economicsandbetteraddresstheissues
ofglobalization.Theoutcomesbetween
the traditional approach and this cultural-diversity approach were compared, and implications for economics
intheglobalbusinessenvironmenthave
been pointed out. The findings support the contention that in the present
global economy, the practice of relativelyculture-freeteachingofeconomic
paradigmsdoesnotserveusaswellas
theculturallyaugmentedapproachsuggestedhere.Thepolicyimplicationsare
interestingandsignificant.
Nonetheless,thechallengeisforprofessors of economics to replicate this
approach in research and education
and perhaps provide further evidence
similar to the findings of this study.
Certainly, such further research would
be interesting. There are many opportunities for theoretical and empirical
studiesinpedagogy.Attheuniversities
where the present research was undertaken,theclasssizesweresmallerthan
some at larger campuses elsewhere,
and this is a limitation of the present
experiments. Such limitation implies
merit for replication of the pedagogical experiment by teachers with larger
class enrollments. Irrespective of the
outcome of our pedagogical research,
thisarticleindicatesthatthereisaneed
for economists to adopt perspectives
thatprovideexplicitculturalaugmentation in their future research and pedagogy.UnderlyingtheWesterncapitalist
system is an economic ideology with
a set of cultural distinctions that help
definethereasonsforglobaleconomic
activity and relative rates of economic
growth.Inthisnewageofglobalization,
tobetteradviseandassistthestruggling
economiesoftheworldandsimultaneously strengthen and defend our own
systems, we need to understand the
implications of cultural diversity and
betterilluminatethestrengthandpower
of economic theory and analysis.With
thisbroadereconomicperspectiveanda
moreglobalframework,wecanexpect
largergainsfromresearch:educational,
theoretical, and empirical. Such perspective,framework,andresearchgains
canbetterserveourstudents.
NOTES
Dr. Darryl J. Mitry is a former university
department chair and Fulbright Senior Scholar.
He continues to teach, and his research is concerned with emerging economies and questions
of sustainable economic growth in the fields of
economic development, international trade, and
laborandindustrialorganization.
Correspondence concerning this article should
be addressed to Dr. Darryl J. Mitry, 38180 Del
WebbBlvd,PalmDesert,CA92211,USA.
E-mail:dmitryusa@msn.com
REFERENCES
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
Andersen, I. (1995). On the art of doing field
studies: An experience-based action research
methodology. Copenhagen, Denmark: HandelshøjskolensForlag.
Becker,W.E.(2000).Teachingeconomicsinthe
21st century. Journal of Economic Education,
14,109–119.
Bogorya,Y.(1985).Interculturaltrainingformanagers involved in international business. JournalofManagementDevelopment,4(2),17–25.
Bradley,T. L. (1999). Cultural values of Russia:
Implications for international companies in a
changing economy. Thunderbird International
BusinessReview,41(1),49–67.
Buckles, S., & Siegfried, J. J. (2006). Using
multiple-choice questions to evaluate in-depth
learning of economics. Journal of Economic
Education,37,48–57.
Cybermetrics Lab. (2008). Catalogue of world
universities. Retrieved September 23, 2008,
from http://www.webometrics.info/university_
by_country.asp?country=us
Educational Testing Services. (2006). Student
instructional report II (SIR II). Comparative
data guide (pp. 22–86). Retrieved August 12,
2007,fromhttp://www.ets.org/portal/site/et
Friedman,T.L.(2005).Theworldisflat:Abrief
history of the twenty-first century. NewYork:
Farrar,StrausandGiroux.
Fujita, M., & Krugman, P. (1995). When is the
economy monocentric? Regional Science and
UrbanEconomics,25,202–528.
Gummesson,E.(1991).Qualitativemethodsinmanagementresearch.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and
organization: Do American theories apply
abroad?OrganizationalDynamics,9(1),42–63.
Hofstede,G.(1991).Culturesandorganizations.
NewYork:McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede,G.(1998).Acaseforcomparingapples
with oranges: International differences in values. International Journal of Comparative
Sociology,39(1),16–31.
Hofstede, G. (2003). Culture’s consequences:
Comparingvalues,behaviors,institutions,and
organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks,
CA:Sage.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design
andmethods.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
�� � ����� �� �� � ��� �� � �
������� �� � � �� � � �� ��� ��
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������
���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������
���������������������������������������������������������������������������������
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
�����������������������
�������������������������������
������������������������������������������
�������������������������������������������������������������
������������������������������
�� ���� � �� � �� � ��� ���
�� � �� � � � � � �
� � � �� �� �� �� � � � � � � � �� � � �
�� � � � �� � � �� � � � � �� � � � �� � � �� � � �
��� ������� ���� � �� � ������ ������
������� ��������
�����������������
��������������������
�������������������������������������������
November/December2008
89
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Using Cultural Diversity in Teaching Economics:
Global Business Implications
Darryl J. Mitry
To cite this article: Darryl J. Mitry (2008) Using Cultural Diversity in Teaching Economics:
Global Business Implications, Journal of Education for Business, 84:2, 84-89, DOI: 10.3200/
JOEB.84.2.84-89
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.84.2.84-89
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 46
View related articles
Citing articles: 3 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 22:46
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
UsingCulturalDiversityinTeaching
Economics:GlobalBusinessImplications
DARRYLJ.MITRY
NORWICHUNIVERSITY
NORTHFIELD,VERMONT
ABSTRACT. Globalizationandincreasingcross-culturalinteractivityhaveimplicationsforeducationingeneralandmay
alsopresentvaluablepedagogicalopportunitiesinthepracticeofteachingeconomics
forbusinessstudents.Therefore,theauthor
investigatedthispropositionandoffers
someempiricalobservationsfromresearch
andteachingexperiments.Inthisarticle,
theauthordescribesaprocedureforusing
cultural-diversitymeasuresinteaching
economicprinciplescourses.Theauthor
performedexperimentstotesttheimpact
ofateachingapproachthatexplicitly
includescultural-diversitymeasurements
inclassroomdiscussionsandstatistically
testedstudent-learningoutcomesusingthis
approach.Thefindingssupportthecontentionthatavaluableopportunityexiststo
enhancetraditionalteachingapproachesby
introducingmeasuresofculturaldiversity.
Theauthorconcludeswithanalyticalcommentsandsuggestionsforfurtherresearch.
Keywords:culture,economics,
globalization,teaching
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
84
JournalofEducationforBusiness
T
he 21st century’s expansion and
convergenceoftechnologyandthe
burgeoning entry of developing economies into the global supply chain have
broughtforthanewconcept:Theworld
is flat (Friedman, 2005). Much press
has been given to the idea that ubiquitous inexpensive telecommunications
networks and lower cost transportation
eliminated the major impediments to
international competition. Indeed, the
word globalization and the term flat
worldhavebecomeanessentialpartof
the common vocabulary. Therefore, I
hypothesizedthatgrowthinglobalbusinessdevelopsamoreculturallydiverse
environmentandrequiresamoreworldly approach in teaching principles of
economicscourses.Ibeganbylooking
at the educational core of economics
andstandardpedagogicalpractices.
StandardPedagogicalPractices
There are currently 3,375 universities in the United States (Cybermetrics
Lab,2008).Moreover,Americahashad
significant influence on curricula and
pedagogical practices in several thousand additional universities around the
world. Most often at the educational
corearethecustomaryclassesonprinciples of microeconomics and macroeconomics. On campuses across the
UnitedStatesandWesternworld,there
isaratherunifiedapproachtopresenta-
tionsofthebasictheoriesofeconomics:
thedescriptionsofdemandandsupply,
underlying relations, capitalist ideology,andinstitutionalinfrastructure.This
type of presentation is infused within
themostdominanttextbooksdistributed
throughouttheworld.
Historically, the shared values of
Westernculturehaveprovidedafundamentalandcommonlevelofunderstanding between students and professors
of economics. Therefore, in the classrooms, students and instructors have
probably paid too little attention to the
elementary ceteris paribus assumptions that so often refer to—but leave
somewhatunattended—theassumptions
dependentonunderlyingculturaldiversity. For example, when an economics
instructorpresentsthedemandfunction,
heorsheoftenreferstotastesorpreferences as one of the causal factors, yet
explores it no more deeply than to say
that people may have different tastes.
When the instructors present Indifference Curve analysis, the students are
intriguedorperhapsmesmerizedbythe
technical aspects, but they may gain
no greater understanding of the nature
of the underlying culturally dependant
factors. However, there are variables
relatedtoculturaldiversitythatarepowerfully explanatory. In an earlier time,
when developed countries were mostly
concerned with Western homogeneous
societies, the single-culture practice
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
may have been quite adequate. During classroom presentations, almost
everyone could sleepily ignore some
of the underlying substance of models
without much concern. Most students
came from Western cultures, sharing
similar customs, beliefs, and practices,
andtheycouldunderstandablyrelateto
thebroadertheory,asitappliedtotheir
domesticeconomies,withoutexploring
thedetailsofthebasicculturalassumptions (hidden deep in the mysterious
ceterisparibusconditions).
However, the globalization of business, growth of online distance education, and the new entrants into the
Western world of capitalism are cause
forawakening.Atleasttwomajorconditions violate the assumptions in the
usualapproach;wemaybroadlyidentifytheseasculturaldiversityandspatial–
geographicvariation.
Forstudentstogainprofitableskills,
theyneedtobeabletoapplythebasic
economicmodels.Itisunfortunate,but
even a casual observation would indicate that many students are not doing
wellinthisregard.Inaddition,national
standardized test results show that students’ overall test performance in economics has been lower than in other
subjects,withtheexceptionofsciences
such as physics (Educational Testing
Services, 2006). Today, students also
need to learn how to synthesize economics with other business tools in a
global context. The other disciplines
associated with the functional areas of
business have been avidly incorporatingtheimplicationsofglobalizationfor
teaching(e.g.,coursesinfinance,management, accounting, and marketing).
More importantly, these areas of business study have classroom discussions
that tend to encompass the practical
applicationofglobalcultures.However,
for most students in the principles of
economics courses, this same attention to diversity is not part of the presentation. Of course, students can take
courses in international trade theory
and learn about international exchange
rates,trade-offercurves,andbalanceof
payments, but again the presentations
rarely,ifever,includeexplorationofthe
ceteris paribus from a globally diverse
culturalperspective.Thisimposesalimitation on students’ ability to learn and
applythetheoreticaltoolsofeconomic
analysis in a practical and insightful
way.Becausestudentshavelessunderstanding of cross-cultural implications
ofthetheories,wecanunderstandwhy
they would have less understanding of
the applicability of the models, both
domesticallyandinternationally.
Furthermore, the cognitive task of
integrating economics with the global
businessdisciplinesisoftenleftentirely
tothestudent.Somegraduatesofbusiness schools have assumed executive
positionsinglobalcorporateenterprise
andblunderedbecausetheyneverreally
learned how to use the power of the
economic models. This is regrettable
and may be costly to corporations and
economies in general. Therefore, in
teachingeconomics,instructorsneedto
better prepare the students by offering
themaframeworkwithsimplesynergy
among the disciplinary languages of
economics,business,andculturalstudies. This requires a slight modification
of the usual approach. For example, I
have studied the reforming economies
of Eastern Europe for many years. My
researchhasuncoveredinterestingfindings that are quite useful for understanding management problems and
economicthinking.Suchresearchoften
involves collating not only economic
aggregates but also surveys of cultural
values (Hofstede, 1980, 1991, 1998,
2003).Theseindexesofculturaldimensions, as identified by Hofstede and
others,arequiteusefultoresearchersin
thehumansciencesbecausetheinstruments are well documented, validated,
andhavealonghistory(Bradley,1999).
Therefore,Idecidedtoutilizesuchdata
duringusualpresentationsofeconomic
principles. Essentially, the data of culturaldistinctionsisusedtoidentifyand
explain the underlying ceteris paribus
conditions during the presentation of
theeconomicmodels.
UseofCultural-DiversityIndexes
Oneofthereasonsprofessorsofeconomics have tended to shy away from
explicit consideration of the impact
of cultural diversity has been the perception that useful quantifiable data is
unavailable.The summaries of cultural
data presented herein came from more
than 5,000 survey participants in Russia,Belarus,andUkraine.Discussionof
themethodologyforimplementationof
thesesurveysisreportedindetailelsewhere(Bradley,1999;Hofstede,1991).
These instruments have more than 4
decadesofprogressivedevelopmentand
applicationinthestudyofculture.The
mostimportantconsiderationforteachingeconomicsisthatthedatasupporta
quantifiable means to incorporate discussionsofculturaldifferencesunderlyingeconomicvariables.Themostrecent
data, discussions, and implications for
teachingeconomicsarefirstreportedin
thisarticle.
ApplicationofDiversitytothe
ClassroomExperience
When considering the traditional approach to teaching demand and
supply functions, I found that student
understandingofnonpricedeterminants
isgreatlyenhancedwhenthediscussion
of how cultural differences may affect
theparametersofthemodelsareincluded.Similarly,thediscussionsrevealhow
thesefactorsmayimpedetheprogressof
economic development in these different countries. I used cultural-diversity
discussionsintheclassroomtoexplore
the framework of economic theory by
introducingthecultural-valuemeasures,
particularly those of Hofstede. There,
the details are customarily identified
asfollows:
1.Uncertainty Avoidance (UA) measures the extent to which ambiguity
anduncertaintyaretolerated.
2.Power Distance (PD) measures the
extent to which unequal distribution
ofpowerisaccepted.
3.Individualism (IND) measures the
extent to which the culture is based
onindividualinterest.
4.Masculinity(M)measurestheextent
towhichvalueisplacedonassertiveness and a focus on ambition and
materialgoods.
5.Long-Term Orientation (LTO)
measures the value that is placed
ontime.
Forexample,Table1showsthemuch
lower scores on IND and M from the
culturesoftheEasternEuropeancountriesascomparedwiththeUnitedStates.
November/December2008
85
TABLE1.DifferencesinCulturalValuesMeasures
Country
UnitedStates
Russia
Belarus
Ukraine
IND
PD
UA
M
LTO
91
31
58
51
40
43
44
23
46
103
100
57
62
–5
–3
13
29
24
22
56
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
Note.IND=individualism;PD=powerdistance;UA=uncertaintyavoidance;M=masculinity;
LTO=long-termorientation.
Economic theory in the United States
is grounded on the IND score’s being
high, but the score on IND is found to
beverylowfortheRussianandEastern
European economies. Therefore, with
low IND scores, the incremental material rewards commonly used as productiveinducementinWesterncultures
may not work as well in this type of
Easternculture.Theconclusionismore
than inference when viewed side-byside with the other cultural differences
ascomparedwiththeUnitedStates.
For example, there is a strongly
negative opposition of the measure for
MaterialisticmotivesandSelf-assertiveness (which are subsumed within M)
for the Russian culture as compared
with that of the United States (a large
differencebetweenscoresof–5and62,
respectively). This helps the students
to see the implications for the consumers’demandfunctionsasrelatedto
thedisciplineandpracticeofmarketing
in a global environment. Discussions
takeonamoreanimatedthoughtfulness
when the subject of demand and price
elasticity are addressed in light of culturaldiversity.Likewise,thisdatahelps
thestudentstounderstandthemanagerial practices that may influence the
supplyfunctions.Thedifficultyofmanagement practices associated with the
supplyfunctionsoflaborinthisglobal
context is illuminated and explained.
Forexample,thescoresfoundinRussia
are definitely not associated with the
same level of ambition for acquisition
of material goods; therefore, the labor
supply responses to incremental material rewards could be expected to be
weaker.Asstudentsconsiderthesetypes
ofimplications,theygainunderstanding
from the thoughtful contemplation of
cultural diversity. Therefore, students’
86
JournalofEducationforBusiness
understandingofnonpricedeterminants
is significantly enhanced by including
thediscussionofhowculturaldiversity
may affect the parameters of the economicmodelsandconsequentimplicationsfordevelopment.
TheculturalscoresinthepresentarticlerevealthattheEasternculturesplace
alowvalueonindependentaction,assertiveness, accountability, and individual
performance.TheWesternexpectations
forentrepreneurialbehaviorandpersonal accountability will likely clash with
the culturally determined response of
workersintheseculturesandtherefore
affect the shape of the supply function
forlabor.
Another example can be found in
the measure of UA in Russia, which
is extraordinarily high when compared
with that of the United States (103 vs.
46). Therefore, Russia exhibits a low
tolerance for uncertainty and the risk
taking that is clearly associated with
Western business practices. The Russians would prefer to avoid the higher
risks normally associated with economic development (e.g., investment,
marketing, management practices). In
accordance, we find that the low score
onINDcorrespondstoandischaracteristicofriskavoidancebehavior.Ahigh
tolerance for risk taking is a hallmark
ofWesterncapitalists’approachtobusiness,management,andeconomicdevelopment,butitisantitheticaltocultural
dimensions found in Russia (or Belarus). Once again, I would expect that
this type of information and culturally
augmented approach would be helpful
to students learning economics as they
becomeawareofthetheoryofeconomicsandallthenonpricedeterminantsin
the equations. The importance of the
ceterisparibusassumptionsineconom-
ic functions becomes more apparent to
thestudentsconfrontedwiththeseglobaldistinctionsanddiverserealities.The
students can better understand some
of the reasons for the higher material
standard of living in the United States.
They come to more fully appreciate
why American workers are so materially productive and consumptive. It is
culturally understandable. Of course,
from a purely theoretical standpoint, it
doesnotmatterwhetherthesemeasures
replicate cultural diversity exactly; it
only matters that relative differences
exist, so cultural diversity can be used
intheclassroomtoexploretheimplicationsofapplyingeconomicmodels.
This type of cross-cultural analysis,
presentation, and discussion assists the
studentsastheyattempttoconceivethe
implications for other economic concepts as well, such as those of productionfunctionsandproductionpossibility
frontiers. Therefore, I expect that this
typeofinformationandcultural-diversity
approach to teaching will be helpful to
professorsandtheirstudents.
Cross-culturalanalysisisatechnique
that embraces an integrative approach
bydiscussingtheimplicationsofcrossculturaldifferencesonthefundamental
modelsofeconomics(suchanapproach
isdependentonneithertheideaofculturalconvergencenorthatofdivergence).
The traditional approach to presenting
economictheoryintheclassroomdoes
not effectively transcend the diverse
cultural aspects of the many emerging,
reforming, and developing economies.
Likewise,itfailstoilluminatetheweak
performance of many economies. As
Bogorya (1985) stated, people attach
to communications their own system
of values, beliefs, and attitudes, which
combine with their culturally determined behavioral code and create an
ethnocentric unilateral system preventing genuine understanding. However,
with quantifiable measures, such comparisons are more easily grasped, and
thepowerofeconomictheoryleadstoa
higherlevelofunderstanding.
Eachcultureperceivestheinformation
inadifferentcontext,resultingnotonly
in confusion but wasteful mistakes. In
thepast,Westernbusinessandeconomicthoughtdidnothavetodealwithsuch
acomplexarrayofculturalperceptions
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
in a global organizational pluralism.
However, globalization means that
understandings of these factors influenceoureconomicaxiomsandarevery
important.Byincorporatingthesetypes
of cultural-diversity discussions in the
context of teaching economic theory,
instructors do a better job of communicating the universal realities of our
economicmodelsandtheirapplicability
andusefulness.
In recent years, economists discoveredthatnaturalandculturalgeography
is an important area of study (Fujita
& Krugman, 1995). This should have
been expected in light of the increasing globalization of business. In the
classroom, students can be introduced
to data files of cultural–geographic
information and then be asked to consider the relations to the constructs of
economic models. If this opportunity
arises, I find that the students swiftly
conclude that physical and cultural
geography are complementary to their
economicstudies.Theyunderstandthat
geographic fertility is a potential antecedenttoeconomicdevelopment.Conversely, geographic infertility is a lack
ofnaturalandculturalresources,which
canobstructeconomicdevelopment.
Usingthecultural-diversitydatailluminatesthecriticalimportanceofsuch
underlying factors in economic theory,
as well as empirical findings in questions of economic development. This
isastronglyintegrativeperceptionand
helps the student to develop a broader
perspective capable of including more
knowledge into every equation. Likewise, cultural attitudes toward savings
andinvestmentaffectdevelopmentpossibilities, as do (a) cultural attitudes
toward labor versus leisure and (b) the
cultural choices derived from the individual tendencies versus the collective
tendencies. However, most economic
educators have not yet discovered the
significant nuances in cross-cultural
value differences and—often unaware
thatsuchquantifiabledataexists—they
continuetoteachtheprinciplesfromthe
bibles of domestic Western textbooks
with a much narrower view of peoples
and places than reality would warrant.
Eventheupperdivisioncourses,suchas
comparative economics, tend to examine only the institutional differences
among economies without addressing
theunderlyingculturaldeterminants.In
schools acrossAmerica, even graduate
business students are not well versed
in the application of economic models because they have only gained a
minimal understanding of the models
under the strict ceteris paribus conditions,whichareoftenunexplored.Many
times I have heard students and even
somebusinessprofessorssay,“Theeconomicmodelsareinapplicablebecause
they are unrealistic.” Such unfortunate
pronouncementswouldnotbethecase
if they learned the real power in the
economic models. In the 21st century,
teaching practices are moving more
toward interactive pedagogy (Becker,
2000). Classroom discussions on these
cultural-diversity issues offer much
opportunity for deeper exploration and
understanding.
LearningAssessmentMethodologyand
MeasuringImpact
Thetheoreticalargumentforacultural-
diversityapproachtoteachingeconomics is supported by the aforementioned
a priori arguments. Nevertheless, a
question remains: What is the extent
of impact on the students of economic
principles and their learning experience? To investigate whether students
learn any better with this approach, I
tested undergraduate business students
ineconomicprinciplesclasses.
For the experiment, I tested two
groupsofstudentsinprinciplesofeconomics classes. The first group was
treatedtotheusuallevelofpresentation
anddiscussion,andthesecondreceived
treatments that included discussions of
cultural diversity (as described in the
presentarticle).Fortheculturaldiscussions, I used the cultural-value dimensions from my studies and others cited
inthepresentarticle.
The research testing methodology
thatIusedissupportedbymyinvolvementwiththeexperiment,hashistorical
groundinginthecasestudymethods—
as suggested inYin (1994)—and with
the developmental research methodologyconsideredbyGummesson(1991),
Andersen (1995), and many others. In
this approach, the researcher plays a
dual role, because in such research,
a valuable input is typically provided
through the researchers’ experiences. I
havemanyyearsofexperienceinteachingeconomics.
The students in Group 2 encountered
the same basic principles presentations
but with the addition of the cultural-
diversitydata,andtheywereencouraged
todiscusstheunderlyingimplicationsfor
thecustomaryceterisparibusconditions.
To ensure comparability of classes, it
wasimportanttodetermineifeachofthe
groupswasequivalentforpurposesofthe
studyorifothervariablesneededconsideration. Therefore, the group membershipswerecomparedalongdemographic
lines and academic backgrounds. Variablescollectedincludedgender,ethnicity,
age,andacademicbackgroundbasedon
GPA.A profile of the students reflected
the homogeneous nature of the general
student population in the school. The
GPA, variance, and distributions were
essentiallythesameforbothgroupswith
nosignificantdifference.Thisisnotsurprising, because the student population
is characterized by specific standards of
university enrollment serving a population of business students with a rather
narrowagerangewithinthesameschool.
Atfirst,therosterhadshownthatamuch
older student had enrolled in one of the
classes,butthisstudentdroppedtheclass
beforethefirstmeeting.
Therefore, the characteristics of the
twogroupsofstudentswerefoundtobe
equivalent for purposes of the experiment. The character of these students
reflected the profile of the overall student population enrolled in the basic
economics courses. Both study groups
receivedthesamelecturepresentations,
withtheonlyexceptionbeingthatGroup
2 students were exposed to culturaldiversityvalues.Bothgroupsweregiven
the same standard objective economics
exam questions, and these exams did
not include any explicit references to
theculturaldataorrelatedmaterials.All
the exams were the typical objectivebased economics tests, with all questionstakenfromthetextbook’sstandard
test-banks as supplied by the textbook
publisher. I admit that some questions
in these standard exams may not be
the best evaluators of students’ abilitiestoapplyeconomicanalysis(Buckles & Siegfried, 2006). Nevertheless,
November/December2008
87
thelargescaleandubiquitousnatureof
these standard exams serves to support
theuniversalityoftheresearchfindings.
The student standard economics
examscomprised80observationson40
studentsintheexperiment.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
HypothesisTesting
The null hypothesis tested was the
following: “The mean score of students
receivingculturaldiversityaugmentation
equalsthemeanscoreofstudentsreceiving the usual instructional presentation,
ceterisparibus.”Therefore,Ihadthenull
hypothesis and straightforward inferentialanalysestestingthestandarderrorof
thestatisticandusingthetdistributionat
the.05levelofsignificance.Thedifferences in mean scores were statistically
significant, therefore rejecting the null
hypothesis where the computed t(38)
value was 2.03 and exceeded the criticalvalueof1.69.Thesedifferencesand
scores indicate that the degree of learningwasindeeddifferentbetweenthetwo
groupsofstudentsandthatthestudents
in the cultural augmentation Group 2
scored significantly better on the standardeconomicstests.
Of course, one would intuitively
tend to agree, given the difference in
scoresforthesetests.Furthermore,the
additional responses to student-learningenrichmentquestionsonanentirely
separate posttest of student responses
to their learning experience showed
thatGroup2ratedhigherthanGroup1
in learning experience. Because these
enrichment results were measured as
ordinaldatainLikert-typescalescores
rangingfrom1(lowest)to5(highest),
theappropriatemeasureofcentraltendencyisthesimplemode,andnotthe
mean. Thus, the students in the usual
course scored 4, whereas the students
inthesecondgroupscored5.Notethat
these responses, higher for Group 2,
areconsistentwiththeaforementioned
objective test scores on the standardizedeconomicstests.Theself-reported
data might otherwise be considered
anecdotal, but alongside the objective
economics test scores, these learning
outcomes are supportive. Nevertheless, the finding that the students in
Group 2 consistently surpassed those
in Group 1 in their understanding of
88
JournalofEducationforBusiness
economic principles, as determined
fromthestandardizedeconomicstests,
ismoreimportant.Itisastrongerindicationthatthisglobalcultural-diversity
approachbetterservesthestudentsand
providesthemwithmaterialthathelps
them to master the standard learning
objectives.
Weekslater,anothertestwasadministered.Theposttestscoresshowedthat
groupperformancewasagainmeaningfullydifferent,witht(38)=2.20exceedingthecriticalvalueforsignificanceat
.05.Therefore, posttests indicated that,
on average, the culturally augmented
Group 2 students were better able to
remember the economic concepts and
usethetoolsofeconomicstosolvetest
problems (as per differences in mean
scores). Moreover, the statistical finding supports the logical justification of
increasedretention.
After the conclusion of this experiment, I performed a replication of the
study abroad. The research design for
examining this teaching approach was
identical to the U.S. experience and
was undertaken at the State Financial
Economics Institute, Crimea, Ukraine.
The procedures were the same except
that the local instructor of economics
taughtbothoftheseclassesinhisnative
language. (Class size was similar to
the U.S. size, with approximately 20
students per class.) Once again, the
differencesinmeanscoreswerestatisticallysignificantatthe.05level.This
replication further supports the importance and universality of this teaching
approach.
Conclusion
Inthepresentarticle,Ireportedfindings of research on teaching economics by using information on cultural
diversity.Idemonstratedhowaculturaldiversityapproachtoteachingeconomicprinciplesmaysignificantlyimprove
student learning of the principles of
economicsandbetteraddresstheissues
ofglobalization.Theoutcomesbetween
the traditional approach and this cultural-diversity approach were compared, and implications for economics
intheglobalbusinessenvironmenthave
been pointed out. The findings support the contention that in the present
global economy, the practice of relativelyculture-freeteachingofeconomic
paradigmsdoesnotserveusaswellas
theculturallyaugmentedapproachsuggestedhere.Thepolicyimplicationsare
interestingandsignificant.
Nonetheless,thechallengeisforprofessors of economics to replicate this
approach in research and education
and perhaps provide further evidence
similar to the findings of this study.
Certainly, such further research would
be interesting. There are many opportunities for theoretical and empirical
studiesinpedagogy.Attheuniversities
where the present research was undertaken,theclasssizesweresmallerthan
some at larger campuses elsewhere,
and this is a limitation of the present
experiments. Such limitation implies
merit for replication of the pedagogical experiment by teachers with larger
class enrollments. Irrespective of the
outcome of our pedagogical research,
thisarticleindicatesthatthereisaneed
for economists to adopt perspectives
thatprovideexplicitculturalaugmentation in their future research and pedagogy.UnderlyingtheWesterncapitalist
system is an economic ideology with
a set of cultural distinctions that help
definethereasonsforglobaleconomic
activity and relative rates of economic
growth.Inthisnewageofglobalization,
tobetteradviseandassistthestruggling
economiesoftheworldandsimultaneously strengthen and defend our own
systems, we need to understand the
implications of cultural diversity and
betterilluminatethestrengthandpower
of economic theory and analysis.With
thisbroadereconomicperspectiveanda
moreglobalframework,wecanexpect
largergainsfromresearch:educational,
theoretical, and empirical. Such perspective,framework,andresearchgains
canbetterserveourstudents.
NOTES
Dr. Darryl J. Mitry is a former university
department chair and Fulbright Senior Scholar.
He continues to teach, and his research is concerned with emerging economies and questions
of sustainable economic growth in the fields of
economic development, international trade, and
laborandindustrialorganization.
Correspondence concerning this article should
be addressed to Dr. Darryl J. Mitry, 38180 Del
WebbBlvd,PalmDesert,CA92211,USA.
E-mail:dmitryusa@msn.com
REFERENCES
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:46 11 January 2016
Andersen, I. (1995). On the art of doing field
studies: An experience-based action research
methodology. Copenhagen, Denmark: HandelshøjskolensForlag.
Becker,W.E.(2000).Teachingeconomicsinthe
21st century. Journal of Economic Education,
14,109–119.
Bogorya,Y.(1985).Interculturaltrainingformanagers involved in international business. JournalofManagementDevelopment,4(2),17–25.
Bradley,T. L. (1999). Cultural values of Russia:
Implications for international companies in a
changing economy. Thunderbird International
BusinessReview,41(1),49–67.
Buckles, S., & Siegfried, J. J. (2006). Using
multiple-choice questions to evaluate in-depth
learning of economics. Journal of Economic
Education,37,48–57.
Cybermetrics Lab. (2008). Catalogue of world
universities. Retrieved September 23, 2008,
from http://www.webometrics.info/university_
by_country.asp?country=us
Educational Testing Services. (2006). Student
instructional report II (SIR II). Comparative
data guide (pp. 22–86). Retrieved August 12,
2007,fromhttp://www.ets.org/portal/site/et
Friedman,T.L.(2005).Theworldisflat:Abrief
history of the twenty-first century. NewYork:
Farrar,StrausandGiroux.
Fujita, M., & Krugman, P. (1995). When is the
economy monocentric? Regional Science and
UrbanEconomics,25,202–528.
Gummesson,E.(1991).Qualitativemethodsinmanagementresearch.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and
organization: Do American theories apply
abroad?OrganizationalDynamics,9(1),42–63.
Hofstede,G.(1991).Culturesandorganizations.
NewYork:McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede,G.(1998).Acaseforcomparingapples
with oranges: International differences in values. International Journal of Comparative
Sociology,39(1),16–31.
Hofstede, G. (2003). Culture’s consequences:
Comparingvalues,behaviors,institutions,and
organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks,
CA:Sage.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design
andmethods.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
�� � ����� �� �� � ��� �� � �
������� �� � � �� � � �� ��� ��
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������
���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������
���������������������������������������������������������������������������������
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
�����������������������
�������������������������������
������������������������������������������
�������������������������������������������������������������
������������������������������
�� ���� � �� � �� � ��� ���
�� � �� � � � � � �
� � � �� �� �� �� � � � � � � � �� � � �
�� � � � �� � � �� � � � � �� � � � �� � � �� � � �
��� ������� ���� � �� � ������ ������
������� ��������
�����������������
��������������������
�������������������������������������������
November/December2008
89