Introduction

This chapter explores the pedagogical approaches of business school academics in the north of England. We investigate the role of UK tutors who are increasingly teaching ethnically diverse international student cohorts whose educational and cultural backgrounds can be very different to tutors’ past experiences. As part of this investigation, we propose the development of an academic cultural consciousness, by highlighting the notion of pedagogical disassociation. We argue that this should be a pre-requisite to improving the academic success of international students. Our findings demonstrate an inconsistent approach to pedagogy creation for ethnically diverse students; it is within this uncertain environment that the phenomenon of ‘pedagogical disassociation’ emerges. It is important to highlight that it is not a premeditated phenomenon, rather it is typified by a lack of cultural understanding, under-developed student awareness, and assumptions based on racial stereotypes. We identify the need for educators and institutions to have an awakening of consciousness. As part of this awakening, academics must first articulate a vision of teaching and learning which acknowledges the diverse nature of UK HE Business Schools.

This chapter investigates the cultural consciousness of academic tutors in three universities in the north of England. The study is focused on each university’s business school where the increasing internationalisation of student cohorts is particularly concentrated due to the popularity of business courses globally. This has led to predominantly Western-educated, UK tutors increasingly teaching ethnically diverse international student cohorts whose educational and cultural backgrounds can be different to tutors’ past experiences.

As well as being Northern English universities, the three universities in this study have a common ethos as part of the University Alliance group which describes itself as ‘Britain’s universities for cities and regions’. The University Alliance accounts for 25% of all students in the UK and is more likely to contain universities that focus more on teaching and learning, albeit with growing research activities. All three have substantial business schools attracting international students. Nonetheless, there is insufficient attention being paid to the impact of business school academic tutors’ ability to be responsive to international student cohorts as part of the student experience in UK Business Schools (Lumby and Foskett 2015; Rienties et al. 2012). This study aims to address this gap through an empirical investigation of business school tutors’ views on teaching international cohorts of students in the UK.

In order to frame this study, we propose the development of an academic cultural consciousness, as a pre-requisite to improving the academic success of international students. This cultural consciousness needs to take into consideration two key factors; first, each individual’s sociocultural consciousness; this is the understanding that people’s ways of thinking, behaving and being are deeply influenced by factors such as race, ethnicity, social class, culture, and language (McGee Banks and Banks 1995; Villegas and Lucas 2002), and second, that academics possess a cultural knowledge base about their ethnically diverse international students. Gay (2002) defines a cultural knowledge base as understanding the cultural characteristics and contributions of different ethnic groups, and further, implies that educators are inadequately prepared to teach international students (Gay 2002; Jabbar and Hardaker 2013).

This study focuses on business schools as students from an international background are increasingly viewing UK higher education (HE) Business Schools as a destination of choice (Beddall-Hill et al. 2011; Hardy and Tolhurst 2014; Jabbar and Analoui 2018; Joy and Poonamallee 2013) and, for many Business Schools, these students are an important source of revenue to facilitate institutional financial health (Humfrey 1999; Molesworth et al. 2009; Schapper and Mayson 2004; Tomalin 2007). However, while institutions achieve this financial goal by recruiting international students, achievement and attainment is poor in comparison to a mainstream non-ethnically diverse student (Richardson 2008; Turner 2006).

Different educational theorists (Modood 2006; Richardson 2008; Tomalin 2007; Turner 2006) propose divergent reasons as to this lack of achievement. Some are of the view that UK HE places emphasis on the dominant Western learner at the expense of the international student (Tomalin 2007; Turner 2006), while others articulate the controversial perception that internationally diverse students are lacking in the conviction, motivation and skills to succeed (Tomlinson 2005; Villegas and Lucas 2002). These poor perceptions highlight a lack of cultural consciousness that can impact on the international student in a negative way, leading to issues of poor pedagogy development (Gay 2000, 2002), inappropriate institutional policies and procedures (Irvine 1990; Jabbar and Mirza 2017; Turner 2006), and out-dated, or insensitive academic staff training strategies (Sabry and Bruna 2007).

In developing this work, the authors discussed the notion of cultural consciousness with Business School academics and how they impact on the creation of pedagogy. The key methodological issues are then defined and articulated alongside our data collection and data analysis approach. We then highlight our key findings which define the critical components of cultural consciousness, the themes of ‘Background and Heritage’, ‘Academic Confidence & Skills’ and ‘Student understanding’ all contribute to the pedagogy creation process. From these themes, we unearth a significant contribution to this paper by identifying the phenomenon of “pedagogical disassociation”, a disturbing trend which can have negative ramifications for UK HE stakeholders.

Cultural Consciousness Within Business Education

Cultural consciousness is underpinned by a body of literature within culturally responsive teaching (Gay 2000, 2002; Ladson-Billings 1995b; Villegas and Lucas 2002), and, as a concept, has featured prominently in the development of frameworks by multiple researchers. Examples include the six salient characteristics (Villegas and Lucas 2002); the essential elements (Gay 2000, 2002); and the Five-pillar framework (Jabbar and Hardaker 2013). Each of these frameworks contains an implicit argument that educators need to have a wider, holistic view of the students they teach, and a confidence in how they communicate and interact with students from backgrounds that are different to their own. There is a view that educators from a non-diverse background struggle to widen their world view and may have low expectations and negative attitudes towards students from an international background, these conclusions are based on empirical data provided by a very few in-depth case studies highly situated in US teacher education for schools (Durden et al. 2014; Durden and Truscott 2013). Consequently, there are few messages from these studies relevant to UK HE Business Schools and for educators in the context for this study.

In order to widen the world view of educators and to expand their knowledge horizons and experiences, Gay and Kirkland (2003), alongside Joy and Poonamallee (2013), propose the need for critical self-reflection in questioning dominant Western narratives and academic literature, to equip educators with the skills to communicate with students from other cultures. In order to achieve this, self-reflection is a key tenet of multicultural education, which includes raising awareness of student background and experiences, and how these backgrounds can be used in the classroom (Foster 1995; Irvine 1990; McAllister and Irvine 2002). In addition, there exist practical mechanisms that can help build cultural consciousness as part of HE teaching. For example, Cummins (1996) discusses developing pedagogy that acknowledges the wealth of languages that may be spoken within the classroom, and Gay (2002) advocates the need to embed culture and native languages as part of the teaching and learning curriculum.

In the creation of these pedagogical approaches, cultural consciousness acknowledges that the role of the educator is to mould the beliefs and behaviours of the student into meaningful and validating pedagogy, unhindered by Western dominated academic attitudes, languages and expectations (Giroux 2004; Nieto 1999: 135). This is ‘risky’ pedagogy, taking educators out of their comfort zones and asking them to develop pedagogy which recognises the international diversity of UK HE Business Schools (Banks 2008; Jabbar and Analoui 2018; Oikonomidoy 2010).

Methods

This research seeks to understand the cultural consciousness of Business school academics and how these experiences could influence academic perceptions, student engagement and pedagogy development for international students. In developing this discussion, we take the view that culturally responsive teaching pedagogy is a conversation between educator and student (Orbe 2000; Tomalin 2007) and this conversation is enriched by meaning that is generated by the academics understanding how students engage with the realities of the world (Crotty 1998; Papert and Harel 1991).

To understand this concept of cultural consciousness, we interviewed Lecturers and Senior Lecturers who had a minimum of three years’ experience of teaching within UK HE Business Schools. The criteria for the interview sample were kept simple in order to capture the main Business subjects and to maximise the amount of respondents we could potentially interview (Ritchie et al. 2003). In adopting a purposeful sampling strategy, we conducted a total of 22 interviews (nine male and thirteen 13 female academics) across three different Business Schools in the North of England. A description of the participants is provided below (Table 8.1):

Table 8.1 Description of the participants
Full size table

Data Collection

Each interview lasted between 50–90 minutes, with informed consent being acquired at the start of each interview. The interviews were conducted in a private, quiet and comfortable room, or a setting deemed to be neutral, for example, a meeting space, a coffee area or a respondent’s office (Oppenheim 1992). All interviews were recorded using a smart phone as opposed to a traditional Dictaphone; this served a dual purpose allowing high quality audio recording as well as instant backup of data to the Cloud (Beddall-Hill et al. 2011). For further anonymity and security, all devices on which the data resided were password protected.

In addition, the collection method was supplemented with the maintenance of a reflexive diary. Within qualitative research it is not possible for researchers to be totally objective because total objectivity is not humanly possible (Crotty 1996, 1998). We can never know with certainty that an account is true because we have no independent and completely reliable access to reality. We must, therefore, judge validity on the basis of the adequacy of the evidence offered in support of the phenomena being described (Hammersley 1992). Hence, in order to be objective and to create a certain level of validation within the research, a reflexive diary served as a tool to minimise our influence on the participant (Finlay 2002). This diary opens up the researcher’s account to public scrutiny, and while it may not prove anything definitively, it does allow the researcher’s thought processes to be probed and demonstrates a level of integrity (Ahern 1999; Finlay 2002; King and Horrocks 2010). Integrity is not solely defined by the methods that are used but also the ‘moral integrity’ of the researcher (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009).

Data Analysis

The researchers independently read and transcribed each interview over a period of five months while comparing notes on a weekly basis. The use of multiple coders shows some measure of inter-rater reliability (Pratt 2009). To help organise and sort the collected data, the analytical approach of template analysis was employed (Brooks et al. 2015; King 2004, 2012). This is a relatively new approach and while it may not be as well-known as other qualitative analytical methods such as Interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA), it is regarded in qualitative circles as providing similar analytical rigour and findings (Langdridge 2007). Template analysis was selected because it is a flexible approach that is not associated with a single delineated method. It refers to multiple, but related, techniques for thematically organising and analysing codes and can be applied across multiple methodological and epistemological approaches, and in particular in situations where an interpretative approach is used, as in this study (King 2004, 2012).

In preparing the data, we first manually transcribed all the interviews, memoing data and reflective diaries into a Word document, which was then imported into a computer-based data management tool NVivo (QSR international, version 10). The initial process of coding mapped the transcribed interviews, reflexive notes and memos onto the a priori code set, which was used to inform template A. At this stage, the researchers cross referenced the data and, subsequently, through the use of a parallel coding approach (axial coding), created template B (King 2012; Saldaña 2012). Parallel coding within template analysis allowed for segments of text to be classified within two or more different codes at the same level and allowed for the placement of data into multiple codes as well as identifying any relationships across clusters and themes (Crabtree and Miller 1999; King 2004). In order to ensure data validity and consistency between researchers, the data was read for a final time, notes were compared, parallel coding was undertaken, and template C was developed. From this template we identified a key higher-level code from the four-step process (Cultural Consciousness). To further investigate this in step 1 we defined an a priori template, which is a key aspect of template analysis; this is based on the Five Essential Elements (Gay 2002), the Six Salient Characteristics (Villegas and Lucas 2002) and the Five Pillars (Jabbar and Hardaker 2013), which are all culturally responsive teaching frameworks.

In step 2 Template A echoes the continuing work of the researchers by giving additional context to each of the higher-level codes. During this step the researchers identified the importance of ‘affirming cultural heritage’ and ‘pedagogy that is validating’ to understanding student background and culture. We also added a new higher-level code that recognise the importance of academics who are transformative by nature, due to their expectations, perspectives and views of their international students.

In step 3 Template B, the researchers identified additional depth and context to the ‘affirming cultural heritage’ and ‘pedagogy that is validating’ codes. The cross referencing of data via the parallel approach (Axial coding) identified data which fits into more than one subheading, this additional data validation identified an additional higher-level code that acknowledged the importance of ‘student motivation’ in UK HE.

In step 4 Template C, the researchers identified additional sub-level codes for ‘affirming cultural heritage’, but no further higher-level codes. The additional sub-level codes identify academic perceptions on previous student experience and how this governs interactions in the classroom. Template C is an output of the previous three steps and highlights the five main higher-level codes. Based on the above process Table 8.2 outlines the key nodes which form part of cultural consciousness:

Table 8.2 Final coding template for Cultural consciousness
Full size table

This is the basis for the three themes which emerged as illustrated in Fig. 8.1 below:

Fig. 8.1
A flowchart displays three cultural consciousness themes: background and heritage, student understanding, and academic confidence and skills.

The three themes of cultural consciousness

Full size image

The first theme acknowledges the importance of background and heritage and ‘pedagogy that is validating’ (Durden and Truscott 2013; Tisdell 2009) with the onus on academic tutors to have a cultural and background knowledge of students. In the second theme we highlight the importance of academics having the confidence and skills to motivate and empower students from an international background (Durden 2008; Jabbar and Mirza 2017; Villegas and Lucas 2002). For the third theme we identify student understanding and culture as an important aspect of building learning relationships between academic tutors and students.

It was at this stage, that the researchers identified that academics subconsciously lay success and failure in UK HE at the feet of their international students by making sweeping assumptions about their language skills, their attitudes to learning and questioning their thinking skills. This is highlighted in template B and template C, we refer to this disturbing phenomenon as ‘pedagogical disassociation’, a significant contribution of this paper to Business School education. We define this phenomenon as a ‘subconscious reflex which comes to the fore when academics struggle to identify shortcomings within their own pedagogy’, and speculate that this is a defence mechanism used to protect the academics’ own personal pedagogical shortcomings.

Findings

Pedagogical engagement and student motivation are critical elements in the learning process, which require academics to view students as capable learners (Leese 2010). The awakening of academic cultural consciousness recognises the need for academics to understand that cultural understanding and positive affirming attitudes are fundamental for teaching successfully in a multi-ethnic society (Giroux 2004; Higbee, Lundell, et al. 2007a; Villegas and Lucas 2002).

Theme 1: Background and Heritage

We defined Background and Heritage as pedagogical components that exist when educators modify their teaching in ways that will facilitate the academic experience of students from diverse, racial, ethnic, cultural and in this case international backgrounds (Gay 1995; Schmeichel 2011). Our findings indicated a tension between academic perceptions of ‘mainstream’ Western students and the ‘non-mainstream’ students from a non-Western background (Durden and Truscott 2013; Ngambi 2008). This tension stems from two elements: first, educational theory, which discusses Western-dominated contexts of learning as superior to non-Western contexts of learning (Ghere et al. 2007; Giroux 2004; Joy and Poonamallee 2013). Second, educators who struggle to relate to students from an international background pedagogically, view these students as lacking in academic skills (Giroux 2004). These perceptions disadvantage ethnically diverse students at the very start of their academic lifecycle and entrenches the attitudes that international student background and culture is deficient and inferior, reaffirming the dominance and superiority of the culture of the Western education system (Joy and Poonamallee 2013; Turner 2006). This dominance leads some academics to reject issues of Background and Heritage:

In a world of no racial discrimination then you treat everyone the same. I don’t even agree, personally, with all this crap about what’s your ethnic background, well, if we are not discriminating then what does it matter what the person’s background is. (Academic 1)

Another academic described how her Western background influenced the way she designed and developed her pedagogy, when faced with different cultures she describes her shock and shame:

One year during the Christmas period, I designed an activity around Jesus and the Nativity. However, I vividly remember one girl, I’m not sure where she was from asked, what is Christmas and who is Christ? I was surprised and ashamed, I took it for granted, everybody knows Christmas. (Academic 6)

The topic of Christmas was also discussed by another female academic:

As a tutor, I am very sensitive to different cultures and ensuring that I don’t offend somebody, and something that I did at Christmas I realised that actually it did not work at all because it was so culture related and around Christmas. (Academic 2)

The use of Western holidays and festivities as part of pedagogy can be a source of frustration, as it so clearly defines the cultural divide between Western and non-Western students (Sabry and Bruna 2007). As a way of crossing this cultural divide one academic commented on the importance of developing different perspectives as part of teaching:

From a personal perspective everybody deserves the same opportunities and the same help. It might be different, and I can accept different groups, no matter who they are or where they’ve come from, will need different help, different support, different encouragement. (Academic 3)

The onus is on academics to create support structures that provide a platform of achievement and attainment, while allowing students to maintain a sense of identity and connection with their communities (Banks 1995; McGee Banks and Banks 1995; Tisdell 2009).

In summarising this theme, student Background and Heritage should be built on positive social learning relationships that support student growth:

You need to create relationships that help to overcome the hurdles that they must get over, or a flipping gate that they’ve got to get through. It’s about giving them something that they can succeed at, and it isn’t just about the mark that they get at the end of it. (Academic 3)

Although a minority view, this outlined the opportunity to develop growth and create relationships, but this requires time, trust and, crucially, student interactions based on cultural influences and differences (Rubie-Davies et al. 2006).

Theme 2: Academic Confidence and Skills

We found that current pedagogical strategies employed by academic staff are heavily reliant on confidence and skills. In this research respondents felt they lacked the confidence to engage (Tomalin 2007) and motivate their students in the classroom (Monroe and Obidah 2004). The lack of confidence and skills we argue are related to the notion that current teaching practices are too insular with little focus on plurality and difference with an emphasis on traditional pedagogy; invariably this is Western dominated and favours the Western learner. In order to illustrate this phenomenon, we identified three response types academics display when they develop pedagogy: ‘oblivious to difference’ (Housee 2011; Schapper and Mayson 2004); ‘resistance to difference’ (D’Souza 1991, 1995) and ‘acceptance of difference’ (Jabbar et al. 2019; Santoro 2013). These responses govern how pedagogy and student engagement is developed.

Oblivious to Difference

Within this behaviour we found that some of our respondents preferred their students to leave their culture at the classroom door. This is an example of accommodation without acculturation (Gibson 1987; Jabbar et al. 2017), and we link this behaviour type very closely to ‘pedagogical disassociation’.

I don’t make any allowances for specific ethnic groups. It is the same for everybody. (Academic 13)

I accept exactly what the culture is, but with me in this room you can pretend that.

that doesn’t exist. (Academic 11)

This behaviour culture is not seen as something to be developed or as a vehicle for learning (Ladson-Billings 1995b) but is viewed as an obstacle in teaching and learning (Joy and Poonamallee 2013). This obliviousness also questions student motivation and accepts that these students are lacking in academic skills and context; this is evidenced by academic 14 who fails to recognise the issue of motivation when students are disengaged in the classroom.

Resistance to Cultural Difference

When academics resist difference, they view culture as a non-entity, a factor to be eradicated from the teaching and learning process (D’Souza 1995). While exploring this phenomenon some of the respondents became quite animated, and in two specific instances were quite aggressive with their tone, speech and body language. During the interview there were subtle indications that some academics felt uncomfortable discussing these issues; eye contact was reduced, the tone of voice changed, and body language became defensive with the crossing of arms and legs. This body language highlighted issues of discomfort, on a subconscious level, which can lead to the creation of pedagogy that is very single minded to the detriment of all other approaches (academic number 7 who talks about pedagogy within military terms.)

Acceptance of Cultural Difference

There are elements of good practice and our research highlights academics who are comfortable with their cultural consciousness. Some academic tutors we interviewed attempted to develop relationships with ethnically diverse students and they encouraged their students to bring culture into the classroom (Lipka 1991; Vita 2001) and to use their own skills to achieve and attain (Beverly 2003). Hence, the acceptance of difference reflects academics’ values and the values of their institution (Meyer 2002).

Theme 3: Student Understanding

Business Management is a functional and practical subject (Joy and Poonamallee 2013), which can thrive when cultural characteristics and contributions of international student backgrounds are recognised within the classroom (Houser 2008; Raelin 2007). This approach allows a conducive space where academics can create student understanding and engagement with international students. Based on our initial research and the data we collected, this manifests itself in two ways; first ‘Expectations of educators’ towards their students (Hardy and Tolhurst 2014) and second ‘Classroom support’ (Choo 2007; Hardy and Tolhurst 2014). ‘Expectations of educators’ and ‘Classroom support’ are key elements for building relationships with ethnically diverse students to support student understanding. Student understanding can blossom when approached in the correct manner. However, if these two forms (Expectations of educators; Classroom support) are not treated equally there is a danger that student support and understanding can become too pastoral, with the focus on compensation for the student, to the detriment of expectations and achievements (Jenks et al. 2001). This suggests that there is a lack of expectation in international students being able to think about certain abstract concepts within an academic environment, and requiring constant support (Hurtado et al. 1999):

They expect me to give them work that they can then jumble up and give it back to me and get a good grade because that’s what they’ve been taught to do. (Academic 1)

These low expectations manifest themselves in students requiring additional pastoral support to the detriment of academic structured opportunities to bridge the gap towards HE standard work (Hultberg et al. 2008). This focus on pastoral elements is inappropriate and can lead to narrow pedagogy development (Jenks et al. 2001), creating an environment where international students fail to engage if they feel the subject does not provide value and they are not given appropriate opportunities to demonstrate what they know (Higbee, Siaka, et al. 2007b).

Many Chinese students don’t understand the concept of continuous assessment. If I say this is not assessed they just switch off, no assessment, no reward, off! (Academic 7)

Academics persevere with a dogmatic pedagogical approach even though it may become clear that this approach to pedagogy is not resonating with international students. Rather than reflect on their own practice to make sense of culture (Zhu and Bargiela-Chiappini 2013), our findings indicate that educators ‘pedagogically disassociated’ themselves from their students.

Pedagogical Disassociation

Our key contribution to this work, is the notion that a lack of academic cultural consciousness feeds into ‘pedagogical disassociation’. This particular phenomenon was observed and identified as an output of academics who struggle to accept cultural consciousness as part of their teaching. Educators whose own academic background and experience is insufficient to overcome these shortcomings instinctively look for the fault in the student and fail to reflect on personal pedagogy. To illustrate, the placement of ‘pedagogical disassociation’ within our research, Fig. 8.2 below highlights the phenomenon as a negative construct arising from the emerging three themes.

Fig. 8.2
An information model comprised of five higher lever codes, three emerging themes, and the pedagogical dissociation, a negative construct derived from the emerging themes.

Pedagogical disassociation here

Full size image

If unchallenged ‘pedagogical disassociation’ can have a negative impact on cultural awareness and student experience, achievement and attainment. To highlight the prevalent nature of this phenomenon and the impact it has had on the pedagogy creation process, our research findings were mapped onto the framework of Kumaravadivelu (2003).

Many academics have been struggling to resolve internal conflicts between dialectically opposed modes of instruction and adaptation (Kolb and Kolb 2005). This conflict is underpinned by staff who are worried that they cannot work effectively because they do not have sufficient knowledge about different cultures and religions (Tomalin 2007). When this process of conflict resolution breaks down, this research has suggested that the phenomenon of ‘pedagogical disassociation’ emerges.

Discussion

What’s the Impact?

Our findings demonstrate a very inconsistent approach to pedagogy creation for ethnically diverse students; it is within this uncertain environment that the phenomenon of ‘pedagogical disassociation’ emerges. It is important to highlight that it is not a premeditated phenomenon, rather it is typified by a lack of cultural understanding, under-developed student awareness, and assumptions based on racial stereotypes (Hardy and Tolhurst 2014; Modood 2006). This research proposes that a large part of this phenomenon is borne out of academic frustration and helplessness due to a lack of understanding, knowledge, under-developed student awareness and in many scenarios, a lack of skills and confidence (Howard 2003; Oikonomidoy 2010; Vita 2001). This becomes a hurdle to educators as they respond to cultural diversity in the educational field where they feel as a ‘fish out of water’ (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992, p. 127). However, this could be addressed through the design of holistic critical reflection and structured academic training which takes into consideration the development of pedagogical strategies that go beyond generic Western teaching methods (Jenks et al. 2001).

It may, therefore, take some time to create a healthy, culturally diverse educational field, which will be dependent on the academic tutors being sufficient to understand how to support students, and also to overcome established practices. A further area of potential future research is the impact of technology. The use of technology within HE can allow students to build their own knowledge representations and meanings at their own pace within an environment where they feel comfortable (Traxler 2009), allowing for the building of consciousness across a variety of channels and modes (Stein 2000). The deployment of technology can become a neutral and interactive ground to develop engagement and meaning within HE.

Potential for Change

Training Strategies and Resources

It is clear that current training and teaching strategies for educators who teach International students have been reported as lacking in content and criticality (Coulson and Harvey 2013; Gay 2000, 2002; Gay and Kirkland 2003; Goodman and Cirecie 2009; Howard 2003). The development of cultural consciousness requires that academics create environments of learning which support students of ethnic diversity (Gay 2002). The creation of any such teaching and training strategies should encompass two key characteristics; first it should embrace multiple teaching perspectives (Durden 2008; Vita 2001) and, second, these perspectives should make explicit connections between culture and learning (Howard 2003). Any such programme of training and reflection should imbue academics with the analytical skills and confidence (Bajunid 1996; Gay 2002) to not only to have mastery of the subject matter, but also to identify the needs of culturally diverse students and how best to support them.

A structured training programme may also be useful in addressing the misconception that Western pedagogy is superior to other cultural forms of learning (Joy and Poonamallee 2013; Ngambi 2008). This may require academics to widen their reading and research in order to expose students to curriculum material that is multicultural by nature (Banks 1995; Howard 2003; McGee Banks and Banks 1995; Ngambi 2008; Swartz 1996).

The development of multicultural resources and assessment is stage one; engaging students in the classroom is significantly more challenging, with many students often reluctant to participate in classroom discussion (Beekes 2006). In order to overcome this challenge, good pedagogical practice dictates that there should be a greater focus on self-directed study and group work. In addition, academics should be sensitive to the notion that many international students are not comfortable with responding in class and, therefore, are often reluctant to contribute in class for fear of ‘losing face’ (Beekes 2006; Tomalin 2007; Turner 2006).

Policies and Procedures

The creation of multicultural resources and assessment is the responsibility of the academic. In addition to this, the institution has a role to play in the development of a multicultural curriculum, and the implementation of institutional policies and procedures which acknowledge difference (Gay 2002; Nieto 2005: 7). One such policy that has been mooted is the recruitment of educators who share a heritage with their students. Research (Dee 2005; Ladson-Billings 1995a) suggests that this produces attentive students who are more likely to complete their work, work harder and succeed. However, this is a controversial policy which has been criticised by the opponents of multicultural education as one of the types of ‘leftist policies’ which, continue to serve the victim mentality, which is prevalent in many ethnically diverse students (D’Souza 1991, 1995).

What is clear is that such a recruitment strategy cannot be implemented in isolation; it needs to be embedded as part of a comprehensive approach to policies and procedures (Gay 2002). In addition, any programme of recruitment must run in parallel with educator training that makes a commitment to developing transformative learning (Jenks et al. 2001).

Students as Producers of Knowledge

While the discussion and implementation of policies and procedures are done at senior manager level, academic training and confidence are still key factors in the creation of a curriculum that is open and conducive to learning. Hence, there are differing techniques that academics can employ to develop the curriculum; one such approach is allowing students to become producers of knowledge, which is directly related to their lived experiences (Gatimu 2009), and another pedagogical approach is the need for an emancipatory pedagogy to break the cycle of privilege (David and Kienzler 1999; Sleeter 2001; Swartz 1996). In order to break this cycle, emancipatory pedagogy aims to encourage more open-ended approaches; looks at course material from multiple perspectives; and has a focus on critical reflection, not on what is right or wrong (David and Kienzler 1999; Schapper and Mayson 2004).

A balance needs to be struck between these two techniques, and the potential for a partnership emerges with students as producers of knowledge and academics as facilitators of knowledge. However, in this balance lies the concern that academics, in combatting these issues, are facing a ‘fear of the unknown’ (Gay 2000, 2002; Sabry and Bruna 2007). Educators need to have more than just mastery of content knowledge but also knowledge of the student population (Gay 2002; Raelin 2007).

Conclusion

In conclusion, we identify the need for educators and institutions to have an awakening of consciousness. As part of this awakening, academics must first articulate a vision of teaching and learning which acknowledges the diverse nature of UK HE Business Schools. This research is intended to support academics in reflecting on the revision of curriculum approaches, training needs, policies, procedures towards the creation of a cultural consciousness and the reduction of ‘pedagogical disassociation’.