استفاده از بهبود مستمر برای تدریس در یک فرهنگ دیگر

As international business programs proliferate, the mixing of many cultures in the classroom creates new teaching challenges. This paper reports on how an American accounting professor coped with cultural differences at INSEAD in France. Student evaluations for the first course taught at INSEAD revealed a variety of problems that the professor tried to resolve by applying the principles of continuous improvement in the next course he taught. Confronting the students directly with the problem, enlisting their aid in improving the course, and eliciting specific feedback all combined to substantially raise the level of student satisfaction. The principles applied in this intervention are broadly applicable to college professors, not only those working with “international” students.

Effective teaching in different cultures is becoming an increasingly salient issue as international business schools develop. Many prominent European schools structure curricula and programs to attract students from outside the host country, thereby creating unique and beneficial learning environments. This paper relates a personal experience in an international teaching setting in which the Deming–Shewhart improvement model was used successfully to resolve instructional problems that were identified on student evaluations for the first accounting course (Langley, Nolan, & Nolan, 1992). The paper also discusses specific problems that arose as a result of cultural differences and how principles of continuous improvement were used to identify, implement, and manage changes.1 The situation described here is one in which an American business professor, the first author, taught for one sabbatical year at INSEAD. The same course was taught twice, once in the fall term and again in the spring term that followed. The course had been presented successfully many times at two American business schools (George Washington University and Duke University), but when this course was transplanted from the United States to an international business school in France (INSEAD), an abrupt drop in student satisfaction occurred. There were no changes in the course delivery—the same textbook, agenda, and materials were used, the course was conducted in English, and the case method was extensively employed. While many of the typical explanations for teaching difficulty were absent in this setting, cultural differences between the American and international students and environments were significant. It became apparent that the international students at INSEAD possessed a different set of expectations from those of the American students the instructor had taught at GWU and Duke. The challenge for the instructor was to identify those differences and make positive changes to accommodate the international students. Although such an experience is considered common among faculty teaching for the first time in a European international business school, the path to a solution is normally to use end-of-course evaluations in order to make incremental adjustments, gradually adapting to the different student expectations and concerns. In this case, however, a more aggressive approach was taken. Students were informed of the problem and their help was solicited in working with the instructor toward a resolution. The results were dramatic and immediate. This paper explains the process and suggests that these methods may be helpful to other faculty moving from one culture to another, perhaps even from one school to another one with a similar though not identical culture.2

This first person experience relates problems encountered when teaching in an ‘‘international’’ setting. With the emphasis placed on business school ratings,administration and faculty have a strong interest in delivering course material that is well regarded by students. The direct implications of this report for teaching effectively in an ‘‘international’’ business school point to two important factors: 1. Expectations about the ‘‘deliverables’’ in a class must be addressed. At INSEAD, the predominantly European culture created a demand for ‘‘right answers,’’ even for case studies of complex business situations. 2. Careful attention must be paid to the needs of students for whom English is a second language. In this case, language problems were ameliorated by (a) short cases, (b) a concise text, (c) a loud, clear voice, and (d) written handouts. The more general lessons of this intervention are for dealing with a bad teaching result. Systematic application of the principles of feedback on teaching, combined with a willingness to confront a teaching problem rather than simply attributing it to unreasonable expectations or growing pains, can yield dramatic results. This paper describes a dynamic approach to improvement that succeeded in raising the level of student satisfaction. The principles of improvement are readily adaptable to other situations where the professor is adjusting to a different cultural environment and demonstrate that the frequent evaluation and feedback process used is simple and flexible in format, easy and economical to exercise, quick and efficient to administer, and capable of generating timely and useful data. The systematic use of evaluation and feedback represents a powerful intervention for faculty to increase communication in the classroom. The students even suggested to other professors that they follow the practices discussed in this paper. The practice of continuous improvement and feedback demonstrated the power of opening lines of communication and actively engaging in problem solving as it related to improving the instructional process at INSEAD.