Cross-cultural comparison: piloting an analytical framework

Jacqueline Prowse (University of Victoria, Canada)

Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives

ISSN: 2077-5504

Article publication date: 1 December 2014

Issue publication date: 1 December 2014

107
This content is currently only available as a PDF

Abstract

With the proliferation of international education initiatives, research into the transfer of pedagogy across cultures is essential to ensure that quality education is delivered in a culturally accessible form. One of the factors impeding such research is the lack of widely accepted theoretical frameworks (Dimmock & Walker, 2005). This paper examines the development and effectiveness of a cross cultural framework that was used to compare a Business program at a Canadian College with its branch campus in Qatar (Prowse & Goddard, 2010). Findings are compared to results in the literature to gauge the robustness of the framework. The framework developed in the study was found to be a helpful means of allowing a comparison of pedagogy across two cultures.

Citation

Prowse, J. (2014), "Cross-cultural comparison: piloting an analytical framework", Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 91-114. https://doi.org/10.18538/lthe.v11.n2.159

Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2014 Jacqueline Prowse

License

This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode


Acknowledgements

Publisher's note: The Publisher would like to inform the reader that the article “Cross-cultural comparison: piloting an analytical framework” has changed pagination. Previous pagination was pp. 1-24. The updated pagination for the article is now pp. 91-114. The Publisher apologises for any inconvenience caused.

Related articles