Abstract
Introduction
Scaffolding on the work of Boyer (1990), McKinney (2007), and others, McBride and Kanekar (2015) contend that the scholarship of teaching and learning must adhere to key characteristics of scholarship more generally. It must be accessible to the scholarly community in a way that enables others to both critique and build upon it (McBride and Kanekar, 2015). In a fully mature field of scholarship, the community that engages in this process is necessarily international. The inclusion of this special section of health promotion pedagogy from Australasia is a healthy initial step in the continued development of Pedagogy in Health Promotion, and toward realizing a truly international scholarship in paraprofessional and continuing education in the health enhancing professions.
The importance of an international scholarly community is greater in the pedagogy of health promotion than in many other fields, for both ethical and practical reasons. Health promotion is taught in virtually every country, and most countries rely on a workforce whose formal learning is domestic. International engagement in health promotion pedagogy is required to ensure that advances, which are eventually reflected in the health of populations, are distributed as equitably as possible.
The practices of teaching and learning health promotion are inexorably intertwined with cultural context. Pedagogical scholarship is applied scholarship, and the discipline must always engage with cultural context if it is to remain useful in enhancing health.
Challenges for an International Scholarship of Health Promotion Pedagogy
While international scholarship is vital to improving health globally, the importance of cultural context to such pedagogy also creates challenges. Drawing out some of these challenges associated with a cross-cultural literature should help overcome them.
The practice of health promotion is itself culturally embedded. Future and current public health professionals undertaking formal study of health promotion will operate within specific cultural and political environments. To be successful, they must tailor their practice to these environments. Health promotion pedagogy typically caters for the reality that most public health professionals work in their home countries, with curricula emphasizing how to engage in health promotion domestically. This emphasis typically includes a disproportionate number of domestic examples and activities. One downside to this strategy, however, is that it means that the subject of study, health promotion as practiced domestically, is different from one country to the next.
The method of teaching should also be adapted to local conditions. Students’ expectations of learning experiences vary, as do the circumstances under which they learn most effectively. The best health promotion pedagogy accounts for the needs of specific students, and specific cohorts of students, and is therefore varied. While some of this variation occurs between universities or even different cohorts within a university, cultural differences contribute a large proportion of this variation.
Neither the differences in teaching content nor in methods necessarily precludes pedagogical scholars from engaging effectively with each other across cultural boundaries. Many classes already have students from a variety of national, ethnic, class, and religious backgrounds, so many health promotion pedagogy scholars are already accustomed to cross-cultural communication. A culturally informed discipline will also better enable the education of international students.
The provision of cultural context in the literature could enhance pedagogical choices, especially in countries outside of the West. Many of the countries in greatest need of skilled public health practitioners are culturally different from those that produce the majority of the health promotion pedagogy literature. Including appropriate cultural context could better inform the formation of the next generations of public health practitioners in these countries, delivering real rewards in human health.
Enhancing Cross-Cultural Dialogue in the Health Promotion Pedagogical Literature
Despite the practice in cross-cultural communication gained by many pedagogy scholars in the classroom, formal cultural training may be useful in driving an effective, mutually comprehensible, international body of literature. It would have the added benefit of enhancing teaching of students from diverse backgrounds, a task that grows in importance with increased migration for study.
The editorial board of Pedagogy in Health Promotion has already highlighted the importance of “evaluation, systematic study, and reflection” in distinguishing pedagogical scholarship (Cavalcanti de Aguiar, 2017, p. 143). Cavalcanti de Aguiar goes on to argue for the importance of how the perspectives of others, typically students, are conceptualized and presented to other pedagogical scholars. These methods can, and should, be used to approach the cultural element of pedagogical scholarship. Properly implemented, they go a long way toward what anthropologists call “thick description,” which is sufficiently rich in the appropriate details to facilitate the understanding of multiple layers of meaning (Geertz, 2008).
The variables on which cultures can differ is virtually infinite, complicating identification of the details of cultural interactions capable of conveying multiple layers of meaning. The details required for such communication vary between cultural events, and can also differ based on the cultural background of the intended audience. Nevertheless, there are some cultural elements that are particularly likely to be of relevance to “thick description” in health pedagogy.
The Meaning and Prestige of Study
Cultures vary substantially in the meaning attached to study. For instance, the prestige of learning and degree attainment varies across cultures. The characteristics of study that define its prestige can also vary. Anecdotally, Americans place more emphasis on the university at which the study occurred than do Australians. Conversely, Australians place more emphasis on the degree studied than do Americans. These differences could be related to variations in the higher education systems and university entry barriers. In America, students are typically required to take classes from a diverse range of academic areas, while in Australia they may focus much more narrowly. American graduates from a broad range of degrees at the same university may have more academic history in common than their Australian counterparts. American universities typically admit students, who are then free to choose among any number of majors. The primary barrier to entry, and prestige associated with overcoming it, is therefore to the university, not the degree. In Australia, students are admitted to a particular degree at a particular university. The prestige associated with a degree is therefore based more evenly on a graduate’s university and their major.
The Economics of Study
Economic conditions shape the meaning of study for many students. In particular, students may see university study as the best or only route to attaining their economic goals. The proportion of students with this perspective likely varies based on the proportion of middle-class jobs, or those which pay even more, which require a university degree. Additionally, the way and amount that students pay for university will shape their perceptions of it.
The Student–Teacher Relationship
The social distance between students and teachers varies between cultures, as do expectations about how collaborative the learning process ought to be. For example, a teacher who sees his or her role as that of a collaborator in learning alongside students is likely to be well received by students in America or Australia. A similar approach might be regarded with unease and confusion among students in countries where the teaching relationship is based on a more strict hierarchy. Assignments and interactions that work well in one context might be viewed as socially inappropriate, or at least abnormal, in other contexts. For instance, assignments and activities that encourage students to challenge views espoused by the teacher are relatively common in some countries but almost unthinkable in others.
The Idea of Study
The goals of higher education also differ between cultures. Western countries tend to place increased value on student ingenuity and problem solving, deemphasizing rote learning. This is not universal.
Student Heterogeneity
The degree of heterogeneity in a class can vary substantially. For instance, universities vary in the how heterogeneous the class backgrounds of their students are. The number and importance of variables that are heterogeneous also differs. One university may have a student body of varied class backgrounds, but which is all the same ethnicity and religion, while another may have a student body varied in its class background, ethnicity, and religion. Examination of student heterogeneity is important in pedagogical scholarship because it recognizes that student perspectives will not be uniform. Appreciation of student heterogeneity is essential to understanding the meaning students make of pedagogical interactions. This is especially important where pedagogical scholarship evaluates teaching techniques based on the feedback of (typically self-selecting) samples of students.
Conclusions
Each of these variables provides important context for understanding successes and failures in pedagogy, and are essential in allowing readers to evaluate the suitability of published methods for their own classrooms. Future articles would do well to make this information available. Indeed, there may even be a place in the literature for “thick” ethnographic descriptions of the cultures of universities across countries. The literature on international health promotion pedagogy will be truly international only when it allows readers to understand the relevant cultural factors in which teaching occurs.
