Document View

In the 21st century, internationalisation and cultural inclusivity have emerged as important principles in guiding organisational change and development in tertiary education, business and other areas. This paper offers a framework for culturally inclusive pedagogy that can be applied to online environments.

Rethinking teaching and learning for a global classroom

The `technological imperative', or the transformation of tertiary pedagogy in the context of communications technologies has been explored by several researchers (Daniel 1996; Thompson 1999; Collis 1998; McLoughlin & Oliver 2000; Oliver & McLoughlin 2001). The challenges have been couched in terms of several issues: increasing flexibility and learner independence, ensuring cultural portability of learning materials and re-engineering or transformation of courses and curricula for online delivery to meet the diversity of learner needs and cultural backgrounds.

However, technologies of themselves cannot transform the university or create new cultures of learning. Bonk and Cunningham (1998, p. 27) remind us that `as the menu of technology choices in schools, workplaces and on college campuses escalates, instructional decisions regarding how to communicate with learners across these settings are becoming increasingly critical and complex'. New assessment and learning designs are called for and this involves a re-evaluation of teaching and assessment approaches to ensure that diversity is acknowledged and that cultural issues become part of the instructional design process.

Many educators agree that the challenges to higher education accompanying Web-based delivery are related to increasing access and flexibility, while developing strategic and systematic plans for expansion and improvement of teaching (Lewis 1998; Collis 1999). Unless educators address the issue of teaching to a diverse body of students, and do so systematically, then online delivery may become just another way of dumping course content, with the assumption that all students, regardless of cultural background, can access learning resources and achieve success. However, the opportunities for interaction, immediacy, networked learning and communication across borders afforded by information and communications technologies demand a rethinking of how we teach online. Forster and Hewson (1998, p. 222) warn that `this lure of the Net is a potential trap, likely to reinforce the most didactic models of learning wherein information transmission, with the teacher in control, dominates'.

While it is widely acknowledged that the Internet offers the potential for improved communication, collaboration and transformation of educational delivery, the important questions remain to be answered: `Do we teach in the same way?' How do we accommodate learner differences? How can our online environments reach a global audience? Web tools such as real-time text-based conferencing, asynchronous dialogue and chat rooms, collaborative online writing and dynamic hyperlinks to resources beyond those prescribed offer students unlimited access to information, peer dialogue and support (Oliver & McLoughlin 1999). Given the potential, what are the cross-cultural challenges of global networked learning?

What are the cultural issues that online delivery brings?

Making learning resources more accessible and relevant to a wide range of learners is a major concern for universities across the world, as we move into the arena of borderless education (Lauzon 2000). The World Wide Web (WWW) has the capacity to reach a wide audience and to make access to educational resources easier. But to what extent does teaching online require cross-cultural understanding and new skills for teachers? Can we assume that the content, assessment and learning experiences afforded by the WWW will have the same relevance and meaning to diverse audiences?

Cole and Engestrom (1993) describe technology as a `cultural amplifier', signifying that while it transforms the nature of human productivity, it can also change approaches to learning and expectations of the teacher's role. For example, in response to a global economy, software developers are meeting demands by developing software (groupware) to enable people to talk, think and learn together (Marjanovic 1999). Many forms of groupware are currently used to support learning, and enable learners to enter an `extended classroom' where they can communicate their ideas to a global audience. In view of these developments, the portability of software and educational resources has become the subject of inquiry as Web-based delivery opens up broader global markets (Joo 1999; Kearsley 1990; Korpela 1996). Portability or cross-cultural use of educational resources refers to the capacity to use resources in multiple settings, different from those in which they were originally developed. The motivation for portability may be economic, educational or strategic. Larger markets for educational products reduce cost and increase profit. Educational motivations are related to the desire to apply studentcentered approaches to design and to ensure that materials are relevant to learners and cater for diversity. Strategic motivations refer to the issue of ensuring equity of access to learners who are enrolled, regardless of their geographic location. For teachers who are new to online delivery, there is also a pedagogic imperative: learning how to teach effectively online to a multi-cultural group of learners.

A great deal of research has been conducted on the design of educational resources for trans-national delivery. Among the barriers to effective online learning and global communication as reported by Collis, Parisi and Ligorio (1996) are:

* problems of culture and environment;

* teaching style differences';

* problems relating to different educational values and cultures;

problems of language and semantics;

* technical problems relating to platforms, operating systems and lack of standard interfaces.

In addition to cultural considerations, there are more fundamental questions associated with the instructional design paradigms adopted. Culture pervades learning, and in designing instructional environments there needs to be serious debate about issues concerning the social and cultural dimensions of task design, communication channels and structuring of information if the needs of culturally diverse learners are to be met. Research has shown that collaborative and self-directed computer-based work can transform classroom cultures, challenge the roles of teachers and students, and alter the expectations of learners (Damarin 1998; De Voogd 1998). Cultural variations in interpreting and communicating information also impinge on pedagogical and instructional design decisions, and the cultural dimensions of learning must be constantly problematised and not marginalised.

Several writers have provided instructional design guidelines that can be applied to the design of learning resources for culturally diverse learners (Collis 1999; McLoughlin 1999a). For example, the adoption of a multiple cultural model of design enables students to learn through resources and activities that reflect the multiple cultural perspectives utilising a choice of culturally preferred ways of learning.

Figure 1 provides a schematic view of differences to teaching and learning viewed from traditional and culturally responsive views, synthesised from a range of sources (Chen et al. 1999; Joo 1999). While comparisons are polarised in figure 1, in reality the differences form a continuum from a traditional to a culturally responsive view of learning and teaching with many shades of difference between. Learners and teachers moving from a face-to-face teaching context, or a traditional, print-based distance delivery mode to an online environment will experience changes from:

* a defined and sometimes isolated learning space to a global, connected resource-based virtual environment; * an instructor-controlled learning environment (traditional classroom) to a collaborative environment;

* an environment where content is defined and prescribed by a teacher to one where resources are flexible, available and readily accessible.

Given these changes, teachers need to reorient themselves to communicating with a geographically dispersed and diverse group of learners, while learners need to learn how to cope with the demands of resource-based learning, online communication and a more flexible learning experience.

Diversity and globalisation: What are the benefits for learners?

The increased focus on diversity in higher education provides the impetus for teachers to adopt an inclusive curriculum and change teaching practices. In Australia and overseas, private and public sector employers are demanding graduates with an understanding of cultural and social diversity, with the capacity to work effectively in diverse communities or with people who may have very different life experiences and world views. This is particularly relevant in Australia which has, amongst other things, greater cultural and linguistic diversity then any other nation, with people born in over 160 countries, who speak more than 200 languages.

It has been argued that one of the essential foundations of studentcentered learning environments is cultural inclusivity (Chen et al 1999), with a focus on enabling learners to access learning resources in a manner that is congruent with their values, beliefs and styles of learning. Webbased technologies enable greater access to information and learning resources and offer the potential of many-to-many communication, exposing students to many ideas and issues (Teles 1993; McLoughlin 1999b).

It is also clear from the literature that students who learn in an environment where multiple and diverse perspectives are fostered and appreciated become better critical thinkers, better communicators, better problem-solvers and better team players (Sugar & Bonk 1998). As studies of online global networking show, teaching approaches that promote the notion of online communities are adequately preparing all their students for a changing world (Harasim 1990, 1994; Riel 1993). In an international world, a student's knowledge and experience of multiple perspectives is an asset to thinking skills and enhances career prospects. Substantial evidence from a number of studies shows that organisations employing and encouraging diverse work groups tend to be more innovative and flexible (Schrum 2000). Studies also show that such groups make better decisions because they draw from a wider base of experience (McConnell 2000). Teaching for cultural diversity means giving learners expertise and practice in multiple ways of constructing knowledge, bringing benefits to the entire student population and reflecting good teaching practice.

UNESCO (2000) reports on the need to broaden the higher education experience of the majority of students who will not travel or at least will not be able to study in another country or in any other institution than the one that awards them their degrees. For educators, this means internationalising the curriculum, broadening the skills base of degrees and awards and strengthening the processes of education to reach beyond national boundaries. This brings the notion of internationalisation closer to the notion of `multicultural education'. Both share features in common, which include fostering understanding of human diversity, commonality and social justice, while promoting intercultural competencies (Chisholm & Wetzel 1997; Wild & Henderson 1997). To become a culturally sensitive educator, teachers need to become familiar with elements of an inclusive curriculum, and to develop pedagogic skills in teaching a diverse body of students.

Enlarge 200% Enlarge 400%

Inclusivity: Acknowledging cultural strengths not deficits

In moving towards effective cross-cultural pedagogy, an appreciation of the principles informing equity and participation in higher education is also part of the notion of cultural inclusivity (Branch 1997). Applied to curriculum and learning design, an inclusive approach aims to establish an environment that recognises, respects and responds to human diversity. This approach encourages teachers to consider diversity in all teaching processes - in selecting learning activities, in designing supports for learning and in the choice of teaching and assessment strategies. As a result, learners are exposed to a much richer range of ideas and learn to value multiple perspectives. The notion of belonging to a global learning community enables students to acquire critical awareness of how they construct their own understanding, and to identify their own (often ethnocentric) ways of thinking (figure 2). Such skills and attitudes are critical to functioning in a diverse and complex world as they push students beyond the limits of their own culturally bound conceptual frameworks. At the same time, an inclusive teaching approach aims to enhance learning outcomes for minority groups by encouraging respect for different values and approaches to learning, and by providing a range of flexible learning options to meet learner needs.

A common approach to inclusivity views it as `deficit driven' - that is, inclusivity is about ensuring that international students (students of diverse language, race and ethnic backgrounds) can be brought up to a 'normal' standard by redressing their 'deficits'. Inclusivity is, on the contrary, about acknowledging and valuing differences, about enabling the values and worldviews of all students to be given expression in teaching and learning. An inclusive curriculum aims to promote reciprocity, the development of a two-way flow of ideas and values between communities (Gallini & Zhang 1997).

Conceptualising an inclusive curriculum is the first step towards designing appropriate online learning activities. In the context of this paper, an inclusive curriculum is one which:

* values the culture, background and experience of all students;

* is inclusive of gender, culture and differences related to ethnicity, language and socio-economic background;

* acknowledges that any curriculum decision is a selection rather than a complete truth;

* makes explicit the rationale underpinning course design; and

* is responsive to the knowledge base of students.

Figure 2 depicts the core elements of the inclusive curriculum as a system of interrelationships between assessment, teaching and support processes, learning activities and learning outcomes. This means that all dimensions must be considered and interrelated in teaching and the design of Web environments. Use of collaborative communicative Web tools and conferencing technologies facilitates this new conceptualisation of learning. In addition, underlying goals and beliefs about learning need to be consistent so that assessment, curriculum objectives and learning activities can be aligned (Biggs 1999). An aligned system for crosscultural Web-based learning means that all elements of the environment, such as resources, learning objectives, activities and assessment are integrated and consistent so that students are given a coherent and planned learning experience. With these principles in mind, what are the pedagogical foundations for becoming an effective online educator for a diverse body of students? One starting point is to look to theories of learning for key theoretical perspectives on teaching.

Theories of learning that advocate culturally inclusive pedagogy

Several contemporary learning theories which are broadly categorised as constructivist emphasise shared understanding, situated cognition and flexibility in thinking as the basis of intercultural awareness and crosscultural understanding. Increasingly, technologies are being described as `cognitive tools', which transform, augment and support social and cognitive engagement among learners from diverse backgrounds and geographical locations. Similarly, Brown, Collins and Duguid (1989) analyse learning as a situated achievement, incorporating authentic activity in a range of settings.

Jonassen and Peck (1999) describe teaching and learning as active, constructive, collaborative, intentional, conversational, contextual and reflective and these qualities are inherent in a number of theories that guide the design of Web-based learning environments. Similarly, Reeves and Reeves (1997) suggest that design of online environments be aligned to ten pedagogical dimensions: learning theory, goal orientation, task orientation, source of motivation, teacher role, metacognitive support, collaborative learning, cultural sensitivity, and structural sensitivity. Each of these dimensions can be presented as a continuum from effective design to ineffective design, and provide useful indicators for instructional designers.

A further element of networked learning is that people learn from each other in teams and communities and engage in dialogue and different communicative activities. This redefinition of learning as 'conversation' has led educators to new educational frameworks, based on social constructivism to guide the adoption of appropriate learning activities (Laurillard 1993). Various interpretations of constructivism are characterised by principles relating to how knowledge is created and how individuals develop understanding (Jonassen & Peck 1999). Sociocultural theory, originating with the writings of Vygotsky (1978), emphasises that learning is a form of enculturation, in which the individual is socialised through gradual participation in tasks, scaffolded or assisted by adults until full competence is attained. Lave and Wenger (1991) also view learning as a social phenomenon that results naturally from becoming part of a community where active participation becomes part of the learning experience, so that `learning, thinking and knowing are relations among people engaged in activity'. With the ascendancy of social constructivist theories during the last twenty years, the culture of teaching has also undergone transformation. Teachers have been urged to adopt more collaborative structures for learning, which have been shown to be effective in terms of learning outcomes (McConnell 2000; McAlpine 2000; McLoughlin & Oliver 1998).

Collaboration and community building as designs for crosscultural learning

The community of inquiry approach (Lipman 1991) based on social constructivist principles of cognitive apprenticeship, common goals, shared inquiry and peer learning, is an example of a collaborative pedagogy applicable to online environments. This model has been used as an epistemological framework to address the needs of culturally diverse learners (McLoughlin 1999a; Lauzon 1999). Technologies can serve to bring communities together and can create contexts where cross-cultural awareness and understanding are developed by the group. Computer conferencing and online learning environments can create community and bring together three types of collective engagement to become tools for a new form of learning. Virtual communities that form through networked learning can create:

Enlarge 200% Enlarge 400%

* a social network of distributed learners where expertise can be compared, shared and revised;

* a communicative, collaborative and cooperative approach to learning where cross-national dialogue leads to new forms of understanding;

* appreciation of diversity which comes from communicating and sharing ideas.

Several approaches to developing online learning communities provide examples of effective cross-cultural pedagogy. Task design that engages students in resolving complex issues such as foreign policy and international relations is conducive to discussion and perspective taking. The Web site located at <http://www.nscds.pvt.kl2.il.us/nscds/us/ seniorseminar/project/main.html> involves high school students in discussing policy events and issues in their own country and contrasting these with reports from around the world. Through discussion and sharing of views, students gain cross-cultural understanding by seeing problems from a different angle, and learn to appreciate multiple cultural perspectives on politics.

Table 1 presents some examples of successful approaches to crosscultural learning using the concept of a `community of learning'. For example, Riel (1993) advocates learning circles and learning communities with a focus on developing big picture, multidisciplinary thinking. A learning circle is composed of several groups of distributed learners representing different cultural perspectives and meeting in order to achieve specific goals. For example, the circle might decide to investigate a particular global problem or environmental issue, share views of how it can be solved and communicate these ideas with others in the circle. The research takes students beyond the confines of their classroom to global interaction, leading to cross-cultural understandings and appreciation of real world events through the eyes of peers and experts in other countries. The culmination of the activity is that each group in the circle creates a joint publication that synthesises the completed work, enables reflection on new areas of knowledge and evaluation of different perspectives. Subsequent research on online circles has provided evidence of improved understanding of complex events and possibilities for global perspective taking and cooperation.

These examples provide a socio-cultural and pedagogic 'lens' through which educational practice can be viewed and which provide a framework for cross-cultural activity design. In developing cross-cultural curricula, the relevance of the ideas of cognitive apprenticeship, social constructivism and professional evolution within a community of practitioners is that these theories integrate the social world into the educator's perspective and emphasise that interaction, dialogue and consideration of student learning needs are the starting point for effective cross-cultural use of Web tools.

Enlarge 200% Enlarge 400%

Adopting cross-cultural pedagogies: The cross-cultural teaching ladder

From the perspective of the student learning experience, Biggs (1999) notes that international students may experience three kinds of problems: socio-cultural adjustment, language issues and teaching/learning issues relating to different expectations and perspectives on learning. Among the latter, a number of important findings have emerged in the literature surrounding the stereotyping of international students' capacity for learning and academic achievement (Chalmers & Volet 1997; Volet & Ang 1998). International students are often perceived to be too teacher dependent, lacking in independent study skills, and tending to adopt rote learning strategies. However, the research indicates that international students often outperform their peers academically and that such conceptions may be misguided (Kember 2000).

In addressing teaching and assessment for cultural diversity, the metaphor of a cross-cultural teaching ladder, as shown in figure 3 is a useful conceptual metaphor that avoids stereotyping and deficit driven teaching. Adopted from Biggs (1999) the cross-cultural ladder allows us to contrast traditional and cross-cultural approaches to teaching. The bottom rung starts with a focus on student difference, which is not necessarily good practice. In a cross-cultural teaching context, this might mean teaching students by focussing on differences and by attempting processes that might be termed 'assimilationist' - that is, teachers may treat all students as homogeneous and hide cultural differences. At the second stage, teaching moves into accommodation, wherein the teacher has adjusted and tries to adopt strategies to match these cultural differences. At level 2, the focus is on teaching rather than on student learning, and on using a range of teaching styles to suit student differences. At the top rung, the focus is on extending students' cognitive abilities, and the focus is on learning. The ladder narrows toward the top, where the educational context converges with the cultural needs of students, and good teaching, with a focus on learning, emerges.

The benefits of the model are that it conceptualises effective teaching as having a focus on student learning, rather than an emphasis on teacher behaviour. In Web-based environments, the ladder suggests that the educational context must meet learning needs and at the same time integrate cultural understanding with pedagogy.

The cross-cultural ladder as proposed by Biggs (1999) may be open to criticism or misinterpretation but it nevertheless provides a framework for effective teaching. In the traditional approach (figure 3), the progression from assimilation to accommodation to the focus on education may convey the idea that effective teaching is rarely achieved, as the teacher moves from attempting to stifle differences, to accommodating and treating students equally, to focussing on cognition while ignoring student differences. All of these traditional approaches may convey a teacherdirected view of learning and teaching. By comparison, the cross-cultural approach - which may begin with a focus on student difference and progress to a focus on learning - is the preferred approach, but it may not proceed in such an orderly fashion. For each of the teaching approaches, Biggs (1999) does not imply that there is a lock-step progression from the bottom rung (poor teaching) to the top (effective teaching) nor does the ladder suggest that the stages are mutually exclusive. Certainly the `traditional approach' would inhibit rather than support learning as it would attempt to devalue and ignore differences and prior knowledge.

The ladder presents only part of the picture of how successful teaching occurs, but the key element is that it draws attention to promoting learning rather than dwelling on cultural differences, or becoming preoccupied with teacher activity. Effective cross-cultural pedagogy would require that teachers consider and reflect on these questions to inform pedagogy: What kind of learning environment is most familiar to my students?

* How do I supPort transition to an online environment?

Enlarge 200% Enlarge 400%

How does the cultural background of the learner influence their view of learning tub?

* How do students conceive of their role and that of the teacher?

* What kinds of assessment tasks best support the learning process?

* What forms of feedback will be most motivating for these students?

* How can the technology support communication and dialogue that is supportive of diverse learning needs?

As teachers move into the era of global education, they need to learn to cope with difference, to foster dialogue and communication across national boundaries and to address differences in learning styles and expectations (McLoughlin 1999c). As the learning environment becomes more flexible, pedagogies too need to become more pluralistic. The crosscultural teaching ladder illustrates less effective and more effective approaches to coping with difference, but does not cover the complex landscape of teaching a diverse student population. It does however provide a useful starting point for reflective teachers.

Aligning teaching, assessment and curriculum design

In terms of the holistic process of cross-cultural teaching, task and assessment design, how can teachers ensure that they apply culturally inclusive principles across a course of study? Often there is a mismatch between what students see as the main focus of learning, and what teachers see as their roles. This principle applies to all students, regardless of cultural backgrounds. For this reason, students may not always see the connection between learning objectives, assessment and outcomes and may develop surface approaches to learning. In figure 4, students see the core activity of teaching as assessment, while teachers see it as teaching activity, culminating in assessment. Basically, students learn what they think they will be assessed on, and so assessment defines the learning outcomes. This is what Biggs (1999) describes as 'backwash'. For students, assessment is the primary concern, and determines the route they will take through the learning materials and the strategies they will adopt. Students will define learning outcomes according to the types of assessment tasks they complete. If there is a match between assessment tasks, learning activities and objectives, the student will learn what is intended (see figure 4) and we have constructive alignment (Biggs 1999).

Assessment is often considered the de facto curriculum and student learning will focus most strongly on information and strategies required to successfully complete assignments and examinations. For international students, there are a number of pedagogical justifications for reconsidering the design of assessment tasks. It is becoming more widely recognised that there has been a cultural shift in the theoretical underpinnings of good assessment design, away from measuring the reproduction of knowledge and emphasising the development of critical thinking, analysis and synthesis of concepts and ideas (Wiggins 1998).

To be effective, assessment must be viewed as an integral part of learning, and must be perceived as relevant to student learning outcomes and grounded in authentic (real world) experience rather than focussed on recall of abstract knowledge. Authentic assessment has several dimensions and leads to the kinds of skills and processes that underpin a global perspective, that is:

* the production of knowledge rather than reproduction of facts;

* the capacity to understand multiple perspectives;

* the ability to integrate knowledge and synthesise it in new ways.

Unless learners are required to engage in real world tasks and solve complex real world issues, they will not develop the skills of intercultural competence and global thinking. Becoming explicit about learning outcomes and how they relate to assessment tasks is a necessary but not sufficient condition for improved cultural responsiveness in online teaching. Teachers of international students therefore need to make expectations clear, provide explicit guidance for students in completing assessment tasks, and ensure alignment with course objectives.

Enlarge 200% Enlarge 400%

Examples of constructive alignment applied to online teaching

In order to achieve constructive alignment, it is proposed that designers map out their intended curriculum goals, learning activities and the tools they intend to use. Table 2 provides an example of how this might be applied in the design of culturally appropriate online learning. In designing and planning for cross-cultural education, the degree of cultural inclusivity is depicted as a continuum of learning activities at three levels. Level one represents a low level of alignment between task, assessment and use of Web tools. At level three, effective alignment ensures that teaching meets cross-cultural needs and that Web tools are used to create an online community of learners, supported by effective pedagogy.

The use of an aligned design process ensures that there is consistency between objectives, learning activities and assessment. In applying the constructivist alignment model, teachers can apply constructivist and socio-cultural theories of learning and the notion of a learning community to create an environment for cultural inclusivity. Exemplars of tasks are given in table 2. Thus, the aligned framework for design ensures compatibility between all aspects of the learning process.

Moving from mono-cultural to cross-cultural teaching

As Ramsden (1992) has emphasised, to be an effective university teacher, an understanding of student learning processes and individual differences is essential. Common theoretical ground is now emerging in the design of Web-based environments, with an increasing emphasis on learning as social and interactive, involving interchange of ideas, comparison of perspectives and collaborative dialogue. To transform teaching and move from being a mono-cultural to a cross-cultural educator, what changes are needed? Firstly, it is essential to recognise that learning is complex and that learners require not only technological tools to facilitate learning, but also social, psychological, pedagogical, motivational and cultural support (APA 1997). To build a better base for culturally appropriate teaching online, a number of key principles can be synthesised from the literature that offer guidance to teachers of multicultural groups of learners.

Enlarge 200% Enlarge 400%

In the following section, some pedagogies for cross-cultural teaching that may be applied to online and technology-supported environments are summarised.

* Create community online. Online groups and virtual classrooms cannot become communities of learners if learners are disconnected and competing with each other, seeking only to reinforce their own identities. A virtual group is not a community unless they share knowledge, values and goals. An online teacher can create community by focussing on common learning goals, working together, sharing ideas and appreciating differences (McLoughlin 1999a; McLoughlin & Oliver 2000).

Create learning tasks that foster `cultural synergy' or reciprocal learning about cultures. This can be achieved by leading students to develop awareness of their own expectations about learning and their own presuppositions and prior knowledge. Set up intercultural dialogues about learning to increase metacognitive awareness and sensitivity among learners to their own culture and approaches to learning (Jin & Cortazzi 1998).

Ensure that learners are exposed to multiple perspectives. Enable students to work in groups to present diverse views and challenge each other's perspectives in order to stimulate debate and critical analysis of ideas (Bonk & King 1998).

* Develop a diverse range of activity structures to create interaction, immediacy and interactivity among learners. While community begins with insiders, it can be strengthened and extended by encounters with outsiders. A vast number of activities can be created online to engage learners and to give them the opportunity to interact with others from different cultural backgrounds. Some examples include electronic publishing, database creation and parallel problem-solving (Harris 1998).

* Foster articulation and exchange of views so that students develop communication, critical thinking skills, a global perspective and the ability to elaborate and defend their views to others of different persuasions.

* Ensure that student roles move beyond passive receipts of content to active, dynamic participants who engage in communication and reflection and develop a repertoire of cross-cultural skills and competencies. This requires effective management and pedagogical planning.

* Foster student learning by adopting a number of moderator roles according to student needs. By modelling flexibility in thinking and interaction, the moderator provides a scaffold for productive student activity.

* Ensure that learners have an open, expandable information architecture that gives students access to a global information network with ample resources, counter examples and data (Siegal & Souza 1994). Create a safe and trusting environment for learning, which is personcentered rather than content focussed. Demonstrate this person focus by enabling sharing of views, but ensuring that there are communication protocols and ground rules for the kinds of interaction that you want to encourage.

* Develop a repertoire of online teaching and management skills, and be prepared to assume different roles as co-learner, mentor, guide, coordinator, model and coach. As higher education is expanding into global networked classrooms, teacher competencies will change and develop. Technologies alone will not create effective multicultural classrooms, so leadership skills and pedagogical pluralism are required by online teachers (Bonk 2000). Many of these principles apply to mono-cultural, Web-based teaching contexts but the additional dimension of becoming a multicultural teacher is that diversity is valued, built upon, integrated and systematically used as a generative resource for learning.

Conclusions: Becoming a cross-cultural educator in the age of global learning

The primary intent of this paper has been to provide a holistic perspective on pedagogy, task and assessment design for culturally inclusive learning on the Web. Three significant areas of educational research have become important for culturally appropriate online teaching, and all derive from social constructivist views of learning. The first of these addresses the need for curriculum that is not deficit driven but acknowledges and values cultural differences and gives scope for expression of difference and of multiple perspectives. The second area relates to the adoption of appropriate pedagogies, and awareness that some practices on the `crosscultural teaching ladder' may not be conducive to effective cross-cultural teaching. For Web-based environments the implications are that we need pedagogies that create communities that learn from each other, where collaboration and cooperation online lead to synthesis of knowledge from different perspectives. The third area of research that may inform crosscultural educators relates to the adoption of a systematic approach to designing for cross-cultural learning by applying the principle of constructive alignment, thereby marrying constructive principles with task and assessment design (Biggs 1999).

The constructive alignment approach is a powerful conceptual tool that enables designers to evaluate the consistency between learning objectives, learning tasks and assessment. Often, design parameters for culturally responsive Web design are treated superficially and only considerations that relate to content organisation, interface design, graphics and interactivity are considered in the creation of culturally responsive learning experiences. This article has presented a case for consideration of the totality of the learning experience and the adoption of alignment as a starting point for planning culturally inclusive learning environments that build on diversity, and place student needs at the centre of effective cross-cultural learning transactions.