The Cultural Brain

Shiri Wahby

Department of Graduate and Undergraduate Studies

Studies in Education

Submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Education

Faculty of Education, Brock University

St.Catharines, Ontario

©Shiri Wahby 2014

Abstract

The study of brain related to culture, in disciplines such as cultural neuroscience, has

revealed major differences in perception and cognition when it comes to Eastern and Western

cultures. In a selective review of theoretical and empirical work, brain imaging findings in an

attempt to better understand cognitive processing differences amongst these two cultures. I

propose that these findings be taken into account to comprehend transitional difficulties that the

immigrant and international student population face in Canadian education institutions. In turn,

recommendations, suggestions, and strategies are presented.

Acknowledgements

First and foremost, I would like to thank my husband, Sherif Wahby, for his

continual faith in me, support, and encouragement which enabled me to complete this journey

that I embarked on. I would like to express my gratitude to my family for their inspiration, their

unconditional love and support. Finally, I would like to thank the faculty for their excellent

guidance, dedication to teaching, and patience.

“Have you tried neuroxing papers? It’s a very easy and cheap process. You hold the page

in front of your eyes and you let it go through there into the brain. It’s much better than

Xeroxing” (Brenner, 1988, p. 104).

This humorous quote by Sydney Brenner reflected the dominant and outdated

understanding that psychologists and educationalists had concerning the brain. The metaphorical

representation of the brain as machine emerged in the 1950s with the advent of the computer

(Kitayama & Park, 2010). Similar to the computer, the brain consisted of a series of wires and

networks, in this case neurons and neural connections delivering a specific output given the

input/stimuli. It was understood that the processing that took place, similarly to a CPU (computer

processing unit), was standard, equivalent, and did not differ in normal human brains. More

important however was the comparison that the mind was “fixed, bounded and housed neatly in

the head, and but for sensory receptors nearly completely isolated from the external

environment” (Kitayama & Park, 2010, p. 111).

Advances in neuroscience have revealed that the brain is malleable, or demonstrates

plasticity, which suggests that it can be shaped by environmental or nongenetic factors

(Kitayama & Park, 2010). The brain can change in response to stimulation from the

environment, and culture could be one of these environmental factors (Organisation for

Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2007, p.30). Developments in neuroscience

due to technologies such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) have enabled

researchers to observe and identify specific brain regions that are recruited in perception,

judgment, and decision making (Kitayama & Park, 2010, p. 112).

This paper will discuss how sustained experiences such as culture shape the brain and

generate perceptual and cognitive changes. These environmental stimuli “cause new neuronal

connections to form” (Koizumi, 2004, p. 435). To set this paper in context, I will briefly define

what I mean by culture. This definition adapted from Kitayama and Park (2010) characterizes

culture as a set of experiences, beliefs, and values that comprise relevant tools, practices, and

tasks across one’s lifetime.

In this paper, I will first provide a rationale and context that anchors this research, with an

explanation as to why I chose this topic. I will then present a few cognitive findings that

document differences between Eastern and Western cultures. I will then draw on themes

suggested from these findings and highlight their importance in an educational context in an

effort to discuss the challenges and barriers that immigrants face when transitioning into a new

culture, such as the Western educational system. Finally, I will propose some suggestions that

could help ease this transition.

Why Care?

This topic is of a personal interest to me as I am a second generation immigrant and, as

such, I have witnessed my parents’ difficult transition into Western culture; they have

encountered many challenges and barriers such as the discounting of their skills and experience

and had to climb the uphill road to start all over again. Even closely, I also have witnessed this

transition in my sister as she entered the Canadian educational system late in her adolescent

years, and I observed both the challenges and the opportunities she met in the process of

transition. On a community scale, being Egyptian, there has been an influx of Egyptian

immigrants into Canada over the past 10 years; hence, it is of cultural significance to understand

the transitions in order to enhance the likelihood of success for Egyptian immigrants to Canada.

Finally, on a professional level, I am a college teacher, and most of my students are international

and/or immigrants. They come from a variety of cultures, and I have always wondered what the

transition was like for each of them. As an educator, I wanted to learn if there were innate neural

differences due to cultural values. Is culture more than a social set of rules, or could it also be

viewed as biosocial? How do students from various cultural backgrounds see the same stimuli?

How are those stimuli interpreted? Finally, what are some of the strategies that I can apply in my

classroom to ease their transition and increase their chances of success.

Theoretical Perspectives

An emerging field in neuroscience has begun to investigate how human brain functions

are shaped by interactions between culture and genetics (Han, Northoff, Vogeley, Wexler,

Kitayma, & Varnum, 2013); similarly, current research has been investigating how neurological

processes such as genetic expression and brain function give rise to cultural values, practices,

and beliefs (Chiao, 2010, p. 109 as cited in Han et al., 2013, p. 336). With advanced techniques

such as functional magnetic resonance imaging, it is possible to identify specific brain regions

that are recruited in psychological operations such as perception, judgment, and decision making

(Kitayama & Park, 2010). The plasticity of the human brain reflects its capacity to change both

structurally and functionally both to environment and to experience (Shaw & McEachern, 2001

as cited in Han et al., 2013). Thus cultural neuroscience places huge emphasis on the influence of

cultural values, beliefs, and practices since the brain is a biosocial organ and not merely

biological (Hans et al., 2013).

A broad agreement exists that experience can shape cognitive processes and neural

organization (Park & Gutchess, 2002). Multiple research articles have cited that cultural tasks

can shape and modify brain pathways (Kitayama & Park, 2010). The classic example often cited

is that of London taxi drivers who relative to control subjects, showed an enlargement in their

hippocampi region (Kitayama & Park, 2010). The hippocampi region, responsible for memory

formation and retrieval (Squire & Schacter, 2002 as cited in Kitayama & Park, 2010), was

enlarged due to the constant spatial navigation, rerouting, and improvisations that are required

(Kitayama & Park, 2010; Park & Gutchess, 2002); “when fired together the brain neurons begin

to be wired together” (Kitayama & Park, 2010, p. 114). This marriage of culture and genetics, as

cofactors that shape neural organization and sensitivity, challenges the dichotomy of nature

versus nurture, or genetic versus epigenetic factors. This relation has been discussed previously

by Bronfenbrenner in his ecological systems theory, “in an attempt to define and understand

human development within the context of the system of relationships that form the person’s

environment” (Johnson, 2008, p. 2). The layers of systems which include the macrosystem refer

to the broad social context, the values, beliefs, customs embedded within culture (Heft,

2013Johnson, 2008).

In order to understand how culture affects cognitive functions, we provide a definition for

both terms. According to Kitayama and Park (2010), culture is defined as a set of values,

meanings, beliefs, conventions, and artifacts that tie together relevant tools, practices, and tasks.

Humans are not born with inclinations for a certain culture; rather they construct and create

culture, meaning that individuals can change their cultural values if they are exposed to another,

as in the case of emigration (Han et al., 2013); “cultural practices can foster different notions of

the self and well-being as well as different cognition and emotion” (DeVos, 1973 as cited in

Kitayama & Park, 2010, p. 114).

According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2007),

cognition is defined as:

the set of processes enabling information processing and knowledge development. These

processes are called “cognitive functions”. Among these, the higher cognitive functions

correspond to the human brain’s most elaborate processes. They are the product of the

most recent phase of the brain’s evolution and are mainly centred in the cortex, which is

highly developed structure in humans. (p. 24)

The cultural context of this paper will solely focus on the differences between Eastern

and Western cultures. Research has studied the differences between Eastern versus Western

cultures because of a clear cultural dichotomy. According to Nisbett and colleagues (2001 as

cited in Park & Huang, 2010, p. 391), this cultural dichotomy is present in the way that East

Asian and Western cultures process information, which is a result of contrasting cultural values

and beliefs. Eastern versus Western cultures will be solely examined as a result of insufficient

information gathered and assessed for other cultures.

The Cultural Brain

Behavioural performances among individuals from Western and East Asian cultures

revealed differences in culture-dependent cognitive processing in the following categories:

arithmetic processing, self-construal, person perception, attention, emotional regulation, and

motivation (Han et al., 2013). Below I will expand on the following categories and emphasize

the differences in processing between the two cultures in an effort to paint a larger picture and

reveal the importance of understanding such processes, in order to discover educational

applications and implications.

Arithmetic Processing

According to Kitayama and Park (2010), in arithmetic processing, native English

speakers differ from Chinese speakers and engage a different region of the brain known as the

perisylvian cortices, which is involved in linguistic processing. In contrast, Chinese speakers

show very little activation in linguistic processing areas and increased activation in the premotor

cortex which is involved in motor execution (Tang et. al., 2006 as cited in Kitayama & Park,

2010). The deviation in brain processing areas is due to the fact that during mathematical

training and computation East Asian cultures place an emphasis on using manipulatives, the most

common being the abacus, which involves finger movements (Kitayama & Park, 2010). This

finding is powerful because it demonstrates that the same behavioural outcome can be

accomplished by different brain pathways; same tasks are accomplished by the recruitment

varying neural components that are dependent on social and cultural backgrounds.

Self-Construal or Views of the Self

In an experiment where Eastern and Western subjects were asked to think about their

mothers, different neural pathways were engaged (Kitayama & Park, 2010). In Chinese subjects

the medial prefrontal cortex was activated (Craik et al., 1999 as cited in Kitayama & Park,

2010), an area responsible for its role in decision making involving risk and reward (Botvinick et

al., 2007 as cited in Euston, Gruber, & Bruce, 2012 ), executive control (Posner et al., 2007;

Ridder-royd et al., 2004 as cited in Euston et al., 2012), and reward-guided learning (Rushworth

et al., 2011 as cited in Euston et al., 2012). The engagement of this neural pathway indicates that

Eastern subjects see the self as interdependent to close others. According to Markus and

Kitayama (1991), this interdependence indicates that a higher value is placed on the interpersonal

or social self, emotional life is positioned on social goals and concerns, and finally motivation is

through such social goals and concerns.

In contrast, in Western subjects the medial prefrontal cortex was not engaged (Craik et

al., 1999 as cited in Kitayama & Park, 2010). The lack of engagement in this neural pathway

suggests that Westerners’ self-construal is separated from close others. According to Markus and

Kitayama (1991), this indicates independence and suggests that a higher value is placed on the

self, emotional life is positioned around one’s personal goals, desires, and needs, and motivation

is through goals that are set personally.

This finding is powerful because it demonstrates an Eastern view of self that is

incongruent with how the West views the self within society (Kitayama & Park, 2010). Instead

of the self being intertwined within the social fabric with all decisions made and influenced by

others, the view of the self in Western culture stands alone, independent of the social fabric, with

decision making being very personal and internally driven (Kitayama & Park, 2010).

Attention

According James (1980), “attention refers to the selection of specific information within

the visual representation, usually by enhancing processing of the selected items or by inhibition

of non-selected items, or both” (Goh & Park, 2009, p. 96). Experiments have been carried out by

various researchers evaluating how individuals from Western and Eastern cultures are affected

by visual contextual information (Kitayama et al., 2003; Blais et al., 2008; Goh et al., in

preparation). One such study used the Frame-Line Test in which participants view a line within a

surrounding square frame of a fixed size (Kitayama et al., 2003 as cited in Goh & Park, 2009).

Participants are given time to view this information in the study phase, and in the test phase

participants are presented with an empty square frame that is of a different size and are asked to

draw a line in the square using either relative judgment, so that the ratio between the line length

and the square length is preserved as in the study phase, or using absolute judgment so that the

square size is ignored and the line length is maintained as in the study phase (Kitayama et al.,

2003 as cited in Goh & Park, 2009). Results revealed that Western subjects were better at

absolute judgment, meaning that they were less affected by the change in context (i.e., size of the

square), whereas Eastern subjects were better at relative judgment which took into account the

changing size of the square (Kitayama et al., 2003 as cited in Goh & Park, 2009).

In Eastern subjects’ attention in visual stimuli (to objects and contexts) was diffused and

holistic due to collectivist dialectic traditions within the culture (Park & Gutchess, 2002).

According to Nisbett, Peng, and Norenzayan (2001), holistic thought involves an orientation to

the context as a whole including attention to objects situated within a field. This results in

information being processed in a more holistic and contextual fashion (Kitayama & Park, 2010).

Further,

“holistic approaches rely on experience-based knowledge rather than abstract logic and

are dialectical, meaning that there is an emphasis on change, recognition of contradiction

and of the need for multiple perspectives, and a search for the ‘Middle Way’ between

opposing propositions” (Nisbett et al., 2001, p. 293).

Since there is an overall picture that is being taken into account, subjects from Eastern

cultures paid less attention to categories or specifics (Park & Gutchess, 2002; Nisbett &

Miyamoto, 2005). East Asian students are “field dependent” (Ji, Peng, & Nisbett, 2000, p. 953),

where attention is focused on the context and thus the “bigger picture” is easier to see. As stated

by Ji and colleagues (2000), “they (East Asians) might be more capable than Americans of

detecting relationships in the environment” (p. 944). However, they might be challenged by

picking out details for a given task and might experience difficulty with questions that are detail

oriented or those that require the recall of details (i.e., contrast and compare tasks). As a result,

they “may need more help in differentiation and analysis” (Ji et al., 2000, p. 953). Further,

according to Witkin and colleagues (1977 as cited in Ji et al., 2000, p. 953), “field dependent

people have interpersonal orientation, show strong interest in others, and prefer to have people

around them and even physically close to them”.

Western subjects’ attention was focused according to the ancient Greek tradition of logic

which results in more rule, based and analytic processing (Park & Gutchess, 2002). Thus, less

attentional bias was devoted to context and more focus was given to categories (Kitayama &

Park, 2010; Nisbett & Miyamoto, 2005). Analytical processing viewpoint sees the world as

composed of objects, focusing on details and their properties (Ji et al., 2000); it also involves a

preference for using rules to explain and predict an object’s behaviour (Nisbett et al., 2001, p.

293). As a result, they (Western subjects) are referred to as “field independent” (Ji et al., p. 944),

since they are able to separate objects from their environments. This point is demonstrated by

Goh and Park (2009): “Westerners perceive visual information in terms of features and constant

attributes that are less bound to the context” (p. 97).

Emotional Regulation

Based on the views of interdependence, emotional regulation in Eastern subjects

expressed socially engaging emotions including friendly feelings, respect, guilt, and shame

(Kitayama & Park, 2010). Feelings such as guilt and shame indicate a link to interpersonal loss

or one that is connected to the feelings of others within social fabric (Kitayama & Park, 2010).

Based on the views of independence, emotional regulation in Western subjects expressed

socially disengaging emotions such as pride, feelings of superiority, anger, and frustration

(Kitayama & Park, 2010). In contrast to feelings such as guilt and shame, feelings of anger and

frustration indicate a link to the personal self, or one that is self-oriented (Kitayama & Park,

2010).

Motivation

Similarly to the socially based views for self-construal and emotional regulation,

motivation in Eastern subjects was observed to be socially oriented (Yu & Yang, 1994). This

means that personal motivation is anchored to the expectations of others and a sense of

obligation and duty to community (Kitayama & Park, 2010). Also interesting is the observation

that intrinsic motivation increased when tasks where chosen by close others such as mothers

(Kitayama & Park, 2010). According to Iyengar and Lepper (1999), intrinsic motivation was the

highest in Western subjects when tasks were chosen by self, and no difference was noted in the

level of motivation whether they were chosen by a close other (Kitayama & Park, 2010).

Perception of Control

Findings about motivation and self-construal are related to perception of control. As the

actor is seen as the main cause of behaviour in Western cultures, a sense of personal control is

more important (Ji et al., 2000). A sense of control is important for Westerners in that they often

fail to distinguish between controllable and uncontrollable events, giving them a false sense of

control or an “illusion of control” as defined by Langer (as cited in Ji et al., 2000). On the

contrary, a sense of perceived control is not as important for East Asians as accommodating or

conforming to reality including group needs (Ji et al., 2000). Understanding one’s illusion of

personal control is important as it affects cognitive functions (Ji et al., 2000). For example,

performance on routine tasks is greatly improved when people believe they can control the

occurrence of events, even though in reality they might not exercise any control over that event

(Glass & Singer, 1973 as cited in Ji et al., 2000).

Holistic Versus Analytic Traditions: Why the Differences?

In America, “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” In Japan, “the nails that stands out gets

pounded down” (Markus & Kitayama, 1991, p. 224). Cognitive differences amongst Eastern and

Western cultures have been thought to originate because of differences between their ancient

civilizations and systems of thought (Nisbett et al., 2001) and/or because of differences in their

social structures (Ji, et al., 2000). According to Nisbett and colleagues (2001), cognitive

differences between Eastern and Western cultures are due to the ancient civilizations they

belonged to, namely Chinese and Greek civilizations. Eastern cultures derived their cultural

values and systems of thought from Chinese civilizations. In Chinese societies, the self was

defined in relation to the community; “individuals are part of a closely knit collectivity, whether

a family or village, and… the behaviour of the individual should be guided by the expectations

of the group” (Nisbett et al., 2001, p. 292). As a result, Eastern cultural values centred on the

holistic perspective (Park & Huang, 2010) and focused on relationships and connections.

Western cultures, derived from Greek civilizations, emphasized the self as a single entity, or the

“location of power” (Nisbett et al., 2001, p. 292). Individuals were encouraged to develop a

sense of personal agency, a sense of choice independent from the social fabric of society. As a

result, Western cultural values centred on the analytic perspective, where categorization and rule

generation were key (Nisbett et al., 2001).

Another perspective which attempts to explain cognitive differences among Eastern and

Western cultures proposes that it is due to their social structures. According to Nisbett and

colleagues (2001), Chinese societies were based on agriculture and farming, where cooperation

and working as a “team” were crucial. Further this environment was highly complex and

constraining, requiring obedience (Ji et al., 2000). Thus this environment requires interpersonal

orientation and a sense of community or allegiance.

European societies, on the other hand, were based on hunting and gathering and required

individual effort and units for their success (Ji, et al., 2000). Hunting and gathering communities

emphasized independence or autonomous functioning and a loose social structure (Barry, Child

& Bacon, 1959; Whiting & Child, 1953 as cited in Ji et al., 2000). Thus, this environment or

structure involved impersonal orientation and more solitary or nonsocial situations (Greenem

1973; Witkin & Goodenough, 1977 as cited in Ji et al., 2000; Nisbett & Miyamoto, 2005).

These differences in cognition and perception have allowed Asian and Greek civilizations

advantages and disadvantages over the centuries. For example, an analytic perspective has

allowed the Greeks to discover many scientific laws but failure to understand the interaction

between an object and its field (Nakamura, 1964/1985 as cited in Ji et al., 2000, p. 943). Aristotle

explained a stone’s falling through air by reference to the stone having the property of gravity (Ji

et al., 2000). The Chinese, due to their understanding and focus on the field, were able to

understand that causation is always the result of interaction between the object and the field (Ji et

al., 2000). This has allowed them to understand and properly explain phenomena such as

resonance and magnetism, and even correctly describe the behaviour of the tides (Needham,

1962 as cited in Ji et al., 2000).

Another theory has to do with the socialization process characteristic of each culture,

such as child-rearing practices (Nisbett & Miyamoto, 2005). For example, American mothers

observed playing with their children point out the characteristics or attributes, whereas

Japanese mothers emphasize the social routines which might direct infants’ attention to the

relationship/context (Nisbett & Miyamoto, 2005).

Possible Implications of Cultural Differences for New Immigrants to Canada

Like the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, Canada has grown through

immigration (Cervatiuc, 2009). During the 1970s, increasing numbers of Asians were

immigrating to Canada—specifically they comprised 48% of the people settling in Canada (the

immigrant experience, 2002). Canada’s immigration policy has changed over the past 20 years to

attract the world’s best educated people in order to compete in a knowledge economy that relies

heavily on a skilled workforce (Baxter, 1999; Duffy, April 2000; DeVoretz, Hinte & Werner,

2002 as cited in Cervatiuc, 2009). This push in immigration has been due to global competition

and a gateway for Canada to replace its aging population with young, educated, and skilled

newcomers (Cervatiuc, 2009).

However, many immigrants are unsuccessful culturally transitioning into Canadian society,

as there are many adjustments such as: new languages to learn, customs to adapt to, accompanied

with a radical change of climate (The Immigrant Experience, 2002). According to Sinacore,

Park-Saltzman, Mikhail, and Wada (2011), “cultural transitioning is the process of an immigrant

adapting from their culture of origin to that of a new country” (p. 168). Successful cultural

transitioning is achieved when individuals are able to achieve sociocultural and psychological

adjustment within the new culture (Berry, 2003 as cited in Sinacore et al., 2011). Despite

immigrants representing a highly skilled and qualified workforce, one major obstacle is securing

economic opportunities and employment (Reitz, 2001; Wald & Fang, 2008 as cited in Sinacore

et al., 2011). This has been due to a variety of reasons including negative attitudes towards

immigrants as perceived competition for resources and skill discounting (Sinacore et al., 2011).

As a result, many educated and skilled immigrants cannot practice their chosen occupations in

Canada, and this has hindered their participation in society (Dean & Wilson, 2009 as cited in

Sinacore et al., 2011). This “gap” has resulted in retraining at postsecondary institutions and,

according to Statistics Canada, 439,650 immigrants over the age of 15 attended high school or

postsecondary full time in 2001, while 267,585 immigrants attended school part time (Sinacore

et al., 2011).

Even within the Canadian educational landscape, many immigrant and International

students have difficulty navigating the system that should lead them to academic and future

occupational success (Sinacore et al., 2011). The difficulty in navigating the Canadian school

system has contributed to 3 times higher immigrant academic attrition rates (Gunderson, D’Silva,

& Odo, 2012; Gitlin, Buendia, Crosland, & Doumbia, 2003; Sagy, 2000 as cited in Sinacore et

al., 2011). “Becoming a student in a new country requires socialization into the teaching,

learning, and student cultures. A second-language-learner must learn features of these cultures if

he or she is to become communicatively and academically competent” (Gunderson et al., 2012,

p. 144).

Another issue is the influx of international students within Canadian institutions – if

Canada has developed policies and strategies (such as planning, cooperative efforts between

government and education, funding for marketing, and simplified visa applications; Schneider,

2000 as cited in Andrade, 2006), it should be the responsibility of Canadian institutions to

develop strategies to successfully integrate and ease the transition of the immigrant and

international student population. The development of these “strategies” should be motivated by

two main factors: economic gains and national relations (Andrade, 2006). First, international

student enrollment in Canada is a source of revenue for postsecondary institutions (Lee &

Wesche, 2000 as cited in Andrade, 2006). Second, international students contribute to

“intercultural learning and increased understanding of diversity and global issues” (NAFSA,

2003 as cited in Andrade, 2006, p. 133). International students create global relations and

connections and promote foreign policy interests (Schneider, 2000 as cited in Andrade, 2006).

Dominant Western Ideologies and Mismatched Expectations

“A major part of how people make decisions has to do with their past social experiences,

reputation and cultural history” (Immordino-Yang, 2011, p. 99). As stated previously, there are

substantial cognitive differences between Easterners and Westerners due to cultural and social

structure differences, and these differences affect how information is perceived, stored in

memory, and retrieved later on (Goh & Park, 2009). The emerging evidence on the brain

suggests that “pruning” is dependent on tasks which are regularly pursued and practiced, and this

causes different patterns of neural activities to be expressed, becoming automatic (Kitayama &

Park, 2010). Thus, the brain is sensitive to the social and cultural context in which individuals

are immersed (Han et al., 2013; Northoff, 2012). These findings have two implications: first,

immigrant and international students entering the Canadian educational system have been

immersed in their own sociocultural contexts; as a result of this “pruning” cognition and

attention will be directly affected; second, after spending “x amount of time” in the West, can the

brain “rewire” its circuitry? (Second, if culture is a powerful determinant of behaviour, do

individuals from different cultures continue to act in the new setting as they did previously, or

do/can they change their behaviours and thus the rewiring of brain circuitry?; Berry, 1997).

Western institutions embody Western values, beliefs, and attributes related to the

individual and culture as a whole; “the domains of knowledge are the products of classroom

activity as beliefs, values, conceptions and norms of students” (Packer & Goicoechea, 2000 as

cited in Somal, 2011, p.10). Markus and Kitayama (1991) sum up some of these attributes as: the

individual as independent, self-contained, and autonomous who is comprised of unique attributes

such as abilities, motives, and values (p. 224). The imperative of this culture is to become

independent, discover and express one’s unique attributes (Johnson, 1985; Marsella et al., 1985;

J. G. Miller, 1988; Schweder & Bourne, 1984 as cited in Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Western

society also values free speech, freedom of expression, and equality of participants (Becker,

1986). Also, from experience, I see Western institutions embodying the skills of independent

thinking through the focus of critical thinking, referring to and expressing one’s thoughts through

the encouragement of in-class participation and questioning, and so on. If we contrast this to

Eastern societies that leave little room for the development of ideals such as “liberty, equality, or

individuality” (Nakamura, 1964, as cited in Becker, 1986), there is a clear cultural incongruence.

Further, a society which is organized through vertical hierarchy and values interdependence

cannot conceive the individual as a single entity and will not tolerate free thought or individual

expression (Becker, 1986). “A society which cannot conceive of a student questioning a master

is not going to tolerate debate and argumentation” (Becker, 1986, p. 77).

In addition, utilizing the research and results from cultural neuroscience people from

Eastern cultures might be challenged by picking out details for a given task and might experience

difficulty with questions that are detail oriented or those that require the recall of details (i.e.,

contrast and compare tasks). As a result, they “may need more help in differentiation and

analysis” (Ji et al., 2000, p. 953). Further, according to Witkin and colleagues (1977 as cited in Ji

et al., 2000, p. 953), “field dependent people have interpersonal orientation, show strong interest

in others, and prefer to have people around them and even physically close to them”. Thus, East

Asian students might prefer collaborative projects, instructional strategies that require sharing

and debriefing. From the social perspective, they might excel in social situations such as forming

new friendships amongst colleagues and teachers. On the flip side, independent projects and

tasks could be challenging. Also, referring to the holistic aspect of Asian culture, concepts such

as global citizenship, global responsibility, and interdependence are quite well understood and

can be conceptualized. “Asians, have been shown repeatedly to be more likely than Americans to

explain behaviour in terms of situational or contextual factors, including social roles and

obligations” (Ji et al., 2000 , p. 944). As a result, East Asian students may have issues with

assertiveness, taking initiative, or understanding the concept of individualism that is central to

Western culture. According to Ji and colleagues (2000), “Chinese and Japanese children

performed best on anagrams their mothers chose for them” (p.944). This concept of

interdependence could make it difficult for East Asian students to become autonomous and self-

directed learners, where they will need to make decisions on their own.

Students from Western cultures may have difficulties with tasks that require making

connections or seeing relationships, between objects (Ji et al., 2000). Since they are “field

independent” (Ji et al., 2000, p. 953), Western students might find it a challenge to find

connections, find relationships and draw on the larger picture. In contrast to Eastern cultures,

however, Western cultures see the actor as the main cause of behaviour (Ji et al., 2000). This

individual focus of control is defined by Langer (1975 cited in Ji et al., 2000, p. 944) as the

“illusion of control”. Westerners think that they have more control rather than what they actually

have. This overtly controlling nature might make it difficult for Western students to cope with

events that are out of their control, and as a result they may experience feelings of frustration,

helplessness, and anger.

Other than cultural disparities between the East and the West, there exist mismatched

expectations and perceptions between what students want and expect and what their teachers

want and expect. Kimmel and Davis (1996 as cited in Goldschmidt & Ousey, 2006) summarize

this issue poignantly by stating that amongst the mismatched academic expectations, most

students (international and immigrant) are unfamiliar with the culture of the academy and have a

difficult time navigating the system and being advocates for themselves. Faculty have a role to

play, as they also come with mismatched expectations. According to Goldschmidt and Ousey

(2006), faculty expect that students have a foundational knowledge in a variety of disciplines;

however, the reality is that educational background of immigrant and international students

differs from Western pedagogy due to cultural differences and life experiences (Ballard, 1996 as

cited in Somal, 2011). “Students taking the same course will not learn the same things as they do

not start with the same background knowledge or the same representation of that knowledge”

(OECD, 2007, p. 32). Thus, learning experiences should take into account individual and cultural

differences.

Further, faculty misread certain student behaviours as communicating indifference or

apathy. A study conducted by Tompson and Tompson (1996; as cited in Andrade, 2006), found

that professor attitudes towards international students who preferred to sit next to conationals as

unproductive and disengaged. However, from an international students’ perspective, these

students explain that they sit next to students who speak their language in order to ask questions

during the lecture (Tompson & Tompson, 1996; as cited in Andrade, 2006). What actually

prevented participation by these students were language difficulties, anxiety, and lack of

confidence (Robertson et al., 2000 as cited in Andrade, 2006). Fox (1994 as cited in Andrade,

2006) found that immigrant and international students’ lack of writing and communicating was

not only due to language difficulties, but their writing was bound by their cultures, identities, and

“ways of seeing the world”.

Facilitating a Smooth Transition to Canada for New Immigrants

“Is it ethical to ignore a field of relevant and original research that is shedding new light

and fundamental understanding on education?” (OECD, 2007, p. 28). As previously mentioned,

institutions that attract international and immigrant students should serve as one of the locations

in setting strategies that are culturally sensitive in order to aid the adjustment to a new

educational system for this special population (Andrade, 2006). What are some of the strategies

or solutions that can be incorporated within the institution and at the classroom level? Since I am

a college educator who regularly is in contact with this special population, I will provide a few

insights based on my experience into what I have done within my own classroom. A few

solutions and strategies from literature will also be presented.

First, to aid students with the emotional and psychological adjustments that may be

encountered when immersed in a new culture, institutions should set up mentoring as a pivotal

resource for assisting students with social integration, culture, and environment (Abe, Talbot, &

Geelhoed, 1998 as cited in Sinacore et al., 2011). Mentoring serves as a peer support program

where students can be paired with volunteer “host” students and they can attend various campus

activities together (Abe et al., 1998 as cited in Sinacore et al., 2011). Research has revealed

numerous positive effects of peer-support programs such as enhanced cultural understanding and

knowledge, friendship, and sharing of academic resources (Andrade, 2006).

Second, a great idea was offered by Goldschmidt and Ousey (2006), which was creating a

one-credit class to be offered the week prior to the start of the school year as an introduction to

college. This class would bring immigrant and international students together with faculty as a

way to become oriented to the system (Goldschmidt & Ousey, 2006). The class would be offered

at no extra charge and would be based on hands-on activities in order to expose students to the

realities of the classroom and help address misconceptions that faculty may hold of students

(Goldschmidt & Ousey, 2006). Throughout the year, schools or faculties could also provide

seminars, tutorials and workshops that focus on topics such as study skills, reading, writing, and

critical analysis.

Initially for these strategies to “work” and be effective at the classroom level, faculty

must be culturally sensitive and aware of the various groups that are present within their

classrooms. There needs to be an intention to modify teaching practices and create

accommodations for this special population. If institutions will not offer cultural training, it still

needs to be the responsibility of teachers to get to know their students, their cultural

backgrounds, their previous educational/work experience, and their interests. I personally like to

use journal reflections or small group discussions to achieve this; however, numerous other

strategies are possible here. Another way that teachers can be culturally sensitive is to avoid

stereotypes and generalizations based on culture (e.g., all Asian students excel in math); this

enables faculty to view their students as individuals with their own unique abilities versus

tagging perceptions based on culture. Other strategies that I have personally used in class

include:

Make expectations clear—provide a course outline at the start of the semester and

dissect it with your class (Andrade, 2006).

Speak slowly during lectures (pace can be an issue for international and immigrant

students because of language and idioms).

Pause during lectures to assess understanding and comprehension. This can be

achieved through “checkpoints” or questions that are posed during the lecture to

assess a concept before moving on to the next.

Recap the lecture and emphasize the key points.

Pick examples that are culturally sensitive; do not make any assumptions regarding

understanding; also, avoid using slang (Andrade, 2006).

Write key terms on the board (engage the verbal and visual).

Post lectures and materials ahead of time online; that way students can prepare by

reading and highlighting any possible issues/questions.

Provide time in class to work on assignments and ask related questions; students can

also assist one another by working in groups, as group interaction is seen as desirable

by students as it not only helps them academically but it also enhances cultural

understanding and communication (e.g., slang phrases and idioms; Campell & Li,

2007 as cited in Somal, 2011).

Create a classroom environment where students are comfortable talking about

themselves and know that their contributions matter to the learning of others; that way

they will want to share their thoughts, experiences, or feelings in response to issues

presented in lecture.

Provide opportunities for meeting (i.e., office hours, after class) for students to come

and ask questions privately. This not only offers academic support but can be an

emotional support as well.

Always provide feedback on assignments, providing as much detail as possible.

Offer extra help and guidance by offering out-of-class sessions, such as holding

tutorials. Students become exposed to the learning material again, increasing

comprehension and understanding.

Concluding Remarks

The past 2 decades have seen tremendous expansion and understanding in the use of

cultural neuroscience to study social and cognitive processes in order to understand human

diversity due to culture (Fiske, 2000 as cited in Ames & Fiske, 2010). Although these findings

may be not be applicable to all fields, within the field of education one has to take note of the

relevance of these findings to today’s multicultural and diverse classrooms in order to improve

educational practices and pedagogy (Ames & Fiske, 2010). A reciprocal relationship between

research on learning and educational practice needs to be established in order to help identify

effective solutions. It is time for higher education institutions, teachers, the curriculum, and

education as a whole to be better informed with neuroscientific insights.

References

Ames, D. L. and Fiske, S. T. (2010), Cultural neuroscience. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,

13: 72–82.

Andrade, S. M. (2006). International students in English-speaking universities. Journal of

Research in International Education, 5(2), 131–154.

Becker, B. C. (1986). Reasons for lack of argumentation and debate in the Far East. International

Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 75–92.

Berry, W. J. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An

International Review, 46(1), 5–68.

Cervatiuc, A. (2009). Identity, good language learning, and adult immigrants in Canada. Journal

of Language, Identity, And Education, 8(4), 254–271.

Chester, A., Burton, L., Xenos, S., & Elgar, K. (2013). Peer mentoring: Supporting successful

transition for first year undergraduate psychology students. Australian Journal of

Psychology, 65, 30–37.

Euston, R. D., Gruber, J. A., & Bruce, L. M. The role of medial prefrontal cortex in memory and

decision making. Neuron, 76(6), 1057–1070.

Goh, J., & Park, D. (2009). Culture sculpts the perceptual brain. Progress in Brain Research,

178, 95–111.

Goldschmidt, M.M., & Ousey, L.D. (2006). Jump start to resolving developmental immigrant

students’ misconceptions about college. RTDE, 22(2), 16–30.

Gunderson, L., D’Silva, A.R., & Odo, M.D. (2012). Immigrant students navigating Canadian

schools: A longitudinal view. TESL Canada Journal, 29(6), 142–156.

Han, S., Northoff, G., Vogeley, K., Wexler, B., Kitayama, S., & Varnum, M. (2013). A cultural

neuroscience approach to the biosocial nature of the human brain. Annual Review of

Psychology, 64, 335–359.

Heft, H. (2013). Environment, cognition, and culture: Reconsidering the cognitive map. Journal

of Environmental Psychology, 33(1), 14–25.

The immigrant experience. (2002, December 12). Canada and the World Backgrounder, 68, 1–

35. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/210208556?accountid=39331

Immordino-Yang, M. (2011). Implications for affective and social neuroscience for educational

theory. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 98–103.

Ji, L., Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. (2000). Culture, control, and perception of relationships in the

environment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(5), 943–955.

Johnson, E. (2008). Ecological systems and complexity theory: Toward an alternative model of

accountability in education. Complicity: An International Journey of Complexity and

Education, 5(1), 1–10.

Kitayama, S., & Park, J. (2010). Cultural neuroscience of the self: Understanding the social

grounding of the brain. SCAN, 5, 111–129.

Koizumi, H. (2004). The concept of ‘developing the brain’: a new natural science for learning

and education. Brain & Development, 26, 431–441.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion,

and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253.

Nisbett, R., & Miyamoto, Y. (2005). The influence of culture: Holistic versus analytic

perception. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 9(10), 467–473.

Nisbett, R., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought:

Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108(2), 291–310.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). An “ABC” of the brain.

Data retrieved January 25, 2014 from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/

Park, D., & Gutchess, A. (2002). Aging, cognition, and culture: A neuroscientific perspective.

Neuroscience and Behavioural Reviews, 26, 859–867.

Park, D., & Huang, C. (2010). Culture wires the brain: A cognitive neuroscience perspective.

Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 391–400.

Posner, M., & Rothbart, M. (2005). Influencing brain networks: Implications for education.

Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(3), 99–103.

Sinacore, A., Park-Saltzman, J., Mikhail, A., & Wada, K., (2011). Falling through the cracks:

Academic and career challenges faced by immigrant graduate students. Canadian

Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 45(2), 168–187.

Somal, M. K., (2011). Understanding the experiences of international students to support and

address their needs (Master’s thesis). Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario.

Stedman, N., & Adams, B. (2012). Identifying faculty’s knowledge of critical thinking concepts

and perceptions of critical thinking instruction in higher education. NACTA, 9–14.

Yu, A. B., & Yang, K. S. (1994). The nature of achievement motivation in collectivist societies.

In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism

and collectivism: Theory, methods, and applications (pp. 239–250). London: Sage

Publications.