Alejandra Alaa

We all think according to our own local software Hofstede.-

A review of literature performed on research of teacher effectiveness in Latin America revealed the somewhat incipient aspect of its condition. At first, the idea of establishing a crosscultural reference analysis between the research models used in Latin America and the predominant ones in the United States seemed appropriate due to my academic and professional background in English as a Second Language (ESL) and Foreign Language Teaching. However, after a thorough study of the aforementioned research, a peculiar trend emerged in the way studies were interpreted and discussed. As a result, I decided to direct my attention to the criteria used as an analytical framework for conducting research on teaching effectiveness and the parameters utilized in order to interpret results. In the following section, I present culture, more specifically certain cultural dimensions of Latin American culture, as a theoretical lens through which these research trends can be not only justified but also analyzed, and even contrasted with the current paradigms of teacher effectiveness in the United States. I argue that cultural aspects within a society such as collectivism/individualism and high or low- power distance have significant impact on the analytical units chosen to be addressed by the research studies. In the case of Latin America, I hypothesize that due to a high presence of collectivism and an elevated sense of power distance (Geertz, 1973) most of the research on teacher effectiveness is done from a collective point of view being the school, or school system for that matter, the analytical unit studied, with a high sense of accountability on principals, administrators and policy makers due to strong power distance issues. On the other hand, the United States being a more individualistic society isolates

Alejandra Alaa the teacher as the analytical unit of study for research purposes and embodies a higher level of accountability on students performance along with the quality, and effectiveness of teaching.

The Element of Culture How is the meaning of quality or success in the life of individuals influenced by prevailing cultural value priorities? In order to answer this question, I decided to delve on the fundamentals of culture as pivotal concept in this endeavor. One of the most renowned and respected definitions of culture as a global concept is the one posited by Hofstede who treats culture as the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another (2001) This definition denotes a segregating connotation, a way in which groups become distinct and establish sociological boundaries making them different from one another in an anthropological sense. From a more inner perspective, (Geertz, 2000) defines culture as a notion that denotes a historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in symbols, a system of inherited conceptions in symbolic forms by means of which people communicate, perpetuate and develop their knowledge about and attitudes towards life Both definitions encompass the role that culture plays in distinguishing behaviors, attitudes and even the decisions made within a society; from another, but also the impact that culture has on the way a particular society thinks and process information. In consequence, the cultural aspect will aid in the interpretation of research trends within Latin American countries and how they differ from those employed in the United States. Moreover, a broad concept like culture encompasses a myriad of elements which have been subject of several typologies and classifications. Most authors and scholars concur in the renowned model of symbols, rituals, artifacts, heroes, values and practices. Among these basic

Alejandra Alaa components of culture some may add more to the list or the terminology might differ but there is a general consensus in regards of these crucial elements. However, when it comes to the comparison of phenomena the similarities and differences between the cultures of an organization, a group, a society, or a nation is often addressed in terms of dimension (Hofstede, 2001). As a result, he identified five independent dimensions of natural cultural differences: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism versus collectivism, masculinity versus femininity, long-term versus short-term orientation. Having outlined these dimensions he then positioned each country studied accordingly with the possibility of having multiple combinations. Many authors such as Aberle, Cohen, Davis, Levy, Driver, and Parsons among others have presented variations and their own taxonomy of their own dimensions of culture. For instance, Schwartz in reply to Hofstedes initial work on cultural comparison provided a typology condensed in what he called a theory of value dimensions on which natural cultures can be compared, and he also widened the scope to include more countries in his study arguing that Schwartz failed to include some that were representative of important regions in the world. (1999). Nevertheless and for the purpose of this study, I will focus on Hofstedes classification of the dimensions of culture as a theoretical stance for interpretation based on the premise that this categorization refer to national cultures as a whole whereas Schwartzs empirical classification leaned more toward individual values. The schema offered by Hofstede called: dimensional model, allows to detect which dimension is responsible for a particular effect and which dimensions are not. The model serves to explain and to help us understand observe similarities and differences between matched phenomena in different countries (Hofstede, 2001, p. 465)

Alejandra Alaa Within this categorization concocted by Hofstede, and based on the functions of the dimensional model, the two specific dimensions of power distance and individualism versus collectivism will constitute the cultural criteria which will attempt to explain the prevalent trends on research effectiveness in Latin America and its similarities or differences with the United States. Individualism and Collectivism: I, teacher versus Teachers R Us According to Hofstede, this dimension describes the relationship between the individual and the collectivity that prevails in any given society, the way people live together with many implications for values and behavior. This is also inextricably linked to societal norms affecting peoples reasoning, decisions and the way many institutions and organizations function ranging from educational, religious, and political to public services and families. In highly collectivist societies, people have a sense of collective identity that makes it natural to adapt to new circumstances and change their views together. It is a sort of cohesive fabric which envelops the individuals tied to a shared value system. The degree of individualism or collectivism expected from the members of a particular society will strongly impact the relationship between the person and the organization to which he or she belongs. In a more collectivist society, the degree of moral dependence to the organization is greater than in those with a more individualistic prevalence. Additionally, the social construct of collectivism can be defined in the words of Hui and Triandis (1986) as the concern by a person about the effects of actions or decisions on others, the sharing of material sharing of nonmaterial resources, the concern about self-presentation and loss of face, the belief in the correspondence of own outcomes with the outcomes of others, and most importantly and for the effects of the present study, the feeling of involvement in and

Alejandra Alaa contribution to the lives of others. An interdependence with sociability. In individualism, there is a prevalence of separation from in-groups and self reliance. (Kim, Triandis, K itiba i, Choi, & Yoon, 1994). In sum, collectivist societies, such as the ones present in China, Malaysia, Philippines and Latin American countries, denotes members who from the moment of birth are integrated into strong, cohesive groups that strive to protect themselves and look out for each other. Conversely, an individualistic nation such as the United States, Canada, and most European countries, the ties among individuals are loose and everyone is supposed to look after him or herself. (Hofstede, 2001). It is because of this distinction and others made by the rest of the cultural dimensions, that a difference in behavior and attitudes can be established between two societies and more specifically, in the way they view issues of accountability and a public structure such as the educational system. In her cornerstone meta-analysis named A Review of Teacher Effectiveness Research in Africa, India, Latin America, Middle East, Malaysia, Philippines and Thailand: Synthesis of Results Avalos (1979) enhances the importance of the teacher as an essential part of the educational process and there is widespread conviction that the quality of an educational system will be only as high as the quality of its teachers. However, the author agrees that times change and the traditional teaching roles have been modified as expectations for education systems generally have evolved. For instance, education has been expected increasingly to contribute to the task of building new societies which unite a variety of linguistic and ethnic groups and which are socially, culturally, and economically as dependent as possible from former colonial or present economic powers as in the case of some African and Latin American countries. Therefore, a teacher must become more than a classroom teacher; he or she must be an

Alejandra Alaa agent of change in their community, and work hand in hand with policy-makers and members of the community. In turn, it is a general assumption that the educational system, as a whole, contributes to national development. Within this type of collectivistic societies, it is also expected that the system responds to the personal and social needs of children and communities. This notion of responsibility set on a conglomerate of agents that constitute the school system, rather than just on the teacher, could be explicated not only from a collectivistic and cultural perspective but also as a result of foreign influence, specifically from the research models utilized in countries like the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom in the sixties, seventies and eighties. The seminal work of Coleman (1966) and Jencks (1971), in the United States and the Plowden Committee (1967), in the United Kingdom drew attention to schools and their effects on learning outcomes and academic results on students. Later, studies by Weber (1971), Edmonds (1979) and Brookover (1979) in the United States, showed the undisputable effects of school in children, especially those who came from low socio-economic status. The literature reviewed on schools in third-world countries revealed that the effects of schools are more powerful in these countries than in developed ones. (Heyneman & White,

1986). The foreign investigative influence started to show in some research studies conducted in countries like Chile, Mexico, and Peru during the early 1980s. These studies focused on schools as analytical units portraying a significant impact of schools in academic achievement, in spite of the socio-economic backgrounds of students.(Arancibia, 1992). According to these influential studies, effective schools had two essential features: they were capable of elevating the expected level of academic achievement in students according to their socio-economic status and, on the other hand, they would exhibit a set of internal variables,

Alejandra Alaa which if correctly and integrally placed, could generate better academic outcomes. (Arancibia, 1997). Later on and after the advent of one of the most predominant paradigms for evaluating teaching effectiveness, the process product paradigm, (Dunkin & Biddle, 1982), this too proved to be extremely influential in the educational research in Latin America having a huge impact in the way research is done to date. This is evident in a series of macro and longitudinal studies conducted by UNESCOs regional office in Latin American countries under the initiative and direct supervision of LLECE (Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluacin de la Calidad de la Educacin or Latin American Laboratory of Evaluation of the Quality of Education). Most of these studies focus on assessing the literacy and math skills of grade school students in Latin American countries, measuring learning outcomes, cognitive achievement and school effectiveness. (Reimers, 2007) (Murillo, 2007). However, and in spite this undeniable influence, the unit analyzed does not seem to be the teacher per se, but the school as an institutional network or in some other cases, the educational system as a whole. I argue that this phenomenon may be heavily influenced by the fact that Latin American societies are predominantly collectivistic, and therefore, this cultural aspect might induce a frequent focus of research and accountability on the collective (school, teachers, community, and system) rather than the individual (teacher). In the light of this particular view, Casassus and Arancibia (1996) in (Muoz, 2003), described the factors that influenced the quality of education, considering the findings of several studies conducted in Latin America during the 1990s. They argue that family, more specifically the mother, the principals role, and the teachers actions, strongly influenced the level of achievement in students. From these assertions, it is worth noting the importance given to the

Alejandra Alaa mother figure, denoting in this way, the matriarchal feature predominant in Latin American culture and society. This is another example that illustrates the influence of culture in explaining and interpreting social phenomena. On the other hand, (Ravela, 2002) also considers that by introducing the concept of social context into the effectiveness equation, the weight of the accountability is somewhat lifted off the shoulders of teachers and the evaluation process seems to be more fair. In other words, the element of social context contributes to the general understanding that there external elements that affect education and that ultimately, those inequalities found within the educational system are reverberations of those found in a given society. Continuing with the idea of a social context as a backdrop for research on quality and/or effectiveness, the World Bank adopted a conceptual framework applied in a study performed by (Vegas & Petrow, 2008) about the quality of education in Latin America, to the Colombian context (Banco Mundial, 2008). The aforementioned study summarizes the key factors and policies which affect learning in the region and addresses the issue of raising the level of academic achievement by examining the variables related to students, school and other institutions that interact in order to generate learning. The authors acknowledge that the political and socio-economic context provides a backdrop for these interactions as shown in the following graphic:

Alejandra Alaa

Political, Economic, and Social Context

Educational Policy

Students
Resources and behavior of:

Political Actions, specific programs, and systemic reforms

Schools
Resources and behavior of:

Students and Parents

Educational System
Organization and Institutionalism

Teachers, schools and authorities

Learning

Conceptual Framework
Source: (Vegas & Petrow, 2008)

The graphic above clearly depicts a schema in which the educational system, placed right in the middle and as a representation of a complex network, plays a fundamental role in the learning process. On the other hand, the teacher, located to the side of the diagram and under the heading schools, is portrayed as one of the many elements that converge in the process along with schools, resources and authorities. Supporting this starring role view of schools, Escalante et al (2009) stated in their proposed model for an strategic model of educational management in Mexico, that schools are at the center of any initiative within the educational system. For the proposed model, the authors define educational management as: the tasks performed by the members of the educational community (i.e. principals, teachers, supporting staff, parents and students), geared to the main objective assigned to the school: to foster an environment of

Alejandra Alaa learning and designing the adequate processes so that students can learn according to the objectives and goals of primary education (p. 47). Within this framework, their project called: quality schools program defines a quality school as that one which takes full responsibility collectively (my emphasis) of the learning outcomes of all students, it is committed to the continuous improvement of schooling it is a safe and beneficial institution for the community with the adequate infrastructure, equipment, technology and resources, and contributes to the integral development of its students allowing them to actively participate in their community. In sum, an education of quality, according to these authors, comprises elements such as: social participation, continuous personal development and academic achievement through strategic planning. After the assertions made by these authors, and after the profiles depicted by the research reviewed have been taken into account, it is noticeable that the role schools play in research models employed for quality and teacher effectiveness is quite significant. However, this does not imply in any way, that teachers do not constitute an element of analysis. On the contrary, they are an essential part of the research performed in Latin America, especially addressing issues of incentives, union, certification and policies (Alvarez, 1997) (Vegas & Umansky, 2005) (Schulmeyer, 2002). The focal point here is the degree of importance given to schools as a cornerstone when elaborating research models in Latin America, which is somewhat different to the schema presented in predominant models in the United States such as the process-product paradigm, Shulmans synoptic map and the interpretive model. Although schools are also present in these models, the tendency has been to create more comprehensive and inclusive models aimed to study and analyze a plurality of elements that intervene in the learning process.

Alejandra Alaa In Latin America, as previously stated, the focal point for research in the educational field has been school effectiveness. In this regard, Murillo (2007) expressed that during the last 30 years of the twentieth century a number of studies centered on school effectiveness were produced in Latin America. This is largely due to the consolidation of a scientific research community focused on school effectiveness and improvement, which is gathered in a research network known as the Red Iberoamericana de Investigacin sobre Cambio y Eficacia Escolar (RINACE) (Iberoamerican Network of Research in School Reform and Efficacy). Shulmeyer adds to the school effectiveness model, the prominent role of the system and the State: curricula, programs, and textbooks could be modified, wonderful infrastructures could be built, but without efficient teachers, a real improvement in education cannot be achieved. However, if we studied the educational reforms in Latin America, we observe that the emphasis has been placed on re-dimensioning of the States role within the educational system. (2002, p. 26). The preceding statement corroborates the interest shown on the system and the State by researchers and policymakers, rather than the teacher as an agent of change, in spite of the fact that it is a well-known fact that the need for more professional, efficient, effective and dedicated teachers in the region is markedly urgent. (Riddell, 2008). Consequently, the importance of culture, and more specifically, the

individualism/collectivism dichotomy helps understand the divergences amid these two trends in research (School-system vs. teacher) and the sense of collective responsibility that could be attributed by a strong influence of the local and/or regional culture. As expressed by Chirkov (2009) Cultures also assign meaning to peoples autonomous experience (p. 12). Concluding Remarks

Alejandra Alaa Throughout this brief discussion on common research trends in Latin America and some of the works cited in order to illustrate these tendencies, I have attempted to frame the research behavior within a cultural framework that would explicate the reasons underlying the selection of certain models or research waves such as : school effectiveness, based on the fact that being a highly collectivistic society, the Latin American countries exhibit a strong sense of collective responsibility, assuming therefore, full accountability for the outcomes and implications of their current educational system. It is difficult to predict at this point where the future of research in Latin America is headed, since it is still a novel field. To this date, the research on educational issues and effectiveness is still incipient in many countries of the region as stated by (Muoz, 2003) we can come to the conclusion that the topic of teaching effectiveness is a process which is recently being proposed for public debate However, authors like Fullan (2011), estimates that there will be two main trends: the first one focusing on instructional issues and the second one expanding research and development of a reform of the entire educational system. He predicts that unlike most of the studies carried out in the past decade concentrating on analyzing results, future investigations will focus on delving in the how and the elements of success. Moreover, Escalante et al. (2009) when addressing future implications of research in Mexico and in other Latin American countries, manifest that the proposed main goal of educational reform is to concentrate on a model which strives to focus on schools as an agent of change and the focal point of the system, providing feedback and valuable information in order to establish a course of action. As a result, even after considering some of the projections and future trends of effectiveness, quality and education in Latin America, the overarching theme seems to be the

Alejandra Alaa school as an integral part of the equation, along with active participation of the community. Hence, indicating that the academic achievement -or lack thereof- of the students is a shared responsibility among more than one particular agent. This constitutes a plausible example of the sense of collectivism that characterizes Latin American countries and their societies. References
Alvarez, F. (1997). Qu hay que evaluar de los docentes? : Centro de Investigacin y Desarrollo de la Educacin. Arancibia, V. (1992). Efectividad escolar. Anlisis comparado. Serie de Estudios Pblicos(47). Arancibia, V. (1997). Los sistemas de medicin y evaluacin de la calidad de la educacin. Santiago de Chile. OREALCUNESCO. Avalos, B., & Haddad, W. (1979). A Review of Teacher Effectiveness Research in Africa, India, Latin America, Middle East, Malaysia, Philippines and Thailand: Synthesis of Results. Banco Mundial, C. (2008). La Calidad de la Educacin en Colombia: un anlisis y algunas opciones para un programa de poltica: Unidad de Gestin del Sector de Desarrollo Humano Oficina Regional de Amrica Latina y el Caribe. Recuperado el. Chirkov, V. I. (2009). A cross-cultural analysis of autonomy in education. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 253. Dunkin, M. J., & Biddle, B. J. (1982). The study of teaching. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. Escalante, J., Meja, J., Ramos, J., Villa, M., Aranda, M., & Segundo, M. (2009). Modelo de Gestin Educativa Estratgica. . Fullan, M. (2011). Investigacin sobre el cambio educativo: presente y futuro. Revista Digital de Investigacin Lasaliana, 3, 31-35. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures selected essays (pp. ix, 470 p.). Retrieved from http://www2.lib.ku.edu:2048/login?url=http://hdl.handle.net/2027/heb.01005 Geertz, C. (2000). The interpretation of cultures : selected essays (2000 ed.). New York: Basic Books. Heyneman, S. P., & White, D. S. (1986). The quality of education and economic development: World Bank. Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture's consequences : comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. Hui, C. H., & Triandis, H. C. (1986). Individualism-collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 17(2), 225-248. Kim, U. E., Triandis, H. C., K itiba i, . E., Choi, S. C. E., & Yoon, G. E. (1994). Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications: Sage Publications, Inc. Muoz, M. (2003). Educacin y Efectividad. Revista Iberoamericana de Educacin, 38(3). Murillo, J. (2007). School effectiveness research in Latin America. International handbook of school effectiveness and improvement, 75-92. Ravela, P. (2002). Cmo presentan sus resultados los sistemas nacionales de evaluacin educativa en Amrica Latina? Reimers, F. (2007). Civic education when democracy is in flux: The impact of empirical research on policy and practice in Latin America. Citizenship Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 5-21. Riddell, A. (2008). Factors influencing educational quality and effectiveness in developing countries: A review of research. Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), Germany.

Alejandra Alaa
Schulmeyer, A. (2002). Estado actual de la evaluacin docente en trece pases de Amrica Latina. Trabajo presentado a. Schwartz, S. H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology, 48(1), 23-47. Vegas, E., & Petrow, J. (2008). Raising student learning in Latin America: the challenge for the 21st century: The World Bank. Vegas, E., & Umansky, L. (2005). Improving teaching and learning through effective incentives: What can we learn from education reforms in Latin America. Washington DC: World Bank, 203.