As Cited by Helmer and Eddy ( 2012), Else Hamayan has imagined a culture in the form of an iceberg that is divided into different layers with  values and belief systems located at the base of the cultural iceberg, people's attitudes and behavior as the middle layer and taste for arts, food and dress to be the top of the iceberg. Therefore, it is crucial for educators to develop an in-depth understanding of the key elements that constitute culture and what could be some of the misunderstandings that could occur as a result of cultural diversity among learners.

 

 According to Hofstede& Hofstede (2005), there are five dimensions for a culture that reflect differences among different cultural backgrounds:

 

1.Power Distance: Different cultures perceive teacher-student relationships in a different light. For example, in the Asian culture, as in Japan, Korea, China, and Vietnam, a teacher is perceived and looked upon in great reverence very close to a king or a father. Students are quite reluctant to voice their opinions in class or challenge the information that their teacher’ provide them with. In contrast, North American education appreciates social constructivist learning theories that encourage students to “ bring teachers’ knowledge into question” ( Phuong-Mai, Nguyen, Terlouw & Pilot, 2006, p.5). This is reflected in students’ attitudes in class who find it difficult to participate in class discussions.

 

2. Individualism-Collectivism: The former approach encourages individuals to look after themselves and their immediate family, which contrasts with collectivist societies that encourage teamwork where the individuals disregard their personal desires for the sake of creating better harmony with the group. While North American culture is identified as one that encourages individualism, some of the countries that celebrate a collectivist approach are most of the Asian countries like China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. However, Phuong-Mai, Nguyen et al. ( 2006) highlight a contradiction that is worth mentioning, as, for example, Korean students have been found to prefer working individually and avoid group work if possible. Similarly, competition in China is more emphasized than cooperation, which explains why students coming from these cultural backgrounds prefer to work individually rather function in a group learning environment.

 

 

3.Masculinity-Femininity: In several cultures, there is a clear distinction between male and female roles where females are expected to be more submissive to the male figures in their lives. This can be noticed in the classroom where male students could be more dominant in their participation than their female peers, which inhibits the female students to showcase their full potential in class discussions (Helmer& Eddy, 2012,Phuong-Mai, Nguyen et al. 2006,  Norton, 2000).

 

4.Uncertainty avoidance: Members of a certain culture could feel threatened by vague situations which could closely be related to different learning styles where some cultural backgrounds prefer rote learning. In such cases, students expect to be spoon fed and act more like passive recipients of knowledge rather than active participants in the learning process. This could interfere with accepting self-directed learning and the notion of being an autonomous learner, which is an emphasized notion for adult learning in the North American education system.

 

5.Short-long Vs. term-time orientation: This is associated with the notion of time as to monochromic and polychromic cultural approaches to time. In a monochromic approach, punctuality, promptness and measures units of time are highly valued. Conversely, a polychromic approach which exists in some cultures tends to “give relationships priority over artificial clock time” where time is perceived as “servant and tool of people” not the other way around (Phuong-Mai, Nguyen et al. 2006, p.12, Helmer & Eddy, 2012).

 

It is worth mentioning that the five dimensions that define a culture are to a great extent equivalent to the five cultural continua: assertiveness- compliance, dominance- submission, disclosure-privacy, direct communication vs. indirect communication, flexible time-time as a commodity. ( Helmer & Eddy, 2012)