3.3.1 How might mismatches between a student's or group's interaction patterns and those of the school be contributing to the puzzling situation?

Norms for social interaction are part of every culture, and cultures vary widely in social interaction norms. Moreover, norms for social interaction are often out of conscious awareness, i.e., part of "tacit" culture." This means that everyone has expectations for how they and others should interact, but that these often may be hard to explicitly articulate.

These issues are potentially significant in schools because interaction between teachers and students is a central component of schooling. Middle class European American norms for social interaction prevail in schools in the United States. Students from other cultural backgrounds may have learned other norms for social interaction. This can have several consequences for students.

In situations where teachers and students have different norms for social interaction, students' patterns of interaction may be labeled as wrong or inferior. Over time, negative labeling (and the creation of "borders" in relation to interaction patterns) can contribute to student resentment and resistance (see Erickson, 1993), which can contribute to students' disengagement from school. Another possibility is that misunderstandings or misinterpretations, by either teachers or students, may occur. Repeated instances can have detrimental consequences for students. Even if misunderstandings or misinterpretations do not occur, students may feel uncomfortable, like they do not "fit" in the school environment.

Shirley Brice Heath's (1982, 1983) research in the southeastern United States is an important example of the kind of research upon which this perspective is based. She was invited to work in the working-class African American community of Trackton because parents there were concerned that their students were not doing well in school. Heath's study eventually included Trackton, Roadville (a working-class European American community), and the middle class "townspeople" (who included many teachers). She documented differences in the ways people in Trackton, Roadville, and the town used oral and written language. Her examination of the implications of these differences for students' experiences in school addressed issues of social class as well as ethnicity.

A considerable body of research on language and schooling exists. Several books (Cazden, 2001; Corson, 2001; Wolfram, Adger, & Christian, 1999) provided broad overviews of research and practice related to social interaction and language in schools. Au (1993, pp. 92-155) applied this cultural perspective to literacy instruction. Ballenger (1999, pp. 31-40) presented a teacher-research study that focuses on cultural differences in the language of control, and the Brookline Teacher Research Seminar (2004) presented a collection of teacher research studies on language and literacy. For a discussion of the use of African American Vernacular English (also called Ebonics) in classrooms, see Perry and Delpit (1998).

Wolfram, Adger, and Christian (1999, pp. 95-96) presented a useful checklist of possible areas in which there may be culturally-based differences in interaction patterns. These include nonverbal and verbal behavior related to activities such as explaining, requesting, apologizing; turn-taking, and responding.

As mentioned previously, in examining possible cultural mismatches it is very important to remember that your goal is to understand, not to judge. Because this CIP step most likely will involve examining perspectives and experiences that are different than your own, it is especially important to remind yourself of this if you are using this cultural perspective in your CIP study.

Success Stories & CIP Studies Related to Mismatches Between Cultures

Consider next question: 3.3.2 
Gather information on this question: 4.3.1