FOR A RADICAL CHANGE IN HIGHER EDUCATION

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

108

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

PUBLISHED DATE: - 03-08-2024

https://doi.org/10.37547/tajiir/ NICSPEEP-2024-01-10

PAGE NO.: - 108-119

FOR A RADICAL CHANGE IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Lin Fan

Assistant Professor, College of Management, National Sun Yat-sen University (NSYSU), Taiwan
Email: -

linfan@cm.nsysu.edu.tw

lavanchawee sujarittanonta

Lecturer, Faculty of Science and Technology, Rajamangala University of Technology Phra
Nakhon. Thailand

John C. Walsh

Senior Program Manager, International Business and MIB, Royal Melbourne Institute of
Technology (RMIT), Vietnam

INTRODUCTION

The troublesome impact of screens in higher

education
The inherent characteristics of knowledge work,

when combined with the operation of the Internet

in contemporary society, produce a change in the
dominant paradigm of what constitutes knowledge

work. Since learning is a form of knowledge work,

therefore this change will affect university

education. The current approach to the Internet
and higher education does not account for the

changed conditions of knowledge in a network
society. New directions are needed which will

allow us to make technology and pedagogy choices

for future education better suited to a network
society (Allen and Long 2009). Most educational

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Open Access

Abstract

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

109

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

institutions in developed nations, for example
universities, as well as important political

organisations, such as the EU, emphasise the
importance of knowledge generation and exchange

for the economy. Thus, education is key to launch
and maintain a so-called knowledge society, which

is desirable as economic prosperity appears to be
linked to a corresponding increase in knowledge.

Alvesson (2013) indicates that most governments
link increased knowledge and education with more

effective forms of democracy, an enhanced quality

of life, improved environmental awareness, better
health and reduced crime. Economic and cultural

globalisation has ushered in a new era in higher
education. In global knowledge economies, higher

education institutions are more important than
ever as mediums for a wide range of cross-border

relationships. For the first time in history every
university is part of a single world-wide network

and the world leaders in the field have an
unprecedented global visibility. The specifically

global element in academic labour markets has
gained even more weight since the advent of global

university rankings (Marginson and van der
Wende 2007).
Mobile computing devices and the use of social

media create opportunities for interaction and

collaboration. They allow students to engage in
content creation and communication using social

media and Web 2.0 tools with the assistance of
constant connectivity (Gikas and Grant 2013).

However, it is desirable for students to strike a
balance in the time spent online for academic and

non-academic purposes. The total time on the
Internet is weakly correlated with the time spent

online specifically for academic purposes. For

social science students, a low but significant
positive correlation exists between the overall time

spent online and the time spent on the Internet for
academic research. In a similar analysis carried out

for science students, a negative low correlation was
observed (Ayub et al, 2014). Academic use of the

internet is patterned by a range of potential
influences such as students' wider internet use,

access and expertise, their year of study, gender,
age, ethnic and educational background.

Demographic variables explain much variation in
internet usage (Khan and Awan 2017). Students'

academic internet use is most strongly patterned
along the lines of gender and subject-specialism

rather than other individual characteristics or
differences in technology access or expertise

(Selwyn 2008). Social networking sites such as
Facebook have been widely-adopted by students

and, consequently, have the potential to become a
valuable resource to support their educational

communications and collaborations with faculty.

However, faculty members have a track record of
prohibiting classroom uses of technologies that are

frequently used by students. Students are much
more likely than faculty to use Facebook and are

significantly more open to the possibility of using
Facebook and similar technologies to support

classroom work. Faculty members are more likely

to use more “traditional” technologies such as

email (Roblyer et al. 2010). Indeed there are
significant correlations between technology

literacy and pedagogical practice integration.
Faculty technology training may be maximised for

the integration of pedagogy by using the training
strategy of small group faculty forums with a

trainer (Georgina and Olson 2008). Social media

are increasingly visible in higher education settings
as instructors look to technology to mediate and

enhance their instruction as well as promote active
learning for students. Empirical evidence, however,

has lagged in supporting the claim. Most of the
existing research on the utility and effectiveness of

social media in the higher education class is limited
to self-reported data (e.g., surveys, questionnaires)

and content analyses (Tess 2013).
Characterising the challenges of education on the

internet is a very complex task. We live in an era
marked by online activity. The full use of the

internet’s potential requires designing new

training needs, and must allow for the many

technological trends that impact educational

challenges in both the medium and long term. “Why

talk only about the internet in education when we
could talk about pedag

ogy in general?” This was the

initial question that inspired us. The process of
educational appropriation of technological

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

110

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

functionality calls for a heuristic approach to better
understand the pedagogical dilemmas and

affordances encountered in the educational use of
technology. Given the interest and use of

educational technologies and consequent interest
by researchers, it is often challenging to isolate the

major issues that have been or can be addressed by
academic research. Learning on an educational

platform involves more than just learning using a
neutral technological system; it involves models of

representation of specific knowledge, values and

action that must be visible in pedagogical models.
Beyond the type of platform, the quality of learning

involves other challenges than just good teaching
and the efficient distribution of content (Gros,

Suárez-Guerrero and Anderson 2016).
So the internet, if not adopted in the correct

manner, has harmful effects. We relish screens in

our lives, but we dread their effects on our social
interactions. We open the gates of our schools to all

types of tools, yet we fear it may harm student

performance. The internet deteriorates students’

competences in reading and writing, dehumanises

educational

environments,

distorts

social

interactions between teachers and students and

isolates individuals (Alhumaid 2019). Both
education level and time management have an

impact on internet addiction. Many forces motivate
institutions of higher education, particularly

business schools, to develop and deliver education
via the Internet. The question of how courses and

degree programmes should be designed for
effective online delivery via the Internet is a

challenge that requires a deeper exploration of the
notion of communication (Rungtusanatham et al.

2004).

The challenge of communication

Scholars routinely evaluate communication

methods used to achieve mutual understanding
(van Mulken & Hendriks, 2014). Edmonson and

House (1991) identified that non-native speakers

apply more words to express their thoughts, due to
their lower level of proficiency. van Engen et al.

(2010) found that non-native speakers consume
more time in identifying nuances and differences

when being confronted with a text in a foreign
language. Henderson and Louhiala-Salminen

(2011: 22) state that “unfamiliar communication

patterns of metacommunicative routines

–

which

often occur in interactions with strangers or people
from foreign countries

–

influence interpersonal

perceptions

and

attitudes.

This

is

a

groundbreaking discovery that tells us that

perceptions

depend

on

the

selected

communication type, which has an impact on the

effectiveness of communication. Confrontation to a

foreign language or unfamiliar communication
pattern has the power to shape the effectiveness of

the information exchange (Fredriksson et al, 2006).
Gudykunst & Nishida (2001) identified a strong

correlation between feelings of uncertainty and
perceived effectiveness. Also, interlocutors are

found to be more uncertain when communicating
with unfamiliar people, which happens often in

cross-cultural exchange. Accordingly, Gudykunst &
Shapiro (1996) indicate that being able to manage

feelings of uncertainty in beneficial for the
perceived effectiveness of a communication, and

thus most likely also impacts the actual
effectiveness. Not only do perceptions about the

effectiveness of communication play a major role,

but also the emotions and valuation of the
conversation partner (Mulken, 2010; Henderson &

Louhiala-Salminen, 2011). The actual effectiveness
of a communication is positively correlated to a

favorable evaluation of the conversation partner
(Mulken, 2010). By contrast, Henderson &

Louhiala-Salminen (2011) state that negative
feelings towards the other speaker will most likely

result in a decreased actual effectiveness due to a
lower focus on the goal of the interaction and an

increased attention given to the negative
perceptions of the communication partner.
In sum, research proves that linguistic balance

impacts the formation of perceptions, either

positively or negatively. Hundreds of studies
suggest a correlation between perceptions and

actual effectiveness. Dillard and Ha (2016), for
example, identified a positive correlation between

message effectiveness and information-seeking
behaviour. Perceptions have the power to influence

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

111

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

the actual results.

Cultural contingence

It is impossible to correctly interpret the meaning

of a speaker without knowing the exact context in
which the communication takes place. In addition,

personal tastes shape utterances. Thus while one
person might like canary wine and Beethoven, the

other person in the conversation might not. It

would be more correct to say that “canary wine is

pleasant to me” (Cavell, 2008: 85). Cross

-cultural

communication is defined as the process of

exchanging messages, either verbally or
nonverbally, between people from different

cultural backgrounds (Levine and Adelman, 1982).
It is a skill that builds, promotes and strengthens

relationships across members of different cultures

(Gore 2013). To conduct an intercultural
communication process, a sender, a message and a

receiver are required. Thomas and Peterson
(2018) emphasise the importance of sender and

receiver, as communication is not only about the
mechanical delivery of the message but also subject

to the understanding of the meaning of the
transmitted message, depending on the cultural

environment of both parties. Messages do not only
have to be translated to a foreign language; they

also have to be transferred from one context to
another (Najafbagy, 2008). The probability of

miscommunication to occur increases when
conversation partners do not share a common

language, have different understandings, point of

views, mindsets and approached on doing things
(Ferraro, 2010).
Therefore, communication is always influenced by

a culture’s values, norms and cognitive structures

(Thomas & Peterson, 2018). According to Zhu et al.

(2006), the cultural dimensions of Hofstede (2001)
impact cross-cultural communication, either

directly or indirectly. Also, the dimensions of high
and low context cultures, as provided by Hall

(1976), are relevant for the communication style.

Moreover, the formality, pacing and usage of
euphemism and slang are characterising the

communication style and can therefore impact the
understandability of both interlocutors. Decoding a

message without context is not possible, as the
meaning, to a certain extent, is transferred by the

respective context of the communication. High
context cultures convey their messages implicitly.

There, nonverbal communication is used to a larger
degree or information is internalised in the person,

while the receiver is expected to be able to decode
information correctly. Consequently, only a

minimum of the message is explicit. By contrast,
low context cultures communicate directly, or

explicitly. Therefore, at least the sender of the

communication clearly indicates the actual
meaning of the message to be transmitted. While

Hall (1976) refers to high and low context, Thomas
& Peterson (2018) as well as Ferraro (2010) use

the terms explicit versus implicit communication
to describe the same phenomenon. Thus, there is

no clear distinction between their framework and
the one provided by Hall (1976), especially as the

contemporary authors refer back to the classic
concept of high and low context cultures. Thus, this

is a good example that an identical phenomenon
can be described with different words, even in the

same language. For example, low context
communication would refuse a request by

answering “no”. However, in a high context setting,

the receiver would reply to the identical request
with silence, vague responses, indirect neglecting

or div language (Steers et al., 2013). These
discrepancies in communication styles might cause

disastrous misunderstandings as high context
might not be understood by explicit speakers or, in

return, explicit messages are perceived as rude
(Hall, 1976).
The success of a communication depends on

whether or not the communication partner is

addressed appropriately. Consequently, research
on forms of addressing has been in the focus on

sociolinguistic scholars. This is due to the fact that
the degree of formality used in conversations

impacts the receiver’s perception concerning the

respect, politeness and haughtiness of the message

transmitted. In some languages, subject pronouns
are used to express a certain level of politeness.

Also, the focus of these subject pronouns can
convey information about age, sex, social and

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

112

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

economic status. Thereby, values and cultural
norms can be communicated simultaneously. Some

languages allow different versions of “you”,

address communication partners with their titles

and their last name, thereby implying formality
(Schneider et al., 2014). Mostly, formality refers to

the correct application of the formal and informal

“you” in different languages and cultures (Scheu

-

Lottgen & Hernández-Campoy, 1998; Steers et al.,
2013; Thomas & Peterson, 2018). Addressing

individuals with their last name and titles can have

a significant impact on the flow of the conversation.
For example, in the United States addressing

somediv with their first name creates an informal
and friendly atmosphere. By contrast, in Austria

this approach would be considered as impolite,
offending and unprofessional as first names are

reserved for long-term relationships, such as
family and friends. Certain countries, such as

Germany, Portugal and Italy, use (academic) titles
complementary to the last name. Even in long-term

work relationships, people might still address each
other with their last name and titles as opposed to

the United States, where people are instantly
introduced with their first names (Schneider et al.,

2014). This is due to different expression of status

prevalent in the respective countries. While in
Western economies material wealth plays an

important roles, developing countries might form
status based on other features, for example age.

Failing to address the communication partner
might result in misinterpretation, negative

perceptions and feelings towards the sender of the
message or, in the worst case, a breakdown of the

conversation.
Hall (1990) stresses the importance of time and

timing in communication. Monochronic cultures
consider time a scarce resource, which must not be

wasted. Common practices in these cultures
include intensive scheduling, focusing on one issue

at a time and avoiding interruptions in business
context. By contrast, polychronic societies rate

time as unlimited and simultaneous. Consequently,
their focus is more on human interactions than

time schedules. Thus interruptions may lead to
misinterpretations. For instance, Latin Americans

or Mediterranean Europeans tend to talk in a fast
pace and change the topic frequently (Levine &

Adelman, 1982). Hall and Hall (1990) identify
North America and Europe as predominantly

monochronic cultures whereas Asian and Latin
American countries are clustered as majorly

polychronic.
Euphemisms and metaphors can be used to

paraphrase particular words, sentences or
expressions to circumvent cultural taboos. Thus, it

might be applied for sexual content or natural
functions of the div, for example in relation to

digestion or menstruation (Ferraro, 2010). In this
respect, it is necessary to interpret the context of

the communication to identify whether the speaker
is referring to the literal or metaphoric meaning of

the phrase. Slang and jargon are other forms of
deviance from the standard language to be

considered

in

international

operations.

Furthermore, the mode of speaking in terms of tone

of voice can give implications on the cultural origin

of the speaker (Thomas & Peterson, 2018). While
55% of the message is conveyed by nonverbal cues

and 7% by the verbally issued content, 38% of the
message is transmitted by the tone (Mehrabian,

1981). Pitch, emphasis, speed, volume, accent and
inflection all affect the tone of voice (Eunson,

2012). Boredom, sarcasm, anger affect it too. The
volume of the tone, for example, serves as an

indicator for dominance, timidity or confidentiality
and might change depending on a private or public

setting. High-pitching voices creates an inmate
situation and is mostly used in close relationships,

while low-pitched voices suggest the opposite
(Eunson, 2012).

METHODOLOGY

Our objective was to measure the effects of a screen

ban on student performance in business schools.

Experimental classrooms were designed in two
locations (Thailand and Taiwan) over two

semesters (Fall and Spring), during which mobile

phones, laptops, tablets, desktops and pagers were
forbidden in class. We conducted satisfaction

surveys and focus groups in these locations. We
noticed a sharp increase of grades, and satisfaction

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

113

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

on the rise (reported further).
The history of focus groups can be traced back to

marketing research methods, but they have also

been used in ethnographic research. Our study,
which used this approach as part of data collection,

raised many issues of analysis and interpretation:

in particular, the importance of paying attention to
the sequence of discussions, the individuals

involved, and the social context of the focus group.
Focus groups are not an easy method of collecting

data, since issues of validity and the relationship
between focus group data and other data require

careful consideration. A focus group is a group
interview or discussion with a small group of

individuals, usually numbering between six and ten
people, who meet together to express their views

about a particular topic defined by the researcher.
A facilitator, or moderator, leads the group and

guides the discussion between the participants. In
general, a focus group lasts one and a half to two

hours and an audio recording is made of it.

Sometimes a video is made as well. The audio
recording can be transcribed for the purpose of

analysis. This description of a focus group implies
that both participants and facilitator will be

physically co-present for the discussion (Gilbert
and Stoneman (2016: 302-3).
Prior to the start of the focus group, we provided

each participant with a consent form. All
participants consented. We then collected the

forms and proceeded with the protocol. The

consent form noted that individual responses

would not be reported and that participants’ input

would be aggregated into larger thematic
statements. Once the experimental classroom was

over, we asked students what they thought about
the screen ban.

RESULTS

In Taiwan, the majority shared Melody’s opinion:

Personally, I really enjoyed this time away from my

smartphone… I think it was a stru

ggle for everyone.

But in the end we could concentrate a lot more on

whatever “theory” the teacher wanted to share

with us. Even if it was boring. At least we could
remember the boring theory.

Other students stressed that the reason they

attended classes

wasn’t the content, but possible

business connections. Networking mattered a lot
more than knowledge. As John, a second-year MBA

student, put it:

I value practical experience and the rest is “blabla”,

if you know what I mean, a bit of a waste of time
really. What I loved in our programme is the

internship with a company before we can graduate,
which, regardless of whether you start working for

them after you graduate or not, is still really
helpful. You have that thing under your belt before

you actually start applying for jobs.
Sophia similarly insisted on practical experience as

a major strength, followed closely by the sense of

community they had as students.

I mean, not being able to use the internet in class…

I don’t really care, right? I can catch u

p on my Insta

later. These days I’m very much into Club House [a

radio-

like application] and if I’m afraid of missing

anything, I can always ask Jane [her classmate] to

keep my phone and I’ll listen anyway through my

pods [tiny headphones] without the lecturer

noticing. The screen ban was a good thing, and not
an issue for me. I got A for my presentation and A+

in the final examination. Whatever lesson we have

isn’t as important as the connections we get. I
always ask myself: “so what? What’s the take

-away

here?” And I find that as LinkedIn says, it’s not what

you know but who you know that will get you a job.
Essentially tied as a leading motivator is the

perception that pedagogy is improved by the
unique characteristics of a real discussion, rather

than Powerpoint-based monologue. There are
several dimensions to this. Self pacing for the

students was mentioned frequently. But so was the

ability to interact more, and more personally, with
students. As Elon said,
You begin to learn about the work habits of your

classmates very quickly and I think you get to know

them, because you’re dealing with them in a verbal

way as opposed to chatting online… You have these

interactions in the classroom, you can really get to

know your teacher and participate with classmates
along much more.

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

114

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

Paul concurred:

Thanks to the screen ban, I get to know my

classmates better because I spend so much more

time with them because when they type stuff on
their phones, they ignore you. The professor gets

much more input from us, and you gets to know us

better.
Tiffany summarised this idea in the Taiwanese

classroom:

It’s not just deeper, we’re becoming more creative.

Do you know I didn’t know I could do it? I didn’t

know that I knew so much.
As Sophia pressed her for clarification, she added:

I mean, it’s about concentration. Now I’m happy I

can follow the course without being disturbed, and

learn about Hofstede’s cultural strategies and

Porter’s five forces, even though it will never use it

in my real career. But having an idea that this exists

is good, because when I’m

back home I can check it

out from Wikipedia. When my professor taught us

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs last term, I was
distracted by some of my friend’s posts and

messages, and I couldn’t focus. I quickly forgot

what this was about.
Mentioned frequently as an advantage of the

medium is its support for the emergence of a

learning community among the students (in both
Thai and Taiwanese contexts). One faculty member

who experimented the screen ban said that
students formed better relationships with other

students than they would if they were in an online
environment.
That's kind of a motivator for me because I feel I get

closer to students. One of the things that I like about
the no-screen classroom is it encourages the

instructor to use creativity to create interesting

things which we don’t always do online. It’s

enhancing creativity on the part of the instructor.
His colleague, who joined the focus group because

he saw us during lunch break, explained:
You bet. I have to think a lot about how to motivate

students to catch up with readings and
assignments. It was really challenging for me and I

really enjoyed it and I find many different ways to
motivate them. That was the reason that I really

like a normal conversation without PowerPoint,
YouTube, Netflix or I dunno what Pokemon activity

we always feel we need to deliver. I had to think. It
was a big challenge for me to motivate them. It was

kind of an experiment for me. If you’re asking me if
I love it, I’d say “yeah, kinda”, and when I think

again, I’d rather go for a strong “yeah, defo”. We

need to talk more and show less. We need to

develop their thirst for knowledge [he guffaws]
The first faculty member echoed the sentiments of

an instructor who described
the challenge of a classroom without technology... I

just happened to enjoy using words and jokes

instead… Okay, yeah, sure, okay, occasionally it was

frustrating, I’m not gonna deny that… But come
on… at the end of the day… We also save time on

class prep, right? [he snorts] What new ways can I
use

that I haven’t used before? If you’re Korean like

me, you don’t know what appeals to Taiwanese
students. Personally, I think that the technology…

after a while, even if you use Netflix, it can get
repetitive. So I just mention my favourite series, Dr.

X, and if they want to watch it after class then so be

it! Why should I always be the “textbook guy”? I’m

serious but I also have a life, and my life doesn’t
revolved around teaching. I’m also a father, see?

And do you think I will teach Maslow to my kids?
Hell no. We have to be more human. We have to

talk, go to restaurants and so on. I play mobile

games with my kids, but only while waiting for the

food. When the food is served, I tell them to “focus”

on the food. It’s a temporary ban [he laughs]… And

after dinner, fine, we just watch the end of an

episode or something if we have time but we won’t
start another episode. Otherwise it’s endless. It

never stops.
Several faculty and students spoke very

passionately about the fact that they felt that they

worked harder (and did a better job) without

PowerPoint or material from websites in the
classroom. However, their work was devalued or

stigmatised by the administration and their peers
for not using technology. For example, one

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

115

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

instructor lamented:
I have a huge problem about lack of recognition

from the community.... Lack of recognition from my

peers. All of my buddies in my school of

management, they all laugh at me, because I don’t

use the power of sounds and images. They say a

picture tells a thousand words. Yeah? But I draw
charts and write words on the whiteboard. They

think it’s so lame. As if I'm not doing anything. So I

wonder whether the administrators also think that

way, that we are getting away with bullshit

teaching... Anyway, that’s okay with me. Th

e point

is that people all laugh at me, they think that I’m

lazy, okay then, so be it.
The Korean faculty member jumped in:
Not only peers and administration, I think there's a

general stigma like “1980s

-

degree” kind of thing.

Among the significant comments that were

contributed during the discussions included the

point that convenience wasn’t always a factor for

students. Saving travel time was not always the

priority. Instead, the overwhelming motivation to
attend classes was career/personal advancement.

They have had positive experiences with their
previous education, and they seek more education,

because they understand that it will make them
more worthy and valued in the workplace. As

Saisuri says in Bangkok,
Of course I could save a lot of time with distance

learning! But staying behind a screen isn’t always

motivating. I enjoy seeing people and talking to

them in the real life, rather than through chats,
even if these days we have lots of cute stickers and

video clips to s

hare… Still, I think seeing someone’s

face and hearing her laugh or complain is part of

what makes campus life attractive. So, yeah, I think
we can also do both? A bit of real-life classroom, a

bit of virtual classroom: the MOOC, right? Like my
friend Mook in Pattaya [Laughter]
Overall, it appears that utilitarian self-interest

doesn’t necessarily drive their enrolment in

business schools. They also want, as Sophia said

repeatedly, “fun”:

How am I going to be motivated if the class isn’t

fun? I only want

three things after I’ve completed

my MBA courses: a degree, a network, and fun. Is

that too much asking?
Purm from Bangkok echoed her Taiwanese

counterpart:

I’m paying quite a lot for this and I’m not going to

waste it. So if you can give me a passport for a

successful career, hurry and do it! And if we can

have some fun too, I won’t complain [she grins]

Others wanted to prove to themselves that they can

successfully earn a degree - not necessarily because

it will lead to a better job but because it is a lifelong
goal that could not be pursued earlier. Several

members of the focus group felt that incentives and
enablers for prospective college students are

important factors that contribute to a student's
decision. Marketing is often most effective when it

is by word-of-mouth. As a faculty professor tells us,
Colleges can certainly get the word out via their

standard communications; however I think word of

mouth by users of this mode of delivery is the most

effective way. The point 'personal influence' over
more impersonal information sources has been

demonstrated by a lot of research in management
and information systems.
For most students, the major obstacle to higher

education may be the demands and pressures of
their (part-time) work roles and family lives. But

even more challenging is technology, which to
many students remains intimidating. Saisuri insists

on this:

I’ve tried Zoom and I don’t like it. Honestly,

FaceTime is way easier to use. When you’re an
Apple fan like me, you don’t want to downloa

d

another crappy app on your phone. You go with
what you trust. You follow your instinct. These

folks assume we can use silent modes and
background for our videos and whatnot, but if

nodiv trains you, how the heck are you gonna do
it?
Therefore, it seems important to explore

accessibility of various technologies, comfort level

with those technologies and comfort with the
different pedagogies each entails. Fear of

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

116

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

technology, it was felt, could be more of a problem
for individuals over age 30 than for individuals who

are traditional age college students or even those in
their 20s. The Korea professor was very clear on

this aspect:

Gen Z, right, Millenials… They know how to deal

with it. I’m gen X, am I old? I don’t think so! It’s just

that I used to be an expert with my own stuff, and

they keep changing it all the time. Upgrades,
updates, planned obsolescence, faster and faster

chips, 3G to 4G to 5 and 6Gs, well yeah I admit it, I

can’t keep up. It’s like trying to catch a train that’s

not stopping. You run

fast when you’re very young,

but at some point, you know… Even if you’re careful

with your diet… Your muscles just don’t respond,

right? Same thing. You gimme an Amiga, MS-DOS or

Windows 3.1, no problem. I run the machine like a
pro. Even the tiny thing, Tatoo, I can send a phone

number in no time. The next generation, the Nokia
something, I can text with two thumbs and get that

important message across at the speed of light. But

I mean, this tiny Blackberry keyboard - come on,
are you for real? And touch-

screens… Just got used

to my Samsung Galaxy III, but it took me a while all

right. iPhone? Can’t even imagine getting that damn

thing to work.
We could go on with such insightful comments but

we are limited with the word count, and must

provide instead recommendations. Time to wrap
up.

Recommendations and limitations: tips for

further research

The focus group discussion stimulated students

and faculty to think of examples and extensions of
ideas that they otherwise would not have thought

of. Among the most actionable results that we

obtained is the following discovery: people said
they worked harder when everyone was offline,

and when the whiteboard was used instead of
slides. The great majority of students in our two

Thai and Taiwanese samples improved their
grades (92 and 96%, respectively). However, some

instructors felt that their efforts were devalued by
the institution and by many of their colleagues.

Official praise and encouragement from high

administrative levels, which costs nothing, would
go a long way towards eliminating this source of

dissatisfaction.
In terms of the practical implications of the results,

we need to determine generalisability beyond

these first two locations, to a much broader set of

institutions, ideally outside Asia. The concepts of
time and place dependency and fear of technology

are relatively recent issues that require further
research. Age and gender also appear to be issues

of importance. Little discussion in the focus group
centred on the previous educational experiences of

students. Another area that was mentioned only in
passing is potential impact and influence that work

have on a postgraduate student.
Although it might have been possible to conduct

this focus group using video conferencing
equipment, the cost of doing that would have also

been substantial. The latter techniques would have
allowed a focus group to work in a synchronous or

live manner, and would have been possible within
a limited amount of time. But expenses are a real

part of research, and often, the most economical
method becomes the best.

REFERENCES
1.

Alhumaid, Khadija (2019) “Four Ways

Technology

Has

Negatively

Changed

Education”, Journal of Educational and Social

Research, 9: 10-20.

2.

Allen, Matthew and Long, Jane (2009)

“Learning

as

knowledge

networking:

conceptual foundations for revised uses of the

Internet in higher education”, in , C

raig

Douglas, W.S. Grundfest and Jon Burgstone
(Eds), International Conference on Education

and Information Technology, pp. 652-657.San
Francisco: Newswood.

3.

Alvesson, M. (2013). The triumph of emptiness.

Consumption, higher education & work
organization. Oxford, UK. Oxford University

Press.

4.

Ayub, Ahmad Fauzi Mohd, Hamid, Wan

Hamzari Wan and Nawawi, Mokhtar Hj. (2014)

“Use of Internet for Academic Purposes among

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

117

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

Students in Malaysian Institutions of Higher

Education”, Turkish Online Journal of

Educational Technology, 13 (1): 232-241.

5.

Cavell, S. (2008). Must we mean what we say?

Updated Edition. Cambridge, UK. Cambridge

University Press.

6.

Crespo-Fernandez, E. (2006). The language of

death:

Euphemism

and

conceptual

metaphorization in Victorian obituaries. SKY

Journal of Linguistics 19(1), pp. 101-130.

7.

Dillard, J.P., & Ha, Y. (2016). Perceived message

effectiveness predicts information-seeking
behaviour. Communication Research Reports

33(4), pp. 356-362.

8.

Edmondson, W., & House, J. (1991). Do learners

talk too much? The waffle phenomenon in

interlanguage pragmatics. In R. Phillipson, E.
Kellerman, L. Selinker, M. Sharwood Smith & M.

(Eds.), Foreign/Second language Pedagogy
Research (pp. 273-287). Clevedon: Multilingual

Matters.

9.

Engen van, K.J., Baese-Berk, M., Baker, R.E.,

Choi, A., Kim, M., & Bradlow, A.R. (2010). The
wildcat corpus of native- and foreign-accented

English: Communicative efficiency across
conversational dyads with varying language

alignment profiles. Language and Speech,
53(4), pp. 510-540.

10.

Eunson, B. (2012). Communicating in the 21st

century, 3rd edition. Milton, Qld: John Wiley

and Sons Australia.

11.

Ferraro, G. P. (2010). The cultural dimension of

international business, 6th edition. Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

12.

Fransen, K., Haslam, A., Mallet, C.J., Steffens,

N.K., Peters, K., & Boen, F. (2017). Is perceived
leadership

quality

related

to

team

effectiveness? A comparison of three
professional sports teams. Journal of Science

and Medicine in Sport 20(8), pp. 800-806.

13.

Fredriksson, R., Barner-Rasmussen, W., &

Piekkari, R. (2006). The multilingual
corporation as a multilingual organization: The

notion of a common corporate language.
Corporate Communications: An International

Journal 11, pp. 406-423.

14.

Georgina, David A. and Myrna R. Olson (2008)

“

Integration of technology in higher education:

A review of faculty self-

perceptions”, The

Internet and Higher Education, 11 (1): 1-8.

15.

Gilbert and Stoneman (2016) Researching

Social Life, Los Angeles: SAGE.

16.

Gikas, Joanne, and Michael M. Grant (2013)

“Mobi

le computing devices in higher

education: Student perspectives on learning

with cellphones, smartphones & social media”,

The Internet and Higher Education, 19: 18-26.

17.

Gore, V. (2013). The importance of cross-

cultural communication. The IUP Journal of Soft

Skills 7(1), pp. 59-65.

18.

Gros, Begoña, Suárez-Guerrero, Cristóbal and

Terry Anderson (2016) “The Internet and
Online Pedagogy”, International Journal of

Educational Technology in Higher Education,
13: 38.

19.

Gudykunst, W.B. & Shapiro, R.B. (1996).

Communication in everyday interpersonal and
intergroup encounters. International Journal of

Intercultural Relations 20(1), pp. 19-45.

20.

Gudykunst, W.B. (1993). Toward a theory of

effective

interpersonal

and

intergroup

communication:

An

anxiety/uncertainty

management (AUM) perspective. In R.
Wiseman & J. Koester (Eds.), Intercultural

Communication Competence (pp. 33-71).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

21.

Gudykunst, W.B., & Nishida, T. (2001). Anxiety,

uncertainty, and perceived effectiveness of

communication across relationships and
cultures. International Journal of Intercultural

Relations 25(1), pp. 55-71.

22.

Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture, 1st edition.

Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

23.

Hall, E. T. (1990). The silent language, 2nd

edition. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

118

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

24.

Hall, E. T., & Hall, M. R. (1990). Understanding

cultural differences: Germans, French and

Americans, 1st edition. Yarmouth, ME:
Intercultural Press.

25.

Henderson, J.K., & Louhiala-Salminen, L.

(2011). Does language affect trust in global

professional

context?

Perceptions

of

international business professionals. Rhetoric,

Professional Communication and Globalization
2(1), pp. 15-33.

26.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences:

Comparing values, behaviours, institutions and
organizations across nations, 2nd edition.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

27.

Khan, Habib Ullah, and Awan, Mahmood A.

(2017) “Possible factors affecting internet

addiction: a case study of higher education

students of

Qatar”, International Journal of

Business Information Systems, 26 (2).

28.

Levine, D. R., & Adelman, M. B. (1982). Beyond

language: Intercultural communication for

English as a second language, 2nd edition. New
Jersey, USA: Prentice Hall.

29.

Louhiala-Salminen, L. & Rogerson-Revell, P.

(2010). Language matters

–

An introduction.

Journal of Business Communication 47(2), pp.

91-96.

30.

Marginson, S. and M. van der Wende (2007)

“Globalization and Higher Education”, OECD

Education Working Papers , No. 8.

31.

Mehrabian, A. (1981). Silent messages: Implicit

communication of emotions and attitudes, 2nd
edition, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

32.

Mulken van, M. (2010). The pleasure of foreign

language. Journal for Language Control 32, pp.

268-279.

33.

Mulken van, M., & Hendriks, B. (2014). Effective

communication

modes

in

multilingual

encounters:

Comparing

alternatives

in

computer mediated communication (CMC).

Multilingua, 36 (1), pp. 89-111.

34.

Najafbagy, R. (2008). Problems of effective

cross-cultural communication and conflict

resolution. Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics,
Economics, and Culture 15(4/1), pp. 146-150.

35.

Roblyer, M.D., McDaniel, Michelle, Webb,

Marsena, Herman, James and Vince Witty

(2010) “Findings on

36.

Facebook in higher education: A comparison of

college faculty and student uses and

perceptions of social networking sites”, The

Internet and Higher Education, 13 (3): 134-

140.

37.

Rogerson-Revell, P. (2008). Participation and

performance

in

international

business

meetings. English for Specific Purposes 27(3),

pp. 338-360.

38.

Rungtusanatham, Manus, Ellram, Lisa M.,

Siferd, Sue P., and Steven Salik (2004) “Toward

a Typology of Business Education in the

Internet Age”, Decision Sciences, 2 (2): 101

-

120.

39.

Scheu-Lottgen, U. D., & Hernández-Campoy, J.

M. (1998). An analysis of sociocultural
miscommunication: English, Spanish and

German. International journal of intercultural
relations, 22(4), pp. 375-394.

40.

Schneider, S. C., Barsoux, J.-L., & Stahl, G. K.

(2014). Managing across cultures, 3rd edition.

Harlow, England: Pearson.

41.

Selwyn, Neil (2008) “An investigation of

differences in undergraduates' academic use of

the internet”, Active Learning in Higher

Education, 9 (1): 11-22.

42.

Steers, R. M., Nardon, L. & Sanchez-Runde, C. J.

(2013).

Management

across

cultures:

developing global competencies, 2nd edition.
New York: Cambridge University Press.

43.

Tess, Paul A. (2013) “The role of social media in

higher education classes (real and virtual)

–

A

literature review”, Computers in Human

Behavior, 29 (5): A60-A68.

44.

Thomas, D. C., & Peterson, M. F. (2018). Cross-

cultural management: Essential concepts. Sage
Publications.

THE USA JOURNALS

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY INNOVATIONS AND RESEARCH (ISSN- 2642-7478)

(SPECIAL ISSUE - NOMMENSEN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL POLITICS, LAW, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, AND
PSYCHOLOGY (NICSPEEP 2024))

119

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajiir

45.

Zhu, Y., Nel, P., & Bhat, R. (2006). A cross

cultural study of communication strategies for

building business relationships. International
Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6(3), pp.

319-341.