Eloise Hockett, Linda Samek and Scot Headley

1. Cultural Humility: A Paradigm Shift
Through
Global Engagement Experiences
Eloise Hockett, Linda Samek, Scot Headley
Presented at the ICCTE conference
Azusa Pacific University
May 25, 2012

2. Who are we?: 3 educators from George Fox University
Global engagement with common global experiences in Kenya

3. Global Engagement
GFU’s commitment:
Engaging Globally and Connecting Culturally: We
value worldwide experiential learning aimed at
understanding and improving the human condition.
We desire to connect genuinely with people from
diverse cultures both locally and globally through
relationships and reciprocal teaching and learning.
(George Fox University Website)

4. Collaborative work even at the governmental level

5. What is the result of our work?
Wrestling with the terminology:
Cultural awareness: “...a cognitive function, not
necessarily involving an emotional component”
(Hardy and Laszlosfly, 1995)
Cultural intelligence: “ a person’s capability for
successful adaptations to new cultural settings”
(Early & Ang, 2003)

6. Cultural sensitivity: “a capacity to relate to
differences in a manner that is sensitive and
respectful....the capacity to respond to culturally
different material in a tactful, respectful, and
genuine way....invites us to examine the impact
of our own culture of origin on our manner of
relating to cultural differences” (Hardy and
Laszlosfly, 1995)

7. A Paradigm Shift
Cultural Humility
• A lifelong commitment to self-evaluation and
self-critique, to redressing the power imbalances
in the patient-physician dynamic, and to
developing mutually beneficial and
nonpaternalistic clinical and advocacy
partnerships with communities on behalf of
individuals and defined populations (Tervalon &
Murray-Garcia, 1998).
• Humble reflection on how one’s knowledge is
always partial, incomplete, and inevitably biased”
(Wear, 2008).

8. • Reynoso-Vallejo (2009) contrasted cultural
competence with humility by equating
competence with knowledge and humility
with understanding.

9. Cultural Humility Applied in Education
Reflecting on our experiences:
Reflective practice allows for the educator or
practitioner to further assess the motives and
outcomes of their work, which can lead to
further growth and development as a
professional. The reflective process involves
examining one’s own behaviors and identifying
how those behaviors impact our responses and
future work (Osterman & Kottman, 1993).

10. Cultural Humility and Application to
Classroom Practice
Reflections of Educator 1
• Ausland’s (2010) framework:
– Staying for Tea: building honest relationships
– Process Matters: people are at the center of the
process
– Focus on Values: community vision based on their
values
– Check your Filter: See Christ in all
(names, faces, stories)
– Cultivate a Servant’s Heart: eye-level work; keeping
our pride aside

11. • Focus on relationships: How well do I know
my students, their names and stories?
• Teaching holistically-the entire student: head,
heart, and hands
• Not making general assumptions about my
students
• Careful and intentional listening

12. Cultural Humility and Application to
Personal Worldview
Reflections of Educator 2
Cultural Humility and Participatory Continuum
(Corbett and Fikkert, 2009).
• Coercion--------------Doing to
• Compliance----------Doing for
• Consultation---------Doing for
• Cooperation---------Doing with

13. • Co-learning---------------Doing with
• Community Initiated---Responding to

14. Applications
• SOE Diversity Committee: focus of the work
• Director of Office of Services to Communities
• Challenges Public School policies as related to
gender identification

15. Cultural Humility
What would be the implications in our
classrooms?

16. References
• Ausland, A. (2010). Staying for tea: Five principles for the
community service volunteer. The Global Citizen: A Journal
for Young Adults Engaging the World Through Service, 2.
Retrieved from www.kristafoundation.org
• Corbett, S. and Fikkert, B. (2009). When helping hurts: How to
alleviate poverty without hurting the poor and yourself. Chicago:
Moody Press.
• Early, C.P. & Ang, S. (2003). Cultural intelligence: Individual
interactions across cultures. Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA.
• George Fox University (2012). Mission statement. Retrieved from:
http://www.georgefox.edu/about/mission_vision_values/index.htm
l
• Hardy, K. & Laszlosfly, T. (1995). The cultural genogram: Key to
training culturally competent family therapists. Journal of Marital
and Family Therapy, 21(3), 227-237.

17. • Osterman, K.F. & Kottman, R.B. (1993). Reflective practice
for educators. Corwin Press: Newbury Park, CA.
• Reynoso-Vallejo, H. (2009). Support Group for Latino
Caregivers of Dementia Elders: Cultural Humility and Cultural
Competence. Ageing International, 34(1-2), 67-78. Retrieved
from http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s12126-
009-9031-x
• Tervalon, M. & Murray-Garcia, J. (1998). Cultural humility
versus cultural competence: A critical distinction in defining
physician training outcomes in multicultural education.
Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 9(2),
117-125.
• Wear, D. (2008). On outcomes and humility. Academic
Medicine, 83(7), 625-626.

18. Contact Information
• Eloise Hockett
– ehockett@georgefox.edu
• Linda Samek
– Lsamek@georgefox.edu
• Scot Headley
– sheadley@georgefox.edu