Analysis of the Components

Several concepts become clear in looking at the six components that seemed to distinguish the most inclusive groups that demonstrated complex engagement of ideas. First, each of these components contributed to cutting across ethnocentrism, suggesting that nurturing each component is important for developing patterns for future service. Second, although this discussion has described each component individually, in actual practice there was constant interaction between the six components. For example, cultural and intellectual humility had an impact on student’s cognitive engagement of others’ ideas; and cultural humility in uenced mutual acculturation and the participative stance each person took. ird, the presence of the components in participants lend themselves naturally to extending inclusiveness to cognitive inclusion of ideas which creates an atmosphere of mutual respect and even joy. While participants may continue to disagree, there is a satisfaction in thoughtfully and respectfully exchanging ideas.

Fourth, Tadmor et al. (2009) o er promising evidence that the e ort of attempting to explain and negotiate across cultural di erences results in the development of cognitive abilities for integrative complexity. Such cognitive abilities can serve individuals well who are charged with acculturation to a new culture and the daunting task of contextualizing evangelism and discipleship (Moreau 2018). And last, acculturation literature also suggests that strategies used in multiethnic discussions now will be used in future multicultural encounters (Crisp and Turner 2011; Tadmor, Tetlock, and Peng 2009). is suggests that acculturation patterns used in multiethnic classroom discussion may forecast the strategies that will be used in diverse team discussions on the eld. e lasting impact of interactional patterns is a sobering reminder of the mission educator’s responsibility beyond book knowledge to attending as well to the development of virtues and interactive behaviors that will complement excellent knowledge for successful crosscultural service for the King.

Conclusion is paper describes six critical components and how they impacted how inclusive multiethnic discussion groups were and how complex cognitive engagement was in each multicultural group in an African setting.

Jane Rhoades | 55

A closer look at identi ed socio-cultural factors reveals unique in uences of shared cultural values of respect, hierarchical status, and harmony that students brought to the discussion table. In some cases, the values facilitated the development of the six identi ed components and in some cases, participants had to overcome natural cultural patterns to exhibit these interactional attitudes and behaviors. Further research could be conducted in other multiethnic discussion groups in classrooms or mission settings requiring collaborative problem-solving.

However, the positive in uence of the six components on creating multiethnic groups that demonstrated participative inclusion that extended to cognitive engagement of other’s ideas to solve problems together o ers an inspiring model. e studies’ ndings and associated literature give a glimpse into the possibility for modeling and nurturing the six components in mission students in multiethnic classrooms and maximizing opportunities for discussion for developing healthy patterns of interactional attitudes and behaviors for future service.

Endnotes

1 Jane Rhoades teaches as an adjunct faculty in Biola University’s Cook School of Intercultural Studies. She served with her husband in Zimbabwe, Zambia, and South Africa for almost thirty years with a focus on missions mobilization and training. She has traveled and taught in many other countries and still enjoys new insights gained from teaching in multiethnic classrooms around the world.