says. Similarly, Pratt et al. (1999) also found a different learning approach
among Chinese learners that may help explain their reluctance to verbalize
their thoughtsin medias res: They initially commit the material to memory;
next they seek to understand the intention, style, and meaning of the mate-
rial. They then try to apply their understanding to situations that call for use
of such knowledge, and finally they enter a deeper level of questioning and
modification of the original material. Whereas the last step in their approach
is verbally interactive by nature, the first three steps may call for more soli-
tary learning and contemplation (which is an important aspect of Chinese in-
tellectual tradition, de Bary, 1983). Clearly, this style is not bound by the im-
mediate verbal exchange at the moment but can extend over a period of days,
weeks, months, and in some cases even several years (as a doctoral student
may publish a paper to challenge his or her mentor’s ideas with which the stu-
dent disagreed several years earlier)!
CULTURAL BELIEFS ABOUT LEARNING:
A NEW WINDOW
The previous brief review shows a rich body of research on learning and cul-
ture even though the bulk of research focuses on Western-Asian compari-
sons. This research has begun to chart important cultural differences in spe-
cific thinking and behavior in learning. However, as a whole, research also
faces some common barriers that prevent us from achieving greater under-
standing of learning in cultural contexts. Two barriers are particularly strik-
ing. The first is our persistent reliance on the use of existing Western concep-
tions to study learning across cultures. While these etic (the outside views) are
necessary for cross-cultural understanding and communication, emic notions
(views of those being studied) are equally essential, therefore must be consid-
ered in research. The latter has not received adequate attention. Second,
bearing on the central theme of this volume, research has been favoring men-
tal processes. The purposive, affective, and moral aspects have not been stud-
ied in sufficient detail, let alone well integrated with mental processes. If our
purpose is to understand intellectual functioning as a whole, then we must
also include these other aspects.
U.S. AND CHINESE BELIEFS: INTEGRATING
PURPOSES, PROCESSES, ACHIEVEMENT,
AND AFFECT
In an attempt to address these inadequacies, Li (2001, 2002a, 2002b, 2003b,
2003c, 2004) conducted a number of studies on U.S. and Chinese cultural be-
liefs about learning. By using open-ended empirical approaches, her data
- AMERICAN AND CHINESE LEARNERS 393