Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Rey Ty, Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Berger, J. (2012). Deconstructing Culture: An Interdisciplinary Critique of Contending Theories of Culture.
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Rey Ty, Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Berger, J. (2012). Deconstructing Culture: An Interdisciplinary Critique of Contending Theories of Culture.

1,054

Published on

Rey Ty, Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Berger, J. (2012). Deconstructing Culture: An Interdisciplinary Critique of Contending Theories of Culture.

Rey Ty, Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Berger, J. (2012). Deconstructing Culture: An Interdisciplinary Critique of Contending Theories of Culture.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,054
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Deconstructing Culture:Static Binary Models & Beyond © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 2. Deconstructing Culture:An Interdisciplinary Critique ofContending Theories of Culture Rey Ty, Michelle Glowacki- Dudka, & Jim Berger Midwest Research to Practice Conference University of Central Oklahoma Edmond, Oklahoma, U.S.A. September 27-29, 2012 © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 3. Rey Ty• Rey Ty, Ed.D., Training Coordinator, Northern Illinois University, International Training Office, DeKalb, IL © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 4. Michelle Glowacki-Dudka• Michelle Glowacki- Dudka, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Ball State University, Muncie, IN © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 5. Jim Berger• Jim Berger, Ph.D. Associate Professor and Coordinator, Western Kentucky University, Adult Education, Bowling Green, KY © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 6. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 7. Q&A1. Please introduce yourself.2. Why are you attending this session?3. What is your idea of culture? What’s your definition? © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 8. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 9. OutlineI. IntroductionII. MethodologyIII. FindingsIV. Conclusion © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 10. Introduction © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 11. Problem © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 12. ProblemAdults engaged in the teaching about and researching society use the concept of “culture” as a valuable tool of analysis.However, a problem arises. While “culture” is an often- used term, it is rarely defined. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 13. ProblemCulture is a difficult concept to generalize or confine through theoretical or practical understandings.For example, the popular understanding of culture problematically equates culture with other descriptors of diversity and ways to categorize people, such as sex, age, color, and ethnicity.Far from having a singular definition, culture is a contested category. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 14. Problem1.While well-known and oftencited, Hofstede’s culturalanalysis is problematic, as itprovides a useful butinsufficient, binary, butimmutable framework. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 15. Problem2. A critical review ofacademic literaturereveals that culture isoften treated as(1) immutable and(2) structurally binary,both of which provideinsufficientexplanations of actuallyexisting socialphenomena andrelations. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 16. Problem 3. Using a post- structuralist deconstructionist stance (Derrida, 1978), this survey of literature reveals that culture is not confined to two ends of a spectrum, but measured along multiple spectrums and© 2012 Rey Ty with much© 2012 Rey Ty complexity.
  • 17. Questions1. What is the critique of Hofstede’s model, which is the dominant view of culture in community, adult, and higher education? © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 18. Questions2. What are the alternative discourses from different disciplines from which a richer understandin g of culture can be attained? © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 19. Questions3. What are the implications of the deeper understanding of culture on the future direction and practice of adult educators and adult learners? © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 20. Objectives1. Todescribe &critique thedominantculturalmodel ofHofstede. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 21. Objectives2. To provide a comprehensive discussion of the concept of culture from different disciplines, such as anthropology, business, history, philosophy, political economy & sociology. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 22. Objectives3. To explain the implications of the deeper understanding of culture on the future direction & practice of adult education. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 23. Methodology © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 24. Methodology1.Most literature in adult education and human resource development, among others, presents a one-dimensional perspective of culture.2.This interdisciplinary, critical review of literature poses contending views of culture and suggests multi-dimensional perspectives of culture. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 25. Methodology1. To complete the literature review, we dissected the elements of mainstream views of culture from the fields of education, business, management, communication and human resource development.2. This paper presents alternative perspectives from various disciplines, among which are philosophy, anthropology, history, political economy, and sociology in order to present richer and deeper appreciation of culture. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 26. Methodology1. As this paper is only focused on the various definitions of the word “culture” in the different fields, “culture” was the keyword used in a search for literature.2. While scouring and evaluating different literatures, only seminal works and the latest textbooks that contain the word “culture” were considered.3. Literature to which textbooks within and across the disciplines always make reference reveal that they are seminal works.4. Hard copies and electronic copies of reading materials were obtained.5. After searching for, reading, and analyzing the literature on “culture,” the key definitions of “culture” from the reading materials across the disciplines were extracted, recorded and categorized. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 27. Findings © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 28. Etymology of “Culture”• Mid-15c., "the tilling of land," from M.Fr. culture and directly from L. cultura "a cultivating, agriculture," figuratively "care, culture, an honoring," from pp. stem of colere "tend, guard, cultivate, till" (see cult).• The figurative sense of "cultivation through education" is first attested c.1500. Meaning "the intellectual side of civilization" is from 1805; that of "collective customs and achievements of a people" is from 1867.Source: Online Etymology Dictionary. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 29. What Is Culture?• In general, everything that is not nature is culture (Lévi- Strauss, 1961). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 30. What Is Culture?• Kant was the first person to use the term “kulture,” which meant “civilization.”• Gustav Klemm was the first to use the term “culture” in an anthropological sense (Omohundro, 2008, p. 35). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 31. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 32. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 33. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 34. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 35. Culture:“the customary ways of thinking & behaving” (Ember, Ember & Peregrine 2007, p. 5) © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 36. What Is Culture? © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 37. Dominant Discourse•Hofstede’s binarymodel (2001) is themost cited literatureused in – adult education, – business, management, – leadership, – human resources development – & other related fields. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 38. Hofstede’s Cultural Framework1. Individualism Collectivism2. Low Power High PowerDistance Distance3. High LowUncertainty UncertaintyAvoidance Avoidance4. Masculinity Femininity © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 39. In Bauer & Erdogan.(2010). Organizational © 2012 Rey Ty behavior.
  • 40. Dominant Discourse•Like Huntington’sclash of civilization(1992), Hofstede’smodel is useful forsynchronic cross-cultural comparisonor which “describe[s]a culture at oneperiod in time”(Peoples & Bailey,2012, p. 96). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 41. Problems with Hofstede•One, Hofstede’s binary model over-generalizes, as though there are nosimilarities at all among societies.Anthropologists, however, point out that thereare not only particular but also universal andgeneral cultural traits (Kottak, 2009). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 42. Problems with Hofstede•Two, Hofstede’s model generalizes culture from the national level of analysis only, which is quite partial.•Culture must also be analyzed from the individual, group, class, societal, state, regional, international, global, and other levels of analysis.•By only focusing on cultural particularism and cultural relativism, Hofstede non- dialectically falls victim to cultural ethnocentrism, missing out on the possibility of some degree of cultural universalism (Peoples & Bailey, 2012; Spradley & McCurdy, 2012). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 43. Levels of AnalysisMacro Micro © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 44. Problems with Hofstede• Three, more sophisticated models discuss – the McDonaldization (Barber, 1992), – hybridization, and “glocalization” of culture (Robertson, 1994), but all these only provide nothing but caricatures. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 45. Problems with Hofstede4 Models of Cultural Interaction (Miller, 2007, p. 19) 1. Clash of Conflict model civilizations 2. Takeover & McDonaldization homogenization model 3. Hybridization Blending model 4. Glocalization Local cultural remaking & transformation of global culture © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 46. Problems with Hofstede•Four, people gothrough not onlya process ofenculturationearly in life butalso acculturationto new ideas,values, &behaviors later inlife (Miller, 2007). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 47. Problems with Hofstede•Five, Hofstede’smodel is not capableof capturingdiachronic changes inculture. Hofstede’simmutable andahistorical modelmisses out ondiachronic analysisthat “studies thechanges in culture ofa people over time”(Peoples & Bailey,2012, p. 96). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 48. Alternative Discourses © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 49. Anthropology © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 50. Anthropology © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 51. Anthropology © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 52. Anthropology © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 53. Anthropology• The behaviorist view considers culture as composed of “learned and shared ways of behaving” (Miller, 2008, p. 31). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 54. Anthropology• The holistic view considers culture as consisting of “learned and shared beliefs, meanings, and symbols as well as learned and shared ways of behaving” (Miller, 2008, p. 31). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 55. Anthropological Theories and Their Proponents (Harris & Johnson, 2007, p. 29) Theories Assumptions Authors19th-C evolutionism & All societies evolve through a series of stages due to rational thinking. Tylor, Morgan,Darwinism Cultural evolution depended on natural selection. SpenserMarxism Importance of class struggle to bring about changes in the mode of Marx, Engels production.Historical particularism Each culture is unique. Need for in-depth ethnographic fieldwork. Boas, KroeberBritish functionalism & Anthropology needs to understand how cultural institutions meet the Malinowski,structural functionalism needs of individuals and contribute to the functioning of society. Radcliffe-BrownCulture and personality Anthropology must show the relationship among early childhood Benedict, Mead experiences in creating a common personality that impacts cultural variables.Cultural ecology Cultures evolve in direct proportion to their capacity to harness energy; White, Steward cultures in similar environments have similar features to respond to environmental challengesCultural materialism Theoretical priority is given to material conditions (infrastructure) in Harris explaning cultural differences and similarities.Biological anthropology Cultural traits are selected if they maximize an individual’s reproductive Cosmedies && evolutionary success; the neural circuits of our minds are the product of natural Tooby, Boyd,psychology selection and designed during the course of human evolutionary history. RicharsonSymbolic & interpretive Public symbols & rituals represent important aspects of culture. Geertz, TurneranthropologyPostmodernism Interpretation is instrospective & a form of individualized understanding Foucault, Marcus, based on narrative & listening to & talking with others; theory & Fisher methodology are invalid as objective is an illusion. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 56. Key Figures in Cultural Anthropology (Miller, 2007, p. 11)Late 19th CenturyTylor, Sir Ewward Fist definition of cultureFrazer, Sir James Comparative study of religionMorgan, Lewis Henry Insider’s view, cultural evolution, comparative methodEarly 20th CenturyMalinowski, Bronislaw Functionalilsm, holism, participant observationBoas, Franz Cultural relativism, historical particularism, advocacyMead, Margaret Personality and culture, cultural constructionism, public anthropologyBenedict, Ruth Personality and culture, national character studiesHurston, Zora Neal Black culture, women’s role, ethnographic novelMid-and Lsate Twentieth Century and Early Twenty-First CenturyLévi-Strauss, Claude Symbolic analysis, French structuralismMedicine, Beatrice Native American anthropologyLeacock, Eleanor Anthropology of colonialism and indigenous peoplesHarris, Marvin Cultural materialism, comparison, theory buildingDouglas, Mary Symbolic anthropologyRosaldo, Michelle Feminist anthropologyGeertz, Clofford Interpretive anthropology, thick description of local cultureNader, Laura Legal anthropology, “studying up”Marcus, George Critique of culture & cultural anthropologyHerdt, Gilbert Gay anthropologyScheper-Hughes, Nancy Critical medical anthropologyMullings, Leith Anti-racist anthropologyMerry, Sally Engle Globalization and human rights © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 57. History © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 58. History• “Cultures are products of history” (Omohundro, 2008, p. 36).• However, interpretations of historical events in turn are a product of culture. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 59. History• Cultural anthropologists deal with “universals and variation in culture in the past and present” (Ember & Ember, 2007, p. 6). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 60. History• Note, however, that usually the conquerors write history, as a consequence of which, other people’s history becomes ignored, deprioritized, and “othered.”• Power dictates how history is presented, what artifacts are valued, and what level of provenance is needed for a piece of information to be considered fact (Foucault, 1980). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 61. Philosophy © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 62. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 63. Philosophy © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 64. Philosophy• Cultural idealists, symbolists or interpretivists consider culture as consisting of “learned and shared beliefs, thoughts, meanings, and symbols” (Miller, 2008, p. 31). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 65. Philosophy• Geertz (1973, p. 89) wrote a seminal work, according to which culture refers to "a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life." © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 66. Philosophy• Geertz (1973, p. 44), in his seminal work, wrote:• “Culture is best seen not as complexes of concrete behavior patterns— customs, usages, traditions, habit clusters—as has been the case up to now, but as a set of control mechanisms—plans, recipes, rules, instructions (what computer engineers call ‘programs’)—for governing of behavior.” © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 67. Philosophy: Structure & Agency, Metaphysics & Dialectics1. Structurism: “structures such as the political economy & media shape cultures & create entrenched systems of inequality & oppression rather than social progress” (Miller, 2005, p. 9; 2007, p. 13).2. Human Agency: “human agency, or free will, and the power of individuals to create & change culture by acting against structures” (Miller, 2005, p. 9; 2007, p. 13)3. Sartre: Humans are free, must live authentically, be being responsible for our own future or else practice “mauvaise foi” (bad faith). To conform to the comfort of being subsumed under a structured society is to be a coward.4. Exaggeration: “Sartre said that he exaggerated the extent to which the individual could free himself from the pressures of the society in which he lived” (Magee, 1998, p. 217). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 68. Philosophy: Metaphysics & Dialectics Structure & AgencyStatus Quo& Change © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 69. Political Economy © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 70. Political Economy © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 71. Political Economy © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 72. Sociology © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 73. Sociology © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 74. Sociology• It deals with groups and organizations, social interaction and structure, groups and organizations, crime, social class and stratification, global stratification and inequality, race and ethnicity, gender, sexuality, discrimination, families, religion, education, and health care, among others (Anderson & Taylor, 2013; Kimmel & Aronson, 2012; Schaefer, 2011). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 75. Sociology © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 76. SociologyAdapted from Kornblum, W. (2008). Sociologyin a changing world (8th ed). Belmont, CA:Thomson Higher Education, p. 46. Ideas Ideologies (e.g. capitalism, communism)Dimensions of Culture Norms Technologies (e.g. computer data processing, auto production) Material Culture © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 77. Adapted from Kornblum, W. (2008). Sociology in achanging world (8th ed). Belmont, CA: Thomson HigherEducation, p. 46. g y lo c io S o© 2012 Rey Ty © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 78. Sociology DurkheimHistorical Evolution © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 79. SociologyDifferent Ways to Explain Phenomena © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 80. How Do You Explain Things?1. Witchcraft: You are sick because someone put a bad spell on you.2. Magic: I can make you feel good by chanting good mantras for your well-being.3. Religion: God chooses to make you happy or suffer.4. Discourse: I narrate, therefore I am.5. Science: Duh! It’s chemistry, physics or biology! © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 81. Conclusion © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 82. Summary© 2012 Rey Ty © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 83. Nutshell1. Anthropology views culture as all-encompassing;2. Business & management, dichotomous & inert;3. History, ever-changing;4. Philosophy, immutable or dialectical, as well as idealist or materialist;5. Political economy, interacting with the economy and politics; and,6. Sociology, as interacting, conforming or opposed to the social order.7. Adult education incorporates these definitions depending on the context. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 84. Views of Culture from the Different Academic Fields Fields Dominant View of CultureBusiness, Communication, Hofstede’s binary modelHRD, Management Disciplinary Views of CultureAnthropology Culture is all-encompassing. It includes things, ideas, norms, and behavior.History Culture changes through time.Philosophy Culture can be viewed as immutable or dialectical.Political Economy The economy and politics interact with culture either to keep the status quo or the change it, which in turn influences the economy and politics.Sociology Culture is a tool for conformity. Counter-culture is a tool to create counter-hegemony. Culture is maintained or changed depending on whether the people conform to or oppose the existing social order.© 2012 Rey Ty © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 85. Contending Perspectives of Culture (Adapted from Kendall, 2010, pp. 71, 75; Schaefer, 2011, p. 18) Perspectives Key Ideas Views of Culture•Interactionism or Micro level of analysis that stresses People create & use culture daily.Interpretivism face-to-face active social interaction.•Structural Macro level of analysis that Macro People meet their biological,Functionalism level of analysis that stresses instrumental and expressive performance of social functions and needs through culture. Culture is social stability. transmitted to maintain social order.•Conflict Macro level of analysis that stresses Powerful rulers use culturallyPerspective tension and struggle between groups, created ideas to impose on the including feminist views. others.•Critical Theory Macro level of analysis that uncritical The dominant culture promotes acceptance of the social order the interests of the dominant class legitimizes oppression. to reinforce the roles of the oppressed classes.•Postmodern Macro level of analysis that stresses Today’s culture is based more on questioning reality vis-à-vis post- simulation than reality. industrialization and consumerism. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 86. Contradictions 1 Pa& Dialectical stHistorical rt F euuDevelopmentin Time & 2Space Centrifugal Forces Freedom, Liberating Consciousness & Agency Ps lo yc Phi h Ge Society nd gy e er Ag Et olo Nature hi 3 Ab cs r Ide lo ilit Co ies Human ss Et Beings ne h ni ue Cu ics cit iq y Un Dif l tu lit fe ren ce ss Po Cla re Economy Centripetal Forces Necessity, Oppressive Consciousness & Structure t n e s r P © 2010 Rey Ty © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 87. Implications• In general, this paper provides a smorgasbord of contending explanations from which adult educators, adult learners, human resource practitioners, and academicians can choose their framework in analyzing and working with individuals and groups in society. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 88. Implications• Through understanding this exploration of the literature, practitioners in community, adult, and higher education may better understand cultural differences and better serve adult learners with different cultures.• Those who take Hofstede’s binary classification of culture falls victim to maintaining a stagnant view of culture as well as stereotyping and universalizing certain traits of people as permanent. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 89. Implications• This paper presents alternative views of culture as complex, dynamic, and ever- changing.• Educators will benefit from having a more profound view of culture, especially as they relate and are applied to adults in the community, work, and academic settings. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 90. Implications• The greatest dangers ofincomplete and incorrectunderstanding of culturein practice arestereotyping, bigotry,intolerance,ethnocentrism, andracism.•By referring to us andthem, we fall victim to thedanger of othering(Derrida, 1978; Foucault,1990; Lacan, 1966; Said,1978). © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 91. Implications•In opposition to theunsophisticated, crude, static,and binary view of culture,this paper argues that culturenot only changes throughtime but is also free-flowing,socially determined,interpreted dynamically, andcolored by experience.• By providing alternativeperspectives, the findingshelp adult educators andadult learners not only avoidsuch dangers, after which thegreater respect for diversitycan be promoted pro-actively. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 92. SummaryI. IntroductionII. MethodologyIII. FindingsIV. Conclusion © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 93. References:• Anderson, M. L. & Taylor, H. E. (2013). Sociology: The essentials. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.• Barber, B. R. (1992 March). Jihad vs. McWorld. The Atlantic, 269(3), 53-65.• Bates, D. G. & Franklin, E. M. (1999). Cultural anthropology (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.• Bauer, T. & Erdogan, B. (2010). Organizational behavior. Irvington, NY: Flat World Knowledge.• Bierema, L. L. (2010). Implementing a critical approach to organizational development. Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing Company.• Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.• Ember, C. R., Ember, M., & Peregrine, P. N. (2007). Anthropology (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.• Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. C. Gordon (Ed.). New York: Pantheon.• Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality. New York: Vintage.• Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic Books.• Harris, M. & Johnson, O. (2007). Cultural anthropology (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson.• Henslin, J. M. (2012). Sociology: A down-to-earth approach. Core concepts (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.• Hofstede, G. (2001). Cultures consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.• Honderich, T., Ed. (1995). The Oxford companion to philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.• Huntington, S. (1992). The clash of civilizations? Foreign Affairs, 72, 22-49.• Kendall, D. (2010). Sociology in our times: The essentials (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.• Kimmel, M. & Aronson, A. (2012). Sociology now: The essentials (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.• Kornblum, W. (2008). Sociology in a changing world (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.• Kottak, C. P. (2009). Anthropology: The exploration of human diversity (13th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.• Lacan, J. (1966). Écrits. Paris: Seuil.• Lévi-Strauss, C. (1961). A world on the wane. London: Hutchinson. (Original work published in the French language in 1955).• Merriam, S. B. & Associates. (2007). Non-Western perspectives on learning and knowing. Malabar, FL: Krieger Publications.• Miller, B. (2008). Anthropology (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.• Miller, B. (2007). Cultural anthropology (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.• Omohundro, J. T. (2008). Thinking like an anthropologist. Boston: McGraw Hill.• Pai, Y. & Adler, S. A. (2001). Cultural foundations of education (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merril Prentice Hall.• Park, M.A. (1999). Biological anthropology (2nd ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing.• Peoples, J. & Bailey, G. (2012). Humanity: An introduction to cultural anthropology (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.• Rosenau, J. N. (1997 November). The complexities and contradictions of globalization. Current History, 96, 631-364.• Robertson, R. (1994). Globalisation or glocalisation? Journal of International Communication, 1(1), 33-52.• Said, E. (1978). Orientalism (25th anniversary ed.). New York: Pantheon Books.• Schaefer, R. T. (2011). Sociology in modules. New York: McGraw-Hill.• Schultz, E. A. & Lavenda, R. H. (2009). Cultural anthropology: A perspective on the human condition (7th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.• Spradley, J. & McCurdy, D. W. (2012). Conformity and conflict: Readings in cultural anthropology (14th ed.). Boston: Pearson.• Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive culture. London: J. Murray.•• Williams, R. (1976). Keywords. London: Fontana. Williams, R. (1981). Culture. London: Fontana. © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 94. Deconstructing Culture:Static Binary Models & Beyond Rey Ty Midwest Research to Practice Conference University of Central Oklahoma Edmond, Oklahoma, U.S.A. September 27-29, 2012 © 2012 Rey Ty
  • 95. Physical Mental Resilience: Resilience: Stand up, Snap fingers; stretch count 100 to 1By Jane McGonigal © 2012 Rey Ty Social Emotional Resilience: Resilience: Thank people, Look at baby shake hands animal photos © 2012 Rey Ty

×