Reflecting on embedding ‘critical reflexivity’ in the development of a Master’s program on social change and international development in a regional university in Australia

Overview: There is growing literature on the internationalisation of curriculum and the importance of inter and/or cross cultural competency in higher education debates. However, there is scant literature that uses ‘critical reflexivity’ as a pedagogical tool for developing understanding of concepts of privilege, power, colonisation and one’s place in the world.

Background: The internationalisation of curriculum (IoC) literature is predominantly focussed on developing knowledge of students of other cultures, attitudes, values and ethics. The focus is on studying ‘others or other cultures’ as opposed to unpacking how privilege, identity and power impact one’s own understanding of the world. This paper borrows from debates from a critical standpoint within critical reflexivity to argue that cross cultural understanding is not a competency but a disposition towards thinking, analysing and understanding the world based on critiquing the ‘Self’ and its relationship with the ‘Other’.

Methods: The paper using insights from critical reflexivity will reflect on the educator’s experiences of developing a new master’s program in social change and international development in a regional university in Australia. Through their reflections of being involved in the development of knowledge, skills and values in the curriculum, we will unpack how ‘critical reflexivity’ as a pedagogical tool was used to address the question of inter and/or cross cultural competency in the curriculum.

Results: As a way of conclusion it is argued that embedding critical reflexivity in the curriculum allows educators and students to address the question of privilege, power and colonisation as opposed to gaining understanding and/or competency in other cultures. An approach that places one’s understanding of ‘self’, privilege’ and power will equip educators and students to undertake ethical practice when working in international contexts. To that end, we assert that an approach which puts the focus on ‘self’ and ‘power’ in the curriculum will allow us to mitigate hidden and/or unconscious biases in our understanding of other cultures.

Conclusions:
The paper will contribute to extending the pedagogical understanding of inter and/or cross cultural competency in the internationalisation of curriculum debates. A pedagogical approach that uses critical reflexivity positions the understanding of ‘self’ ‘privilege’ and power will allow students as well as educators to tackle hidden unconscious biases and develop ethical practice when they work in international contexts.