Next Article in Journal
The Rise of China and Evolving Defense Cooperation between India and Japan
Previous Article in Journal
Insight into the Multidimensional Poverty of the Mountainous Ethnic Minorities in Central Vietnam
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Social Sciences
Volume 12
Issue 6
10.3390/socsci12060332
socsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Tailored MOOC Fostering Intercultural Conflict Management in the Educational Context: Evidence from Italy

by
Elena Dell’Aquila
1,2,*,
Federica Vallone
1,3,
Maria Clelia Zurlo
1,3 and
Davide Marocco
1,2
1
Department of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, 80133 Naples, Italy
2
Natural Artificial Cognition Laboratory “Orazio Miglino”, University of Naples Federico II, 80133 Naples, Italy
3
Dynamic Psychology Laboratory, University of Naples Federico II, 80133 Naples, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Soc. Sci. 2023, 12(6), 332; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12060332
Submission received: 27 April 2023 / Revised: 25 May 2023 / Accepted: 31 May 2023 / Published: 3 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Section International Migration)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Managing relationships between/with students is one of the main duties that teachers are asked to fulfill, which becomes even more challenging in multi-ethnic/multicultural educational contexts. Responding to the need for culturally-qualified training for school professionals and given the increasing use of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)—often without evidence supporting their efficacy—this study will evaluate the potential of a tailored MOOC—designed to tackle overt/covert discrimination and foster inclusion and culturally responsive teacher–student interactions—to promote teachers’ awareness and competence in conflict management. Overall, 206 Italian teachers experienced the MOOC, of whom 99 completed the Rahim Conflict Management Inventory-II, assessing Conflict Management Styles (Integrating, Obliging, Compromising, Dominating, and Avoiding) pre- and post-MOOC. Potential changes in the adoption of Conflict Management Styles after completing the MOOC were evaluated. After completing the MOOC, there was a reduction in teachers’ recourse to the Avoiding and Obliging styles and, of note, more informed/targeted use of the Dominating style. These findings provided evidence-based contributions sustaining that the MOOC may effectively foster a more aware, engaged, and active pattern for managing relationships and conflicts within classes, thus potentially having a tangible positive impact on the real everyday life of teachers experiencing this training and their students.

1. Introduction

Within the current superdiverse world, characterized by increasing multiculturality, new needs and challenges have emerged to effectively face cultural/ethnic differences at the individual and societal levels (Crul et al. 2023; Meissner et al. 2023). The education context is one of the chief places to implement actions which foster constructive intercultural relationships and intercept the emergence of issues and tensions due to diversity (EC 2020; Gonçalves et al. 2016).
Over recent years, the number of school-age people with migrant backgrounds in many European countries has been growing (OECD 2018a). This condition has highlighted a need to reflect on how to effectively support students with migrant backgrounds, as they are at a higher risk of underperformance in education, dropping out of school earlier, and later challenges in the world of labor than their native counterparts (OECD 2023). Due to these concerns, schools are becoming increasingly aware of the need to identify successful educational interventions which favor a supportive and nurturing learning environment to increase engagement and equity in the education process (EC 2021).
Teachers are key actors in enacting inclusive education policy, bringing actual changes in the education of students. Specifically, nowadays, teachers have new key roles and duties within the school and society (Donlevy and Rajania 2016). Teachers need to effectively manage classes which feature cultural and ethnic diversity and help students adjust to the superdiverse school and social contexts. Teachers also need to successfully manage relationships with and between students (Zurlo et al. 2020) and secure a safe/equal/inclusive context for all of the students and their families (Hannon and O’Donnell 2022).
For this very reason, teachers, globally, are pressured by growing expectations, as they need to possess or acquire new individual and relational skills to successfully fulfill the teaching role (Ası and Joyce 2023; EC 2017; Vallone et al. 2022). Specifically, they need to possess/enhance not only their knowledge and awareness about multicultural education but also their individual skills to deal with potential conflicts which could arise in classes due to differences/mismatches in values, cultural backgrounds, and worldviews (Evans et al. 2009; Han and Han 2019; Kunemund et al. 2020). The encountering of different cultures and perspectives within the school context is a reality to be adequately addressed (Euwema and Van Emmerik 2007). This condition may result in conflicts deriving from misunderstandings, lack of knowledge about different cultural backgrounds, and a Color-blind approach to diversity (for example, when teachers/educators act as though “we are all the same, regardless of differences”). Conflicts may, however, also derive from overt and covert expressions of prejudices, discriminations, and exclusions (Anderstaf et al. 2021; Dong et al. 2008; Expósito et al. 2014; Kyere et al. 2023; Jurtikova 2013; OECD 2018b; Stevens and Dworkin 2019). The consequences of teachers failing to manage intercultural and interethnic conflicts within the classrooms are countless, and they may vary from conflict escalation within the class to the severe psychological suffering of actors involved and the development of a hostile/unsafe class climate. Thus, increasing the intercultural competence of teachers allows them to approach culturally/ethnically diverse populations appropriately.
Within this portrait, based on one of the most internationally adopted models for conflict management, namely the Rahim’s Model of Conflict Management (Rahim 2001; Rahim and Bonoma 1979), research has investigated the variety of management strategies that teachers may use to deal with the different situations which potentially occur during classes both with and between students (Dell’Aquila et al. 2022; Dogan 2016; Morris-Rothschild and Brassard 2006; Vallone et al. 2022; Zurlo et al. 2020). Specifically, teachers may expend efforts and a great amount of time to carefully deepen students’ perspectives and the reason for the conflict, trying to solve it effectively (i.e., Integrating style). Moreover, teachers may choose to save time—needed for achieving the learning outcomes—and quickly find a compromise to solve the issue (i.e., Compromising style). However, teachers may also opt to reach a conflict resolution which is biased towards the student’s interest to safeguard the relationship with him/her (i.e., Obliging style), or to avoid dealing with the conflict/postpone any confrontation (i.e., Avoiding style). Finally, teachers may decide to use more direct means to handle conflicts, which may vary along a continuum ranging from a more control-oriented/hostile style to a firm expression of authority (i.e., Dominating style). Teachers can use this latter form, the Dominating style, to accomplish their role as class managers.
Despite the abundance of research and practical efforts that policymakers/educational key actors undertake to strive to support school professionals in the enhancement of conflict management and interethnic/intercultural competences (Malone and Ishmail 2020; Papageorgiou et al. 2023), overall, school staff still express a need for culturally-qualified training and educational tools (EC 2017; Burnell and Schnackenberg 2015; Keengwe 2010; OECD 2014). Therefore, there is a clear necessity to propose further customized contributions to effectively support teachers’ professional development.
In this direction, recently, research has increasingly highlighted that digital tools and e-environments may provide several advantages to learners, i.e., overcoming the boundary of space and time; higher individualization of the learning experience; innovative, interactive, and engaging environments; cost-effectiveness advantages; flexibility; transferability (Almahasees et al. 2021; Fidalgo et al. 2020; Prosen et al. 2022). In the past decade, the online learning experience has been further enhanced through the development of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), which have indeed made education even more easily accessible to people globally (Hew and Cheung 2014; Hone and Said 2016; Jo 2018).
Accordingly, within the project ACCORD, and in line with the national guidelines for MOOC preparation (Susanna 2017; Farrow 2019), a MOOC was developed and embedded within a tailored e-platform. The MOOC was designed to train educators, teachers, and school professionals to handle diversity and deal with conflicts that can occur in classrooms through a freely available online multicultural training course. In line with the EU Digital Education Action Plan (2021–2027) and the AGENDA 2030, the MOOC responds to the need for innovative learning approaches to reduce disparities in accessing and engaging with formal and non-formal education.

1.1. MOOC Contents

The MOOC proposed in the present study has been structured considering both the pros and cons reported in the literature for the design and implementation of MOOCs (Gamage and Kalansooriya 2021). According to our experience, and in line with findings in this research field (Lee et al. 2020), the most influential dimensions for a successful MOOC are represented by: self-regulated learning strategies; a custom-made system of feedback (Dell’Aquila et al. 2017); the adoption of intelligent technology that enables creating tailored learning pathways for different users (Papadimitriou 2023).
The MOOC consists of different contents, namely, Lessons, Serious Games, and Self-assessment questionnaires (Figure 1). The five lessons provide teachers with in-depth multimedia learning material that is freely available online (further information links and videos, slides, and scripts). The lessons deal with the topics specified in Appendix A Table A1. The MOOC also includes a Serious Game to enrich and increase users’ engagement in the personal experience of interethnic conflicts. The Serious Game is a single-player tool to train intercultural communication and conflict management skills through realistic scenarios during interaction with artificial agents. The game simulates a dialogue between two 3D avatars (i.e., one represents the teacher and is controlled by the user, and the other represents the student and is controlled by the computer). The avatars perform basic expressions based on verbal and non-verbal components (e.g., facial expressions and body gesture) that model the main dimensions of the identified relevant psychological and pedagogical theories of Effective Communication (Dryden and Constantinou 2004) and Conflict Management Styles (Rahim and Bonoma 1979). The game allows the user to play five different scenarios developed to convey a particular type of interethnic conflict in the classroom context (see Appendix A Table A2). At the end of the gaming experience, teachers can benefit from a customized debriefing about the negotiation path played during the conflict scenarios. The assessment system allows teachers to become aware of personal conflict handling styles and related skills which are particularly relevant to successfully managing multicultural classes.
Finally, the MOOC also comprises “Self-assessment Tools”. The assessment path of the e-platform includes questionnaires to: (1) investigate the users’ conflict management skills; (2) assess personal experiences regarding the learning experience undertaken through the game scenarios which are related to the Conflict Management Styles and multicultural dimensions involved. The tools allow for assessing the users’ training achievements and perceived learning development after the completion of the MOOC.
The e-platform is sustained by rigorous technological (i.e., EduTechRPG; Simulation Technology-drama based system; Dell’Aquila et al. 2017, 2020; Marocco et al. 2019), psychological (Vallone et al. 2019), and pedagogical frameworks (Frossard and Barajas 2018). Nonetheless, there is a need to empirically prove the validity of the MOOC, as mentioned above. Indeed, despite the rapid growth in the interest in e-learning approaches over recent years, more studies are needed to evaluate the validity of online tools in educational settings (Hewson and Charlton 2019; Soffer et al. 2017).

1.2. The Present Study

The present study aims to evaluate the potential of a tailored MOOC—specifically designed to tackle overt/covert discrimination and foster inclusion and culturally responsive teacher–student interactions—to effectively promote teachers’ awareness and adaptiveness in conflict management. In particular, the study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the MOOC in producing significant changes in the Conflict Management Styles adopted by teachers.
In our expectations, we were confident that the MOOC could foster not only knowledge and learning achievements but also actual modifications in latent dimensions, such as interpersonal styles. Several teachers may indeed perceive that they do not have the experience or knowledge to effectively manage culturally and ethnically diverse classes. This feeling may also be partially due to teachers’ lack of awareness of their individual and relational characteristics, skills, and resources.
In other words, by offering a valid online tool, the current study sought to provide a practical answer to a key issue regarding the current educational context, namely how to effectively support educational actors in the rapid shift from a traditional mindset—that favors “optimal learning outcomes” within homogeneous educational contexts—to a multifaceted approach—that attempts to simultaneously promote both valuable learning outcomes and satisfactory relationships within the current superdiverse educational context.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants and Procedure

The MOOC was made available online as part of the ACCORD Project. The implementation of the MOOC was preceded by a preliminary piloting for testing the usability of the e-platforms (lessons, learning material, and questionnaires). This phase was extremely important before the MOOC was released, considering that the founding methodology of the MOOC is designed to allow users to train themselves on the topic autonomously and from home. In the case of any impediment, teachers could not receive immediate feedback and/or support (available via an inquiry/help automatic button). The pilot study was conducted with 50 secondary school teachers of the ACCORD Project country consortium by administering both paper-based prototypes and the online version of the MOOC. The pilot phase was crucial to identifying any potential issue that could impact the effectiveness of the learning experience (e.g., content-related issues, technical issues, usability problems, issues in the basic game and scenarios design, and problems with the artificially intelligent tutor). We used the collected feedback to refine and improve the final version of the MOOC. Afterwards, we spread the final version of the MOOC online through formal channels (e.g., institutional mailing lists) and informal channels (e.g., word-of-mouth and social media). There were no inclusion/exclusion criteria for enrolling in the MOOC, except for the condition of being a school teacher.
Overall, 206 Italian teachers enrolled and completed the online training courses on a voluntary basis; of those, 171 completed the questionnaire at the beginning of the learning experience (pre-MOOC). However, 99 teachers (Age Mean = 47.79, SD = 8.35, Range = 24–65; Working Seniority Mean = 18.19, SD = 9.68, Range = 0–43) fully completed the questionnaire both pre- and post-MOOC and, therefore, were included in the final dataset. Thus, there were no missing data. The characteristics of the participants are reported in Table 1. All of the procedures were performed in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of Psychological Research (CERP) of University of Naples Federico II (Protocol Code: 36/2019; Approval Date: 28 November 2019).

2.2. Measures

Teachers were asked to complete a background information form (Age, Gender, Working Seniority) along with the Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory-II (ROCI-II; Rahim 2001; Italian version: Majer 1995) before and after completing the MOOC. In the present study, we used Form B of the tool, measuring the management styles used by individuals to deal with conflicts with subordinates (i.e., students in our case). Teachers were asked to imagine/recall an intercultural conflict that occurred within classes with and/or between students, and to select the ways in which they have handled/would have handled it.
Specifically, the Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory-II consists of 28 items (5-point Likert scale ranging from one = Strongly Disagree to five = Strongly Agree) divided into five subscales, namely: Integrating (7 items, e.g., “I try to integrate my ideas with those of my students to come up with a decision jointly”); Compromising (4 items, i.e., I usually propose a middle ground for breaking deadlock”); Dominating (5 items, e.g., “I am generally firm in pursuing my side of the issue”); Obliging (6 items, e.g., “I usually accommodate the wishes of my students”); Avoiding (6 items, e.g., “I try to stay away from disagreement with my students”).
For interpreting the data, higher scores represent higher recourse to those strategies. Rahim’s description of the five styles derives from the different combinations of two main dimensions, namely “Concern for Self” (i.e., the degree to which people aim to satisfy their own concerns throughout conflict management processes) and “Concern for Others” (i.e., the degree to which people aim to satisfy the concerns of the other party throughout conflict management processes). Accordingly, the scores from the ROCI–II can be discussed according to two macro-dimensions, namely the Integrative and Distributive Dimensions.
The Integrative Dimension (ID) represents the amount of satisfaction (high–low) about the concerns received by both parties (self and others) and covers the Integrating Style and Avoiding Style. Indeed, when using the Integrating style, people attempt to increase the satisfaction of the concerns of both parties by finding solutions to the problems that are mutually acceptable, whereas, conversely, the Avoiding style leads to a reduction in satisfaction of the concerns of both parties and results in a failure to solve the issue.
In contrast, the Distributive Dimension (DD) represents the amount of satisfaction (high and low) about the concerns received by only one of the parties (self or others) and covers the Dominating Style and Obliging Style. Indeed, when using the Dominating style, people attempt to obtain a high satisfaction of concerns for self (and low for others), whereas, conversely, the Obliging style leads to low satisfaction of the concerns for self (and high satisfaction of concerns for others). In the middle ground, the Compromising style represents the point of intersection of the two dimensions, which represents an intermediate position where both parties receive a moderate level of satisfaction of their concerns from the resolution of their conflicts.
The ROCI-II has been internationally adopted, and its psychometric soundness is well-recognized (Bilsky and Wülker 2000; Munduate et al. 1999; Rahim et al. 2002; Vallone et al. 2022; Yu and Chen 2008).

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed by SPSS software (Version 27) (IMB, Chicago, IL, USA). Firstly, Descriptive statistics were conducted (Mean and Standard Deviations) for Conflict Management Styles (both pre- and post-MOOC) and a comparison was drawn with respect to the corresponding normative values reported in the Italian validation study (Majer 1995) by using Student’s t-test analyses (p < 0.05). Afterwards, Repeated Measures ANOVA (Greenhouse-Geisser correction method; Wilk’s Lambda [λ]; p < 0.05) was used to assess the effectiveness of the MOOC in terms of potential changes in the recourse to Conflict Management Styles by teachers. Finally, considering the inherent specificities of Massive Online Open Courses (MOOC), which should be designed to be broadly accessible and widely enjoyable by the target population (i.e., teachers in our case), and which—mainly—should be effective beyond individual differences, a further set of Repeated Measures ANOVA was also conducted to explore any potential changes in the recourse to Conflict Management Styles according to gender, age, and working seniority.

3. Results

Table 1 displays teachers’ background characteristics (n = 99).
Table 2 shows the Means/Standard deviation scores of Conflict Management Style by teachers, pre- and post- the completion of the MOOC, together with normative data and findings from Repeated Measures ANOVA.
With respect to the comparison with normative values and considering the Integrative Dimension (ID), teachers who accessed the MOOC adopted the Integrating style to a significantly greater extent than the normative group of workers (pre-MOOC t = 5.43, p < 0.001; post-MOOC t = 4.80 p < 0.001). Moreover, they also adopted the Avoiding style with a significantly lower extent than the normative group only after completing the MOOC (pre-MOOC t = 0.34, p = 0.734 post-MOOC t = 5.66, p < 0.001).
Considering the Distributive Dimension (DD), teachers adopted the Dominating style (pre-MOOC t =11.53, p < 0.001; post-MOOC t = 8.78, p < 0.001) and Obliging style (pre-MOOC t = 10.06, p < 0.001; post-MOOC t = 12.45, p < 0.001) to a significantly lower extent than the normative group.
Additionally, teachers adopted the Compromising style significantly more than the normative group of workers (pre-MOOC t = 6.64, p < 0.001; post-MOOC t = 5.63, p < 0.001).
With respect to changes in the recourse to Conflict Management Styles by teachers after the completion of the MOOC, the data revealed a statistically significant reduction in the recourse to the Avoiding style (p < 0.001) and Obliging style (p = 0.031), and a statistically significant increase in the recourse to the Dominating style (p = 0.018). No changes in the recourse to the Integrating style (p = 0.483) and Compromising styles (p = 0.382) were found (Figure 2).
Furthermore, findings revealed no significant changes in the recourse to conflict management style by background information (i.e., Gender Integrating style λ = 0.993, p = 0.417; Compromising style λ = 0.998, p = 0.681; Avoiding style λ = 0.985, p = 0.226; Obliging style λ = 0.983, p = 0.202; Dominating style λ = 0.999, p = 0.742; Age Integrating style λ = 0.973, p = 0.273; Compromising style λ = 0.998, p = 0.897; Avoiding style λ = 0.994, p = 0.736; Obliging style λ = 0.970, p = 0.231; Dominating style λ = 0.969, p = 0.223; Working Seniority Integrating style λ = 0.992, p = 0.665; Compromising style λ = 0.987, p = 0.540; Avoiding style λ = 0.978, p = 0.340; Obliging style λ = 0.969, p = 0.221; Dominating style λ = 1.00, p = 0.999).

4. Discussion

This study aims to respond to the need to prove the validity of MOOCs in effectively producing changes in learners—not only in terms of increased knowledge but also in terms of deeper consciousness and actual modifications in interpersonal styles. In particular, this study provided evidence endorsing the efficacy of our tailored MOOC in effectively promoting teachers’ awareness and adaptiveness in conflict management within interethnic and intercultural educational contexts.
Firstly, the findings highlighted that—beyond the MOOC experience—teachers who participated in the study reported scores reflecting a more competent use of all five Conflict Management Styles when compared with the normative group, the latter comprising a sample of general Italian workers employed in public and private organizations (Majer 1995). These data are, however, in line with the ongoing transformations of the educational context; indeed, according to the European agenda, nowadays, teachers are increasingly demanded to promote mutual understanding, respect, and integration among students, rather than reaching high-quality learning outcomes alone (Ası and Joyce 2023; EC 2017, 2020). They need to favor a satisfactory class climate, manage relationships with and between students, and deal with the potential conflicts that could occur during classes, also due to the increasing differences in values, worldviews, and cultures in our society (e.g., Jackson and O’Grady 2019; Loode 2011; Meissner et al. 2023).
In the present study, the values gathered among teachers for the Integrating style (Integrative Dimension; ID) as well as for the Compromising style were significantly higher than the normative values even before they were involved in the MOOC experience, thus highlighting the already increased awareness of adopting these styles favorably to manage conflicts effectively (Ciuladiene and Kairiene 2017; Yu and Chen 2008). No changes between the values of pre- and post-MOOC were found, yet we did not intend to achieve this result.
In contrast, considering the Avoiding style (Integrative Dimension; ID), our findings revealed that teachers adopted this management strategy to a significantly lower extent than the normative group only after completing the MOOC. We believe that this finding is particularly valuable when considering the evidence highlighting that Avoiding is a rather common strategy adopted by teachers. This is particularly true when the topic concerns difficult cultural subjects and/or the other party involved is perceived as culturally different (Dogan 2016; Mahon 2009; Morris-Rothschild and Brassard 2006). However, conflicts within classes and, above all, intercultural conflicts may significantly escalate when teachers underestimate/avoid confronting them, potentially resulting in a vicious circle characterized by widespread perceived anger, frustration, marginalization, and inequities by students and their families (Jurtikova 2013; Malone and Ishmail 2020; Zurlo et al. 2020).
Considering the Distributive Dimension (DD) and, specifically, the Obliging style, our findings revealed that teachers were less likely to be accommodating/complaisant than the normative group, and this finding may reflect the inherent pivotal role of teachers as class managers. Indeed, despite the recourse to this strategy, it can also be adequate to defend relationships during the negotiation processes (Tehrani and Yamini 2020; Yu and Chen 2008), and the adoption of this strategy should be discouraged for people in charge of managing (Rahim 2001). Using an Obliging style leads people to sacrifice their own concerns to satisfy those of their subordinates (in this case, the students). From this perspective, teachers could also tend to adopt this style—in an unaware way—when they feel highly stressed and overwhelmed (Zurlo and Pes 2006; Zurlo et al. 2016, 2020), thus being unable to deal with the conflict more effortfully. Interestingly, teachers’ recourse to this strategy was significantly reduced after completing the MOOC. We believe that this evidence also endorses the value of the MOOC in effectively supporting more adequate ways to deal with conflicts. This finding could also be interpreted by considering research highlighting that European teachers highly adopting the Obliging style were also more likely to possess low emotional stability, which represents a multicultural personality characteristic featured by a high tendency and ability to regulate their own and others’ emotions when under pressure in intercultural/interethnic contexts (Vallone et al. 2020; Vallone et al. 2022).
Finally, of note, findings revealed that teachers adopted Dominating style (Distributive Dimension, DD) to a significantly lower extent than the normative group. However, the recourse of teachers to this strategy significantly increased after completing the MOOC (yet remaining still lower than the normative group). We consider this result as one of the key proofs that the proposed MOOC fostered awareness among teachers. Indeed, as underlined in the MOOC contents—according to Rahim’ Model (Rahim et al. 2001, 2002)—each of the five strategies adopted to manage conflict can be adequate or, conversely, inadequate according to multiple factors, such as the specific context, the conflictual situation, the other party involved, own role.
Teachers may inappropriately adopt the dominating style to aggressively impose his/her position along with depreciation, frequently without reasoning and ignoring students’ expectations and needs (Dogan 2016; Morris-Rothschild and Brassard 2006; Zurlo et al. 2020). However, teachers can appropriately use this style in those situations when they need to take a quick solution, to actively battle discriminations/prejudices within classes, or when teachers must assert their reasons to deal with the conflict based on their knowledge, competences, and/or experience. In such cases, we recommend teachers to adopt this style cautiously and with self-awareness, rather than stigmatizing it. Dominating style may indeed serve to prevent, limit, and/or regulate those students’ behaviors that could harm/damage others as well as him/her (e.g., distracting/damaging other students; reducing satisfaction/participation/wellbeing within classes; lowering motivation; using the classwork time unproductively).
In sum, overall findings were all united to sustain that the MOOC may have effectively fostered a more aware, engaged, and active pattern for managing conflicts within classes, with particular emphasis on intercultural and interethnic conflicts, thus potentially having a tangible positive impact on the real everyday relational life of teachers experiencing this training and their students.
Despite these findings, this study had some limitations that should be addressed. Firstly, self-report measures were used to assess conflict management, so we need to interpret our findings with caution by also considering the risk of social desirability bias. Secondly, teachers enrolled in the MOOC on a voluntary basis, so we can hypothesize that the study sample could be less representative of those who were less open to diversity and, rather, consisted of people who were already disposed to achieve greater knowledge on the topic, and who were willing to enhance their management strategies for fostering positive relationships within their classes. The study is also limited considering that the final sample size is relatively poor. Nonetheless, the fact that 99 out of 206 teachers (about 48%) completed both the pre- and post-MOOC questionnaires should be considered a satisfactory result for many reasons. Indeed, whether these data represent the actual dropout of teachers, this percentage is still considerably low for a MOOC, which usually results in dropout rates over 90% (Goopio and Cheung 2021). Moreover, this number may not represent the people who left the MOOC but only those who did not complete the questionnaire. Also—and differently from e-learning courses—the full completion of the MOOCs, despite limiting the potential benefits deriving from the MOOC experience, is not the main goal/concern for several learners, who may indeed wish to learn new information/enhance their knowledge/face personal challenges (Breslow et al. 2013; Hew and Cheung 2014; Wang and Baker 2018). Finally, considering that the findings revealed no significant changes in the recourse to conflict management style by Gender, Age, and Working Seniority, we could sustain that the MOOC effectively produced changes in teachers beyond individual differences. However, given the small sample size, we do not mean to over-interpreting these data, which require further investigation on larger and more representative samples to be confirmed.

5. Conclusions

Nowadays, MOOCs represent the innovative node where the worlds of higher education, vocational education, training, and open online learning converge. By enhancing opportunities for the flexible delivery of education, tailored MOOCs—such as the one proposed in the present study—can effectively support new ways in which teachers can approach formal and informal education. Teachers can, indeed, achieve—in a flexible way—new knowledge and new skills, such as successfully dealing with conflicts and implementing/promoting inclusive educational practices.
From this perspective, the purpose of our tailored MOOC was to effectively help teachers to develop/enhance intercultural skills by offering innovative practices that promote intercultural awareness and learning. Accordingly, we can confirm that this study provided evidence-based contributions which sustain the notion of the MOOC as a methodology that can significantly foster the awareness of teachers who wish to cultivate student–faculty relationships. The MOOC can promote a more effective form of intercultural and interethnic competency in classroom management.
Our findings can have several theoretical and practical implications. Specifically, considering theoretical implications, our study provides evidence which supports the usefulness of designing and developing effective learning strategies in MOOCs—that can be empirically measured and verified—in terms of perceptions of teachers regarding self-development in interethnic competencies. In other words, the present study endorses and tries to promote the development of research that empirically evaluates the effectiveness of online courses. To the best of our knowledge, the latter branch of this research is currently still lacking.
Considering practical implications, the MOOC that we have proposed is a multifaceted tool that teachers can use to train themselves—autonomously—but it can also be freely shared and used to train other colleagues and students. Indeed, the MOOC can be adopted as a culturally responsive teaching technique within educational practices to foster multicultural strength-based approaches. All key actors can be involved and expected to achieve results which are widely transferable within an interethnic context. Furthermore, considering the need for continuing professional development (CPD), teachers experiencing such MOOCs can take advantage of including a tailored multicultural training experience in their curriculum.
Finally, we consider that adopting tailored MOOCs covering culturally relevant issues—such as the one addressed in the present study—could indirectly impact society, fostering a better understanding of culturally and ethnically diverse populations, and creating welcoming communities. However, when designing multicultural training online, researchers/educators should directly involve, in the future, not only teachers but also educational stakeholders, students, and their families of different backgrounds. This approach could potentially have a greater impact on the current society, promoting inclusion, preventing conflict escalation, and spreading social justice. Promoting these key societal changes can start from the positive relational experiences within single classes. Yet, to address these challanges at a systemic level, it is crucial to spread these changes beyond the classroom walls to build a more inclusive and aware community.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, E.D., F.V., M.C.Z. and D.M.; methodology, E.D. and F.V.; software, E.D. and D.M.; formal analysis, F.V.; investigation, E.D., F.V., M.C.Z. and D.M.; writing—original draft preparation, E.D. and F.V.; writing—review and editing, E.D. and F.V.; supervision, M.C.Z. and D.M.; project administration, D.M.; funding acquisition, E.D. and D.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board, Ethical Committee of Psychological Research (CERP) of University of Naples Federico II (Protocol Code: 36/2019; Approval Date: 28 November 2019).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Appendix A

Table
Table A1. The Five Lessons offered within the MOOC.
Table A1. The Five Lessons offered within the MOOC.
TitleDescription
Lesson 1.
Pedagogical framework 		Competence areas: Intercultural literacy, Inclusive education; Conflict management
Lesson 2.
Multicultural Personality dimensions and teachers’ role in multi-ethnic classes		Role of multicultural aspects of personality to cope with cultural diversity and to gain efficacy and success in multicultural contexts; relation to the school context, particularly focusing on the relevance of multicultural personality for teachers and educators.
Lesson 3.
Psychological models of conflict resolution in the school context		Negotiation as a dimension inextricably related to effective communication (assertive communication); Rahim’s model of handling interpersonal conflict applied to the school context within teacher-pupil interethnic interactions.
Lesson 4.
The use of Serious Games in the school context for teacher-pupils’ interethnic and intercultural interactions		Psychological modeling encompassing the game’s development (integration and operationalization of the two main concepts of multicultural personality and Conflict Management Styles); main characteristics of the game and instructions for use.
Lesson 5.
Theoretical framing interethnic conflicts in the classroom: perspectives derived from sociology, anthropology, and social psychology		Concepts of ethnic inequality and ethnic discrimination in European educational systems; theoretical framing ‘interethnic conflict’ scenarios in the classroom.
Table
Table A2. The Serious Game scenarios within the MOOC.
Table A2. The Serious Game scenarios within the MOOC.
TitleConflict IssueScenario Description
Scenario 1—
Too much noise		Majority vs. Minority culturesA student of Ethiopian descent caught the teacher’s attention during class because he was making too much noise. Despite several warnings from the teacher, the student and the teacher get caught up in a verbal conflict. At some point during the conflict, the boy screams to the teacher that ‘history still lingers on’ and ‘white people still treat people of color as slaves’.
Scenario 2—
E-humor		Stereotyping and Ethnic humorDuring an ICT-Class, a boy of Italian descent forwards an e-mail with a picture enclosed to his classmates. Suddenly, the whole class starts laughing. The picture shows a selfie of two monkeys wearing sunglasses and has a text: “this is a picture of us during our holidays in Brazil.” He shouts: ‘Sam’s holiday picture [boy of African descent].’
Scenario 3—
Headscarf		Good intentions and StereotypingDuring class, the subject of ethnic discrimination comes up. The teacher invites everyone to share their experiences. One girl shares how people in the grocery store always look weird at her mother because she wears a headscarf. One of the class pupils states that people may not look odd at her because of what she wears but because of how she acts. Not everything that looks like a racist reaction at first sight is racist per se. The Muslim girl becomes furious and responds that this is not true.
Scenario 4—
Religions		Racism is exceptionalThe subject of the course today is the exploration of religions. The teacher kindly asks a Muslim pupil to teach the class everything there is to tell about the religion of Islam. The teacher always enjoys it when her pupils can learn something new. The pupil refuses to accomplish the request of the teacher.
Scenario 5—
Movie Activity		Gender and SexualityThe class watched a movie that tackled the theme of sexuality. One of the topics in the movie was homosexuality. After the movie, a discussion in class takes place. A Muslim boy of Turkish descent feels disgusted and shouts that two boys kissing should not be allowed and is completely unethical. The other classmates react and say that ‘the Turkish is a backward culture and Islam is not a religion of modern times’.

References

  1. Almahasees, Zakaryia, Khaled Mohsen, and Mohammad Omar Amin. 2021. Faculty’s and students’ perceptions of online learning during COVID-19. Frontiers in Education 6: 638470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Anderstaf, Susanna, Robert Lecusay, and Monica Nilsson. 2021. ‘Sometimes we have to clash’: How preschool teachers in Sweden engage with dilemmas arising from cultural diversity and value differences. Intercultural Education 32: 296–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ası, Derya, and Tracey Joyce. 2023. Diversity in the Classroom: How Teacher Perceptions and Teacher-Child Interactions Matter. Social Justice and Culturally-Affirming Education in K-12 Settings. IGI Global, 250–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bilsky, Wolfgang, and Anne Wülker. 2000. Konfliktstile: Adaptation und Erprobung des Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory (ROCI-II). Zurich: Psychologisches Inst. IV. [Google Scholar]
  5. Breslow, Lori, David E. Pritchard, Jennifer DeBoer, Glenda S. Stump, Andrew D. Ho, and Daniel T. Seaton. 2013. Studying learning in the worldwide classroom research into edX’s first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment 8: 13–25. [Google Scholar]
  6. Burnell, Beverly A., and Heidi Schnackenberg. 2015. The Ethics of Cultural Competence in Higher Education. Boca Raton: CRC Press. [Google Scholar]
  7. Ciuladiene, Grazina, and Brigita Kairiene. 2017. The resolution of conflict between teacher and student: Studentsí narratives. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability 2: 107–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Crul, Maurice, Frans Lelie, Elif Keskiner, Laure Michon, and Ismintha Waldring. 2023. How do people without migration background experience and impact today’s superdiverse cities? Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 49: 1937–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dell’Aquila, Elena, Davide Marocco, Michela Ponticorvo, Andrea Di Ferdinando, Massimiliano Schembri, and Orazio Miglino. 2017. Soft Skills. New York: Springer International Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  10. Dell’Aquila, Elena, Federica Vallone, Maria Clelia Zurlo, and Davide Marocco. 2020. Creating digital environments for interethnic conflict management. In Methodologies and Intelligent Systems for Technology Enhanced Learning, 9th International Conference, Workshops. New York: Springer International Publishing, pp. 81–88. [Google Scholar]
  11. Dell’Aquila, Elena, Federica Vallone, Maria Clelia Zurlo, and Davide Marocco. 2022. SG-ACCORD: Designing Virtual Agents for Soft Skills Training in the School Context. Education Sciences 12: 174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Dogan, Soner. 2016. Conflicts management model in school: A mixed design study. Journal of Education and Learning 5: 200–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Dong, Qingwen, Kenneth D. Day, and Christine M. Collaço. 2008. Overcoming ethnocentrism through developing intercultural communication sensitivity and multiculturalism. Human Communication 11: 27–38. [Google Scholar]
  14. Donlevy, Vicki A. Mejerkord, and Aaron Rajania. 2016. Study on the Diversity Within the Teaching Profession with Particular Focus on Migrant and Minority Background: Annexes. Brussels: European Commission. [Google Scholar]
  15. Dryden, Windy, and Daniel Constantinou. 2004. Assertiveness Step by Step. London: Sheldon. [Google Scholar]
  16. European Commission (EC). 2020. Action plan on Integration and Inclusion 2021–2027. Brussels: European Commission. [Google Scholar]
  17. European Commission (EC). 2021. Digital Education Action Plan (2021–2027). Brussels: European Commission. [Google Scholar]
  18. European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. 2017. Preparing Teachers for Diversity: The Role of Initial Teacher Education. Brussels: European Commission. [Google Scholar]
  19. Euwema, Martin C., and I. J. Hetty Van Emmerik. 2007. Intercultural competencies and conglomerated conflict behaviors in intercultural conflicts. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 31: 427–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Evans, David R., Margaret T. Hearn, Max R. Uhlemann, and Allen E. Ivey. 2009. How to work with diversity. In Supervision and Professional Development in Social Work Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Pvt. Limited, p. 120. [Google Scholar]
  21. Expósito, Jorge, Eva Olmedo, Marciana Pegalajar, and María Tomé. 2014. Pseudo-conflicts in intercultural ESO (Mandatory Secondary Education) classroom from the point of view of students and teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 132: 100–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Farrow, Robert. 2019. Massive Open Online Courses for Employability, Innovation and Entrepreneurship: A Rapid Assessment of Evidence. Maastricht: European Mooc Consortium-Labour Market. [Google Scholar]
  23. Fidalgo, Patricia, Joan Thormann, Oleksandr Kulyk, and José Alberto Lencastre. 2020. Students’ perceptions on distance education: A multinational study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 17: 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Frossard, Frédérique, and Mario Barajas. 2018. Enhancing teachers’ intercultural conflict management competences through digital game-based learning: A pedagogical framework. EDEN Conference Proceedings 1: 69–77. [Google Scholar]
  25. Gamage, Thamodi, and Pradeep Kalansooriya. 2021. An Overview on Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) as an Elearning Platform: A Review. Sri Lanka: KDUIRC, pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  26. Gonçalves, Gabriela, Marta Reis, Cátia Sousa, Joana Santos, Alejandro Orgambídez-Ramos, and Peter Scott. 2016. Cultural intelligence and Conflict Management Styles. International Journal of Organizational Analysis 24: 725–42. [Google Scholar]
  27. Goopio, Joselyn, and Catherine Cheung. 2021. The MOOC dropout phenomenon and retention strategies. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism 21: 177–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Han, Jinghe, and Yu Han. 2019. Cultural Concepts as Powerful Theoretical Tools: Chinese Teachers’ Perceptions of Their Relati ionship with Students in a Cross-Cultural Context. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 13: 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Hannon, Laura, and Grainne M. O’Donnell. 2022. Teachers, parents, and family-school partnerships: Emotions, experiences, and advocacy. Journal of Education for Teaching 48: 241–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Hew, Khe Foon, and Wing Sum Cheung. 2014. Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational Research Review 12: 45–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hewson, Claire, and John P. Charlton. 2019. An investigation of the validity of course-based online assessment methods: The role of computer-related attitudes and assessment mode preferences. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 35: 51–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hone, Kate S., and Ghada R. El Said. 2016. Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study. Computers & Education 98: 157–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Jackson, Robert, and Kevin O’Grady. 2019. The religious and worldview dimension of intercultural education: The Council of Europe’s contribution. Intercultural Education 30: 247–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Jo, Donghyuk. 2018. Exploring the determinants of MOOCs continuance intention. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems (TIIS) 8: 3992–4005. [Google Scholar]
  35. Jurtikova, Michaela. 2013. Conflicts between students as interculturally incompetent behavior. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 106: 696–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Keengwe, Jared. 2010. Fostering cross cultural competence in preservice teachers through multicultural education experiences. Early Childhood Education Journal 38: 197–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kunemund, Rachel L., Shannon Nemer McCullough, Chelsea D. Williams, Chantelle C. Miller, Kevin S. Sutherland, Maureen A. Conroy, and Kristen Granger. 2020. The mediating role of teacher self-efficacy in the relation between teacher–child race mismatch and conflict. Psychology in the Schools 57: 1757–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kyere, Eric, Saahoon Hong, and Carolyn Sherlet Gentle-Genitty. 2023. Mediational Effect of Teacher-Based Discrimination on Academic Performance: An Intersectional Analysis of Race, Gender, and Income/Class. Education Sciences 13: 387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lee, Daeyeoul, Sunnie Lee Watson, and William R. Watson. 2020. The influence of successful MOOC learners’ self-regulated learning strategies, self-efficacy, and task value on their perceived effectiveness of a massive open online course. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 21: 81–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Loode, Serge. 2011. Navigating the unchartered waters of cross-cultural conflict resolution education. Conflict Resolution Quarterly 29: 65–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Mahon, Jennifer. 2009. Conflict style and cultural understanding among teachers in the western United States: Exploring relationships. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 33: 46–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Majer, Vincenzo. 1995. ROCI. Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventories. Manuale e Adattamento Italiano [ROCI Italian Manual and Adaptation]. Florence: Organizzazioni Speciali. [Google Scholar]
  43. Malone, Celeste M., and Kareem Z. Ishmail. 2020. A snapshot of multicultural training in school psychology. Psychology in the Schools 57: 1022–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Marocco, Davide, Elena Dell’Aquila, Maria Clelia Zurlo, Federica Vallone, Mario Barajas, Frédérique Frossard, Andrea Di Ferdinando, Raffaele Di Fuccio, Michiel Lippens, Lore Van Praag, and et al. 2019. Attain Cultural Integration through teachers’ COnflict Resolution skills Development: The ACCORD Project. Qwerty-Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education 14: 11–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Meissner, Fran, Nando Sigona, and Steven Vertovec, eds. 2023. The Oxford Handbook of Superdiversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  46. Morris-Rothschild, Britta K., and Marla R. Brassard. 2006. Teachers’ Conflict Management Styles: The role of attachment styles and classroom management efficacy. Journal of School Psychology 44: 105–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Munduate, Lourdes, Juan Ganaza, José M. Peiró, and Martin Euwema. 1999. Patterns of styles in Conflict Management and Effectiveness. International Journal of Conflict Management 10: 5–24. [Google Scholar]
  48. OECD. 2014. Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  49. OECD. 2018a. TALIS—The OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey. Paris: OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  50. OECD. 2018b. The Resilience of Students with an Immigrant Background: Factors that Shape Wellbeing. Paris: OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  51. OECD. 2023. Education GPS. Migrant Background. Paris: OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  52. Papadimitriou, Alexandros. 2023. Adaptive and Intelligent MOOCs: How they Contribute to the Improvement of the MOOCs’ Effectiveness. International Journal of Research in E-Learning, 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  53. Papageorgiou, Eleftheria, Charalampos Krommidas, Nikolaos Digelidis, Louis Moustakas, and Athanasios G. Papaioannou. 2023. An online PETE course on intercultural education for pre-service physical education teachers: A non-randomized controlled trial. Teaching and Teacher Education 121: 103920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Prosen, Mirko, Igor Karnjuš, and Sabina Ličen. 2022. Evaluation of E-learning experience among health and allied health professions students during the COVID-19 pandemic in Slovenia: An instrument development and validation study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19: 4777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Rahim, M. Afzalur. 2001. Managing Conflict in Organizations. Westport: Quorum Books. [Google Scholar]
  56. Rahim, M. Afzalur, and Thomas V. Bonoma. 1979. Managing Organizational Conflict: A Model for Diagnosis and Intervention. Psychological Reports 44: 1323–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Rahim, M. Afzalur, Clement Psenicka, Panagiotis Polychroniou, Jing-Hua Zhao, Chun-Sheng Yu, Kawai Anita Chan, Kwok Wai Yee Susana, Maria G. Alves, Chang-Won Lee, Md. Sahidur Ralunan, and et al. 2002. A model of emotional intelligence and conflict management strategies: A study in seven countries. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis 10: 302–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Rahim, M. Afzalur, David Antonioni, and Clement Psenicka. 2001. A Structural Equations Model of Leader Power, Subordinates’ styles of Handling Conflict, and Job Performance. International Journal of Conflict Management 12: 191–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Soffer, Tal, Tali Kahan, and Eynat Livne. 2017. E-assessment of online academic courses via students’ activities and perceptions. Studies in Educational Evaluation 54: 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Stevens, Peter A. J., and Anthony Gary Dworkin. 2019. The Palgrave Handbook of Race and Ethnic Inequalities in Education. London: Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar]
  61. Susanna, Sancassani. 2017. Progetto MOOCs Italia. Linee guida nazionali per la predisposizione di MOOCs di qualità erogati dalle Università italiane. CRUI. [Google Scholar]
  62. Tehrani, Hossein Dabiriyan, and Sara Yamini. 2020. Personality traits and conflict resolution styles: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences 157: 109794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Vallone, Federica, Elena Dell’Aquila, Maria Clelia Zurlo, and Davide Marocco. 2019. Design Methods for Training Teachers in Conflict Management Within Multi-Ethnic and Multicultural Classes: A Proposed Psychological Framework. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Proceedings of the First Symposium on Psychology-Based Technologies Co-Located with XXXII National Congress of Italian Association of Psychology—Development and Education Section (AIP 2019), Naples, Italy, 25–26 September 2019. Edited by Orazio Miglino and Michela Ponticorvo M. Aachen: CEUR, paper 18. [Google Scholar]
  64. Vallone, Federica, Elena Dell’Aquila, Maria Clelia Zurlo, and Davide Marocco. 2020. ‘ACCORD’ e-Platform: Development and Evaluation of an Innovative Multicultural Training for School Professionals. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Psychology-Based, Naples, Italy, 28–29 September 2020. Edited by Onofrio Gigliotta and Michela Ponticorvo. Aachen: CEUR, paper 6. [Google Scholar]
  65. Vallone, Federica, Elena Dell’Aquila, Pasquale Dolce, Davide Marocco, and Maria Clelia Zurlo. 2022. Teachers’ multicultural personality traits as predictors of intercultural Conflict Management Styles: Evidence from five European countries. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87: 51–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Wang, Yuan, and Ryan Baker. 2018. Grit and intention: Why do learners complete MOOCs? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 19: 20–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Yu, Tong, and Guo-Ming Chen. 2008. Intercultural sensitivity and Conflict Management Styles in cross-cultural organizational situations. Intercultural Communication Studies 17: 149–61. [Google Scholar]
  68. Zurlo, Maria Clelia, and Daniela Pes. 2006. Dimensioni dello stress e Successful Aging degli insegnanti nell’arco di vita professionale [Teachers’ Stress dimensions and Successful Aging in the professional life span]. Psicologia della Salute 1: 50–64. [Google Scholar]
  69. Zurlo, Maria Clelia, Daniela Pes, and Roberto Capasso. 2016. Personality characteristics, job stressors, and job satisfaction: Main and interaction effects on psychological and physical health conditions of Italian schoolteachers. Psychological Reports 119: 27–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Zurlo, Maria Clelia, Federica Vallone, Elena Dell’Aquila, and Davide Marocco. 2020. Teachers’ Patterns of Management of Conflicts With Students: A Study in Five European Countries. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 16: 112–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Socsci 12 00332 g001 550
Figure 1. The ACCORD MOOC structure.
Figure 1. The ACCORD MOOC structure.
Socsci 12 00332 g001
Socsci 12 00332 g002 550
Figure 2. Changes pre-to-post-MOOC in conflict management strategies.
Figure 2. Changes pre-to-post-MOOC in conflict management strategies.
Socsci 12 00332 g002
Table
Table 1. Teachers’ background information.
Table 1. Teachers’ background information.
Value
[n (%)]
Gender
Women85 (85.9)
Men14 (14.1)
Age
<35 years7 (7.1)
35–45 years29 (29.3)
>45 years63 (63.6)
Working Seniority
<5 years14 (14.1)
5–10 years10 (10.1)
>10 years75 (75.8)
Table
Table 2. Means (M) and Standard Deviations (SD) for Conflict Management Styles: Normative data and Repeated Measures ANOVA for pre- and post-MOOC by teachers.
Table 2. Means (M) and Standard Deviations (SD) for Conflict Management Styles: Normative data and Repeated Measures ANOVA for pre- and post-MOOC by teachers.
Normative DataPre MOOCPost MOOCRepeated Measures ANOVA
Conflict Management StylesM (SD)M (SD)M (SD)Wilk’s LambdaChi-Square
Integrating4.15 (0.63)4.50 (0.44)4.46 (0.48)0.9950.495
Compromising3.18 (0.81)3.74 (0.81)3.65 (0.69)0.9920.771
Avoiding3.01 (0.86)3.04 (0.68)2.51 (0.66)0.733 ***35.75 ***
Obliging3.39 (0.66)2.71 (0.49)2.55 (0.45)0.953 *4.81 *
Dominating2.91 (0.94)1.80 (0.69)2.06 (0.79)0.994 *5.76 *
*** p < 0.001; * p < 0.05.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Dell’Aquila, E.; Vallone, F.; Zurlo, M.C.; Marocco, D. A Tailored MOOC Fostering Intercultural Conflict Management in the Educational Context: Evidence from Italy. Soc. Sci. 2023, 12, 332. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12060332

AMA Style

Dell’Aquila E, Vallone F, Zurlo MC, Marocco D. A Tailored MOOC Fostering Intercultural Conflict Management in the Educational Context: Evidence from Italy. Social Sciences. 2023; 12(6):332. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12060332

Chicago/Turabian Style

Dell’Aquila, Elena, Federica Vallone, Maria Clelia Zurlo, and Davide Marocco. 2023. "A Tailored MOOC Fostering Intercultural Conflict Management in the Educational Context: Evidence from Italy" Social Sciences 12, no. 6: 332. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12060332

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop