Hayes and Khine (2010) have recently published a very interesting empirical paper that investigates Arab women’s ways of knowing and learning. They believe that answering questions such as “How do Arab women know what we know?” and “What beliefs and attitudes do they have about knowledge?” will help both Arab women and teachers enhance the learning and teaching process. If educators understand the ways Arab female students acquire knowledge, they will be able to align pedagogical strategies to learners needs more effectively.
This study was based on the work of Belenky et al. around women’s epistemological beliefs which culminated in the publication of “Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice and mind”. In 1986, Belenky and his team studied 135 women in order better understand women’s approaches to knowledge, personal growth, and decision-making. Their subjects described five ways of knowing: received knowledge, subjective knowledge, constructed knowledge, and procedural knowledge. The latter indicates that knowing does not rely on intuition or information extracted from content but requires “conscious, systematic thinking” (Brownlee, Boulton-Lewis, & Purdie, 2002). Additionally, procedural knowledge in particular consists of two forms of knowing: connected and separate.
Hayes and Khine used the Attitude Towards Thinking and Learning Survey (ATTLS) with 167 women from a university in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to carry out Belenky’s experimental design. Just like their counterparts in the West, the majority of Arab women turned out to be “connected knowers” (ck). They do not seek logical or empirical explanation of a position; their primary goal is to comprehend the position rather than to test its validity (Clinchy, 1996). On the other hand, separate knowing (sk) demands a sense of detachment from ideas and a critical perspective to knowledge. It should be noted that scores on CK and SK reflect a learning style (Gallotti et.al, 1999). They are not correlated with performance or ability but are strongly “related” to gender (Magolda, 1992).
How can this inform pedagogy in the Arabic world? Since schools in the UAE are segregated from grades 5 until 12, teachers might find it easier to focus on one gender and attune their teaching methods to females. With such a significantly high CK, Arab females will prefer teachers who are in control, helpful, facilitating, emotional, patient and understanding. In contrast, students with high SK scores connected better with instructors that are demanding, enthusiastic, critical and analytical. This might be validated by Richardson (2004) observation of the Arab “male dominated society which still resists the idea of women thinking for themselves”. Additionally, studies have demonstrated that connected knowers who belong to a collectivist culture (such as the Asian and Arabic) thrive in environments where collaboration and team work is part of the learning design. However, they have an affinity with rote learning and try to avoid formulating deep connections and creative concepts. This lack of interest to analytical analysis and innovation should warn educators and spur them into designing lessons where Arab females are interested in creative and systematic reasoning. Teachers in the Arab world are thus encouraged to teach females how to challenge the status quo and question ideas. Tendencies of preferred learning styles and ways of knowing can change over time according to William Perry (1970), a key early researcher in the field of epistemological beliefs.
Following on this study, it would be worth exploring specifically how Hofstede (1980) five dimensions of culture and religion affect the learning in the Arab context, which is largely driven by religious laws and a multicultural community. The results of such an investigation will greatly help teachers teaching Arabs in a diverse classroom that sometimes embrace up to 70 different nationalities.

Khine, M. S., & Hayes, B. (2010). Investigating women’s ways of knowing: An exploratory study in the UAE. Issues in Educational Research , 20(2).

A study about Ethics, CSR and Sustainability Education offered in the Financial Times Top 50 Global Business Schools responds to questions about the inclusion and coverage of those topics in the MBA programs, level of students interest in these topics and ways those topics are being taught. Even though it has been proven that teaching ethics in the profit-maximizing world of business is a challenge (Alsop, 2003; Evans and Robertson, 2003), MBA programs are beginning to expand the dimensions of ethics to include: (1) the corporation’s ethical duties for society (its “corporate social responsibility” or CSR as well as (2) the corporation’s role in minimizing its environmental impact and resource consumption so that it meets future generation’s needs (it’s “sustainable management”). Christensen et al. conducted a survey of the top 50 business schools as identified in the Financial Times rating of global MBA programs. The study of the findings analyzed how those top programs address ethics, CSR and Sustainability in their curricula. The research is quite international (US, Asia, and Europe) and looks at best practices that might be of interest to researchers, practitioners, and instructors involved in curriculum development and delivery.
The survey questions were directed to deans and directors of MBA programs as they are in the best position to speak about the past and future strategic emphases of their graduate programs. The two main questions that were addressed in the survey are:
1. Are ethics, and/or CSR, and/or sustainability covered at these institutions (stand alone courses vs. integrated)? Are they required or optional/elective courses?
2. Do the top 50 institutions dedicate centers or institutes to supporting ethics, and/or CSR, and/or sustainability?
Syllabi from faculty and school websites were also examined for additional follow up data.
The preliminary hypothesis created by the authors was that the ethics field is now expanding to include coverage of topics that fall under the “sustainability” capacity. Furthermore, in the event that such a trend is identified, the authors wanted to study ways sustainability is being taught.
The methodology used to collect the data was through personal telephone interviews to 44 business schools who agreed to respond (88% for a response rate). Financial Times ratings were used as it represents well the international population of global business schools with highest reputation, scope and academic rigor. To avoid any cultural miscommunication about the subject matter, the terminology used to define the difference between ethics, CSR and sustainability was presented prior to the interview so that respondents determine how their coursework fits within those definitions. The definitions supplied are listed below:
• Business Ethics: A form of applied ethics that examines ethical rules and principles within a commercial context; the various moral or ethical problems that can arise in a business setting; and any special duties or obligations that apply to persons who are engaged in commerce.
• Corporate Social Responsibility. The voluntary actions taken by a company to address economic, social, and environmental impacts of its business operations and the concerns of its principal stakeholders.
• Sustainable Business/Sustainability. Business that contributes to an equitable and ecologically sustainable economy. Sustainable businesses offer products and services that fulfill society’s needs while contributing to the well-being of the earth’s inhabitants.

An analysis of the survey findings encompasses the following four main areas:
1. Course on Ethics/CSR/Sustainability: 84.1% require students to take courses that address one or all of these topics. 25% of schools reported that they require MBA students to study ethics as a stand-alone course. Nearly one third of the responding schools require coverage of all three topics in the MBA curriculum.
2. Institutional Support: centers who conduct research on those topics imply long-term institutional support as well as legitimacy and validation. It was found that 65.90% of schools stated that they have a center related to these topics. 47.73% of the 44 schools confirmed that their centers/institutes were in support of the sustainability topics.
3. Integration: one goal of the research was to examine whether (and to what extent) the three topics were “mainstreamed” or integrated in the program. It was found that 54.55% of schools followed an integrated approach. Teaching sustainability requires changes in the traditional classroom and an emphasis on immersion programs as a cutting-edge feature.
4. Social Network: Additionally, student involvement in clubs/networks (Net Impact) has proven to be critical to sustain change and drive the CSR agenda. Overall, findings indicate that 72% of the top 50 schools have Net Impact chapters and 100% of the top 10 schools have Net Impact chapters.
This shows that many Business Schools are making a strong move to increasingly embrace sustainability, CSR and ethics and integrate those topics into the chore curriculum. The two tenacious systems that drive this integration are students’ networks and schools research centers.

Below are examples of how those topics are integrated, taught and supported by students.
Integration: It should be noted that integration is such a powerful method to connect business models to human and nature’s systems. Usually integration is a staged process where organizations start by offering electives, then some of those courses become compulsory and finally key concepts are meshed in other core courses such as strategic planning, finance, marketing, etc.. (Russel, 2006). Interestingly, RSM Erasmus University and University of Western Ontario in Canada allocate a portion of a students’ final grade to evaluate how students have worked with ethics related issues across all courses. Based on this study, only two schools have committed to weaving all three topics into the core curricula. Some schools use the orientation period to introduce CSR/Sustainability to students. Tepper School of Business at Carnegie Mellon, faculty across multiple disciplines designed a 12-hour orientation course to provide the students with a framework from which to operate their business future decisions. Tepper offers a professional development program to faculty so that they can collaborate with a law and ethics instructors and weave sustainability into class projects. University of Michigan engages students into a 1-week leadership program that incorporates heavy focus on ethical frameworks in leadership and explores how business and communities can live in harmony. To ensure that all faculty regardless of content area are infusing CSR/Sustainability into their course, Brigham Young University (BYU) included “CSR/Sustainability” in its faculty yearly review scheme and is taking steps to tie ethics education to faculty compensation.
Teaching Techniques: experiential learning through excursions and immersion. Many of the schools believe that to promote ethics, students need to endure a unique immersion or a compelling learning experience. One of the earliest examples is University of Maryland. It has designed a 3-day program centered around a visit to a prison that houses “white collar” criminals who discuss consequences of ethical violations in the business sector. The course also encompasses readings, role plays, lectures, and guest speakers. Other schools such as Cornell instituted an immersion course where participants engage in real-life consulting projects with a heavy focus on sustainability. It requires students, who wish to focus on sustainability, to attend a 10 day “bootcamp” course that “provide the intellectual foundation for sustainability in a business context”. Students will be able to “funnel the passion and energy they bring to the topic by grounding it in both a historical and functional context”. ESADE Business School in Spain offers a project-based internship program that allows students to design and implement social development programs for small companies and local communities in Latin America. University of Virginia has developed a simulation program for teaching ethics. Over 1000 business school students has benefited from this innovation. On the other hand, University of North Carolina gives its students access to a “sustainable enterprise mentoring” program, which connects them to practitioners in sustainability fields for a 12 month period of mentoring and coaching. These teaching techniques require creativity and flexibility from faculty. Even though those courses stretch the boundaries of curriculum and students personal and professional development, it does add a financial burden on school and/or students.
Social Networks: Based on the Net Impact website, the organization’s mission is ‘‘to improve the world by growing and strengthening a network of new leaders who are using the power of business to make a positive net social, environmental, and economic impact. With over 150 chapters in the world, a central office in San Francisco, and partnerships with leading for profit and non-profit organizations, Net Impact allows members to use business for social good in their careers, and communities.’’ Students’ engagement and interest in these topics, were repeatedly mentioned by deans and faculty as one driver of the course content (and even program focus). Other factors that deans stress on are trends in society and within their peer institutions.

Benchmarking: Notable Practices in Teaching Ethics, CSR, & Sustainability
Spotlight: The “Living Management Assignment” LMA program from RSM Erasmus University integrates the six functional areas (finance, marketing, strategy, operations, human resources and entrepreneurship) with sustainability and is required by all MBA students. Executives from various industries help students with a ‘‘Living Case’’ project and they assess the project separately from the faculty assessment. The reasons to pursue this offering, according to Dean Page, are results oriented: ‘‘If students want to succeed in the global world, they have to understand its complexity; work with those who hold different values, work with different stakeholders; they must consider the impact of the firm upon society.’’