Date

5-2020

Department

School of Education

Degree

Doctor of Education in Curriculum & Instruction (EdD)

Chair

Eric Lovik

Keywords

Cultural intelligence, Cognitive CQ, Metacognitive CQ, Motivational CQ, Behavioral CQ, Faculty Development

Disciplines

Education | Higher Education

Abstract

In this age of globalization, colleges need to ensure that their students be able to function effectively across cultures upon graduation. This ability is referred to as Cultural Intelligence (CQ) and is comprised of four subfactors: Metacognitive, Cognitive, Motivational, and Behavioral CQ. Faculty play an important role in getting students exposed to the cross-cultural experiences and thoughts needed to develop CQ, yet little is known about the faculty’s CQ levels. The purpose of this study with a quantitative causal-comparative cross-sectional research design was to determine if the undergraduate faculty members in this convenience sample have differing levels of CQ between academic units within a large faith-based university in the southeastern United States. The independent variable was the academic units in which the faculty teach and the continuous dependent variables of CQ were measured with the Expanded Cultural Intelligence Scale. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted with the Composite CQ scores of faculty as the dependent variable, and a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted, using the CQ scores of faculty on the four factors of CQ as dependent variables. The results of this study indicate there are statistically significant differences between the faculty of several academic units on the Composite, Cognitive, Metacognitive, and Behavioral CQ scores but not Motivational CQ scores. The findings provide valuable information to determine whether CQ training during faculty development should be provided to all faculty across the board or with discipline-specific variations.

Download

Share

COinS