skip to main content


Vol.2, Issue 2, 2016, pp.89-103 Full text

Crossmark logo

Web of Science: 000449159200002

Ellie Boyadzhieva

South-West University Neofit Rilski, Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria

Pluralism, multiculturalism, leaner autonomy and motivation have become buzz expressions discussed widely both by the Common European Framework of Reference and the European Centre for Modern Languages. However, despite the hard work to implement these new approaches in the classroom, some countries seem to be more adaptive compared to others. In the author's opinion, the answer is rooted in the specifics of national cultures. The article discusses the roles of teacher and student as an archetypal case of micro social organization as they reveal typical patterns of social behaviour. Provided is a detailed description of the specifics of the Bulgarian national culture along the six dimensions of Hofstede's theory of organizations and cultures with regard to the educational system. The readiness of the Bulgarian teachers and students to comply with the concepts of pluralistic approaches, multiculturalism, learner-centred teaching and autonomy in the Bulgarian classroom are explored. The general conclusion is that these ideas are highly culture-sensitive and the success of their implementation depends on the closeness of the cultures where they emerged and the recipient countries to which they are exported.

Keywords: education, culture, cultural dimensions, autonomy, multiculturalism

Article history:
Submitted: 2 December 2016;
Reviewed: 20 December 2016;
Revised: 27 December 2016;
Accepted: 28 December 2016;
Published: 31 December 2016

Citation (APA):
Boyadzhieva, E. (2016). Reflections on the Relation between National Cultures and Innovations in Education - the case of Bulgaria. English Studies at NBU, 2(2), 89-103.

Copyright © 2016 Ellie Boyadzhieva

This open access article is published and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. If you want to use the work commercially, you must first get the authors' permission.

Banks, J. A. (2010). Multicultural education: Characteristics and goals. In J. A. Banks, & Banks, J. A. (Eds.). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (pp. 3-31) (7th ed.). Wiley & Sons.

Benson, P. (2006). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40, 21-40.

Boyadzhieva, E. (2014a). Pluralistic Approaches in Education: Culture Related Issues. In Bereshova, J. & Suhanyova, Z. (Eds.). Pluralistic Approaches to Languages and Cultures in Education Conference proceedings, 26-27 November 2014, Trnava University, pp. 35–48.

Boyadzhieva, E. (2014b) Theory and Practice in Foreign Language Teaching - Past and Present. Journal of Modern Education Review, 4(10), 776–788.

Boyadzhieva, E. (2014c). The Teacher Role and Learner Autonomy - Some Issues of Contention. Godishnik na filologicheskia facultet 12 ['Yearbook of the philological faculty 12'], (pp. 60–68). South-West University Publishing house.

Boyadzhieva E. (2015a). Global Trends in Education: Issues of Contention. Ezikov sviat - Orbis Linguarum, 13(1), South-West University Publishing house, 16-25.

Boyadzhieva E. (2015b). Modern Trends in Education and National Cultures. Journal of the Department of Foreign Languages of Romanian-American University, 6(1), 131-139.

Boyadzhieva E. (2016a). Learner-Centered Teaching and Learner Autonomy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 35-40.

Boyadzhieva E. (2016b). Reflections on Learner autonomy: Cultural perspectives. International Scientific and Practical Conference "World Science" 4(2), 11-14.

Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation: A literature review. System 23(2), 165–174.

Fullinwider, R. K. (2003) Multicultural Education, In R. Curren (Ed), A Companion to the Philosophy of Education, (pp.487-500). Blackwell Publishing.

Gardner, H. (2004). Changing minds. Harvard Business School Press.

Gerhart B. & Fang M. (2005). National culture and Human Resource Management: Assumptions and Evidence, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(6), 971–986.

Hofstede Home page. (n.d.).

Hofstede Homepage – Bulgaria. (n.d.).

Hofstede, G. (2009). Geert Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions.

Hofstede, G. , Hofstede, G. J., Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. (3rd ed.), McGraw-Hill USA.

Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon, (First published 1979). Council of Europe.

Inglehart R. F. & Norris, P. (2009). Cosmopolitan Communications: Cultural Diversity in a Globalized World. Cambridge University Press.

Khatri, N. (2009). Consequences of Power Distance Orientation in Organisations. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective, 13(1).

Little, D., Ridley, J. & Ushioda, E. (2002). Towards greater learner autonomy in the foreign language classroom. Authentik.

McSweeney, B. (2002). Hofstede's Identification of National Culture Differences – A Triumph of Faith a Failure of Analysis, Human Relations, 55(1), 89–188.

Melting pot. (n. d.). Merriam-Webster On-line Dictionary. Retrieved from

Schwartz, S. H. (2006). Value orientations: Measurement, antecedents and consequences across nations. In R. Jowell, C. Roberts, R. Fitzgerald, & G. Eva (Eds.), Measuring attitudes cross-nationally - lessons from the European Social Survey, (pp. 169-204). Sage.

Shy. (n.d.). Dictionary on-line.

Venaik, S. & Brewer, P. (2013). Critical issues in the Hofstede and GLOBE national culture models, International Marketing Review, 30(5), 469-482.

World Values Survey. (n.d.). Retrieved from


Handling Editor: Stan Bogdanov
Verified Editor Record on Publons

Article Metrics