“I Came Back as a New Human Being”

Abstract

While education abroad programs are part of an emphasis to prepare university students to be more interculturally competent, one criticism is that programs often send students overseas without adequate preparation. This study aims to explore what students have learned from education abroad programs and how their stories might reveal the need for predeparture and postdeparture training. Using the concept of intercultural competence from the field of intercultural communication, this study analyzes reflective papers of 18 students who have returned from education abroad programs. The results indicate that while experiences abroad have an obvious impact on students’ cognitive, affective, and behavioral skills, they do not necessarily help to develop deeper levels of intercultural competence. This study concludes that immersion into the culture alone may not increase intercultural competence. Ways in which intercultural communication courses can leverage the students’ experiences in education abroad programs are also discussed.

Keywords

intercultural competence education abroad study abroad intercultural communication

“Intercultural competence”¹ is no longer an objective found only in intercultural communication courses. Instead, it is now often one of the specific goals of higher education. Educational institutes are under pressure to prepare “global-ready graduates” or “global citizens” (Hunter, White, & Godbey, 2006; Paige & Goode, 2009). The assumption is that if attained somehow on a personal level, intercultural competence will help students deal with current states of diversity and globalization. This movement in higher education would appear to create an opportunity for campus collaboration, especially among administrators, intercultural scholars, and international education professionals. However, this does not happen as expected. Kehm and Teichler (2007) note that internationalization efforts are mostly initiated and developed among policy makers or administrators. These conversations often do not include specialists that have actively pursued research in intercultural competence.

At the same time, each group approaches the development of intercultural competence differently. Within international education, the focus tends to be on how to implement cultural aspects into the curricula and how to encourage students to go abroad (Bok, 2006; Paige & Goode, 2009; Olson, Evans, & Shoenberg, 2007). However, intercultural communication scholars tend to focus on theoretical aspects of intercultural competence, including debates about components of competence and attempts to validate these components so that effectiveness in cross-cultural communication can be measured (Bradford, Allen, & Beisser, 1998; Collier, 1989). This focus on conceptualization and theorization has not adequately addressed practical issues with intercultural competence.

Recently, we have seen the increase of cross-disciplinary collaboration between scholars in international education and intercultural communication (Deardorff, 2006; 2008). These efforts derive from the need for effective program assessment for internationalization efforts. They are also necessary if schools would seriously attempt to improve their programs. As intercultural communication scholars, we believe that it is our responsibility to assist the programs not only in assessment, but also in leveraging the impact of internationalization efforts. The purpose of this paper is to examine ways in which intercultural communication can provide insight into international education programs, based on theoretical approaches to intercultural competence. First, we will describe how intercultural competence has been approached in international education. Then, we will summarize how scholarship in intercultural communication has theorized the concept of intercultural competence. By using data from students’ experiences with education abroad², we will then demonstrate specific ways in which intercultural communication courses would benefit education abroad experiences.

Intercultural Competence in Settings of Higher Education

Within the field of international education, the foundations of education abroad efforts in the United States began in the 1950s. Vande Berg and Paige (2009) discuss the impact of a pamphlet published in 1955 by the State Department. The assumptions of study abroad outlined in the pamphlet still carry considerable influence in international education today. First, intercultural competence was conceived as mainly a cognitive phenomenon with the most emphasis placed on culture-specific knowledge. Culture learning was approached from a contrastive method, comparing how American behavior could be compared to local practices in other countries. The way to become competent was to acquire necessary culture-specific information and learn the local language. The assumption was that contact with difference will automatically lead to intercultural competence, which led to a focus on participation in immersion programs as the mainstay in international education.

Recently, however, study abroad programs are criticized in various aspects. One criticism is that most programs overlook the importance of predeparture training. As Paige and Goode (2009) report, while it has been established that intercultural learning happens more effectively when carefully facilitated, “this type of cultural mentoring by international education professionals is uneven at best and often nonexistent” (p. 334). This observation is supported by Goode (2008), who found that faculty members involved in leading study abroad programs possessed a limited understanding of intercultural learning and how to facilitate such learning. Further, Deardorff (2008) reported that oftentimes predeparture orientations for study abroad programs tend to focus on logistics instead of on intercultural training. These studies tend to conclude that full immersion without intervention does not effectively increase intercultural competence.

Another criticism to education abroad programs is concerning assessment. A study by Deardorff (2006) investigated how schools assess students’ intercultural competence. Of 24 institutions identified as having a strong commitment for internationalization, only 38% have some forms of assessment for intercultural competence. Moreover, a widely used method is self-report pretest and posttest, which was warned by many scholars as insufficient to assess intercultural competence. Deardorff’s survey results to school administrators and scholars indicated that assessment should be accomplished by both quantitative and qualitative methods. Qualitative measures, including interviews, observation, case studies, and narrative diaries, are highly recommended for better analysis of students’ intercultural competence. Therefore, while U.S. universities have engaged in education abroad efforts for years, there are still many ways in which programs should be assessed and improved to help develop intercultural competence. We now turn the discussion to how the concept of intercultural competence has been approached by intercultural scholars.

Overview of Intercultural Competence Within Intercultural Communication

Within intercultural communication, approaches to intercultural competence began with the roots of the discipline, which emerged from the need of the United States government to send military personnel and others abroad after the Second World War (Leeds-Hurwitz, 1990; Rogers, Hart, & Miike, 2002). Most of this research was initially concerned with improving communicative abilities of those personnel for them to accomplish tasks and establish good relationships outside of the United States. Many scholars devoted their efforts to building models that address requirements for a single person, such as a sojourner, to strive successfully in intercultural environments.

Scholars in intercultural communication started by exploring what it means to be an effective communicator. One influential early study, conducted by Ruben and Kealey (1979; see also Ruben, 1976, 1977, 1989) highlighted that observable behaviors, not knowledge of other cultures, were considered a better variable for effective communication. Ruben and Kealey (1979) proposed seven behavioral assessments of communicative competency. These include (a) display of respect; (b) interaction posture; (c) orientation to knowledge; (e) empathy; (f) self-oriented role behavior; (g) interaction management; and (h) tolerance for ambiguity. Another research approach came from Hammer, Gudykunst, and Wiseman (1978), in which 24 abilities were identified based on a review of literature concerning intercultural effectiveness. Three dimensions were specified: (a) the ability to deal with psychological stress; (b) the ability to effectively communicate; and (c) the ability to establish interpersonal relationships. Hammer et al.’s (1978) approach directly focused on characteristics and behaviors of the sojourners.

However, Spitzberg (1989) argued that competence is not only effectiveness; it also involves appropriateness. Appropriateness refers to “avoiding the violation of valued rules or expectancies” whereas effectiveness is “the achievement of valued objectives or rewards” (Spitzberg, 1989, p. 250). Intercultural communication competence is defined as “the ability to effectively and appropriately execute communication behaviors to elicit a desired response in a specific environment” (Wiemann, 1977, cited in Chen, 1990, p. 247). Competence, then, is conceptualized based on cognitive (knowledge), affective (attitude and motivation), and behavioral (skills) approaches (Bennett, 2009, Chen, 1990; Howard Hamilton, Richardson, & Shuford, 1998; Spitzberg, 1989). For instance, Spitzberg (1989) suggested that competence depends on the “motivation to communicate, knowledge of the communicative process and context, and skill in implementing motives and knowledge, given the constraints of the context” (p. 250). Chen and Starosta (1996) constructed an intercultural competence model that includes three perspectives that reflect the above approaches: intercultural awareness (cognitive), intercultural sensitivity (affective), and intercultural adroitness (behavioral).

When considering the concept of intercultural competence, there are obviously many theoretical approaches (Spitzberg & Changnon, 2009). Realizing that a unified set of competence should be determined to help administrators assess their education abroad programs, Deardorff (2006) used a Delphi methodology to compile 23 intercultural experts’ definitions and components of intercultural competence. One of the visual models developed from this research is a pyramid model of competence, in which the lower levels (based on requisite attitudes, knowledge, and skills) support and enhance the higher levels (those of desired internal and external outcomes). At the top, some of the desired external outcomes are the ability to both behave and communicate effectively to achieve goals. The desired internal outcomes include aspects of an individual’s frame of reference, including aspects of adaptability, flexibility, and empathy. These are supported by both knowledge and skills. Finally, the base of the pyramid rests on requisite attitudes, including those of respect, openness, and curiosity. This model, then, includes the traditional aspects of affective, cognitive, and skills elements, along with attempts to present aspects of the foundational elements of competence and an ordering of elements to result in the more visible and external outcome, that of effective and appropriate communication.

No matter how intercultural competence is theorized within intercultural communication, scholars seem to agree on at least three core assumptions. First, most intercultural communication scholars agree that intercultural competence should be conceptualized based on cognitive, affective, and behavioral approaches (Bennett, 2009). Second, the end result should be communication that is considered both effective and appropriate. Third, intercultural competence is culture-general. That is, there are core competencies that individuals can develop that are not specific to any culture.

Within intercultural communication, then, besides general agreement on necessary components of skills, the emphasis on theorizing has not necessarily produced practical results or ways to specifically measure levels of intercultural competence. For example, Bennett (2009) suggests that there has been an overreliance on emphasizing cognitive skills, without enough focus on affective or behavioral skills. At the same time, while necessary theorizing is continuing, many students engaged in education abroad are continually being exposed to situations that could improve their own intercultural competence. It is obvious, then, that increased collaboration between intercultural scholars and international education professionals could result in more effective internationalization programs.

Therefore, this study is designed to examine qualitative data from students’ education abroad experiences with the purpose of identifying how components of intercultural competence are represented in descriptions of learning. The guiding question in this study is: In students’ reflective narratives of intercultural learning, how do students describe aspects of cognitive, behavioral, and affective skills? The second question addresses possible collaboration based on the results of the first question: How can these descriptions help develop pedagogy to enhance intercultural competence in international education efforts?

Method

This study is based on the analysis of 18 reflection papers of students at a university in the southeast of the United States. These students enrolled in a certificate program that aims to prepare them to be more cross-culturally adept and to develop global citizenship skills. One of the requirements of this program is to engage in an education abroad experience, including traditional study abroad programs or international internships that last for at least one week. There is no standard course required for students prior to their education abroad experience. However, students in this certificate program are required to take at least four courses that address international or cross-cultural issues related to their majors. They are also required to study a foreign language if their native language is English. Once the students have returned from their overseas experience, they must write a reflection paper and submit it to their advisor to complete the education abroad requirement.

The purpose of the reflection paper assignment is to have students self-evaluate their international experience and their direct interactions with people from different cultures. Five specific prompts are included in the assignment instructions: (a) the students’ experience of cultural difference; (b) the students’ adjustment during the international experience; (c) the students’ collaboration with people from a different culture; (d) the students’ experience communicating or speaking the local language; and (e) the students’ specific skills, knowledge, or abilities they used or the new ones they have gained through this international experience. The students have to write at least 200 words for each prompt question.

Data Collection

All students who submitted reflection papers were contacted through email by the researchers. The email stated the general goal of this research study and asked for participation. If the students agreed to participate, they were granted access to an electronic consent form. The data collection process took place over an 11-month period, starting in March 2010 and ending in January 2011. A total of 39 students were initially contacted; 20 consented to participate in this study. However, two of these papers were excluded because they did not represent an international experience outside of the United States. As a result, this research is based on a total of 18 reflection papers. The experiences abroad happened between 2007 and 2010, with the majority of students traveling during 2009. Travel durations range from 1 week to 6 months, with the most common length of experience being between 5 to 8 weeks.

Data Analysis

To analyze the data, we combined all the students’ reflection papers to look for common themes. Once initial themes were identified, these were categorized into the different components of cognitive, behavioral, and affective skills. Because the students wrote reflection papers based on the five prompt questions, their essays tended to focus on similar issues. For example, every student addressed aspects of language use because one of the prompts asked about their experience with the local language. While the prompts act to focus the responses that students cover in their papers, this allowed for consistency of topics and for uniformity of comparisons between papers. The purpose of the analysis was to detail ways in which students describe the skills that they acquired during their study abroad, not to actually measure levels of competence gained during the experience.

Research Results

To answer the first research question regarding how students describe aspects of cognitive, behavioral, and affective skills that they have acquired through their experience abroad, this section will detail the descriptive accounts of the research participants’ reflection papers.

Descriptions of Acquired Cognitive Skills

Within this category, the emphasis on acquisition was based on specific information that participants could identify as having learned. Many of the comments were about specific aspects of the new culture, such as religion, as one student describes, “My conversations with her [host mother] helped me improve my knowledge of the Catholic faith” (A, Costa Rica).³ Other comments indicated acquisition of information regarding the economy, politics, or history of a location, as this quote exemplifies: “I increased my understanding of Central America—their customs, culture, political and educational systems” (J, Costa Rica). Some participants also gained knowledge about decision-making and goal-setting because of their experience in international internships (M, Rwanda; Q, Peru). One student even described how his experience studying overseas really motivated him to continue to increase cognitive skills: “After visiting Central Europe, my interest in the area, instead of being sated, grew exponentially. Since I got back, I have attempted to digest as much knowledge about the area as possible” (L, Germany and Central Europe).

Within the category of cognitive skills, one prevalent theme was the identification of cultural differences between the United States and the new location. These descriptions fit the traditional approach of culture learning through a contrastive method. For example, one student explains learning about Chinese culture based on different approaches to education:

In China, it is common to pay for public education, and public schools are very competitive with each other, to the extent that the schools will stay open for students to work six to seven days a week, eight to nine hours a day. By comparison, education in the United States is relatively uncompetitive. Public school is free, and no matter what school you go to, you only go for 5 days a week, six to eight hours a day. (S, China)

What is unique about this student’s comments is how she goes into detail including information about both China and the United States. Many of the other participants, while identifying cultural information through contrast to U.S. culture, did not specifically comment on the insight that their new knowledge actually provided them about their own culture. For example, one participant learned that “walking through the streets . . . it was easy to spot Americans. We tried to dress nicer as the locals would, and take our time. Being around churches and cathedrals we were very respectful” (D, Italy). The implication in learning this information about how the local population dressed and presented themselves was obviously made in contrast to the participant’s own cultural norms. However, what is not present in his comments is any identification of what his specific cultural norms are. In other words, the focus is on: In Italy people act like this. The comparison is not overtly communicated as: In the United States, people act like this, which is why I can see a difference in public behaviors in Italy. Therefore, most descriptions of knowledge gained about the new culture, while learned from comparison to the home culture, were depicted only as learning culture-specific information about the new culture, not as learning culture-specific information about the participants’ home culture.

Descriptions of Acquired Behavioral Skills

The second main category is acquired behavioral skills; within this category there were two main emphases. While students described many learning experiences with regard to language and communication skills, they also described learning many different varied living skills.

Acquired language skills

Language issues were heavily commented on in the reflections. Many participants described greatly improving language skills based on their immersion in a foreign language setting: “The biggest thing I got while abroad was a better confidence in my ability to speak the language, as I was very insecure about it before” (P, Spain). Close to half of the students mentioned having some amount of language skills prior to their overseas experience; most of these students traveled to Spanish-speaking countries. There was one student who had studied Arabic previously before traveling to Morocco and another who had studied Chinese before traveling to China. For other places traveled (such as Italy, France, Central Europe, Turkey) no language preparation occurred at all. Therefore, these students were in short-term programs and received study abroad instruction solely in English. In their narratives, they formed more relationships with other English speakers and did not experience homestay situations. Language learning for these individuals was more focused on “survival” language skills such as ordering food in restaurants and navigating public transportation.

The importance of nonverbal communication was mentioned frequently with regard to attempts at effective communication. Many participants described how they learned to use hand gestures and body language to communicate as clearly as possible, as this excerpt demonstrates:

A specific skill I developed from the lack of communication is my ability to use my body language to make myself understood. I always smiled and acted confidently, and used my hands to point to where I wanted to go and used my body and hands to try and describe what I wanted. (S, China)

Another student expressed his experience with the value of nonverbal skills in the form of advice: “Do not be afraid to use your hands. Communication reaches far beyond using only your voice and you would be surprised to see how much can be translated through simple hand movements” (I, Panama).

The prevalence of comments regarding the importance of nonverbal communication is important for two reasons. First of all, this indicates that students were immersed in foreign language settings in which they were not fluent enough to rely solely on their oral skills. Hence, gestures and other nonverbal strategies were necessary to aid in their communication. Second, these descriptions about the use of nonverbal skills imply that for most, this was their first time to realize or experience the usefulness of gestures in such a manner. Participants’ relative isolation from other native-English speakers and their immersion into a new language community was a new occurrence. These education abroad situations were noteworthy because of the experience of being in the language minority.

Students not only honed their nonverbal communication skills, but they also listed many language learning strategies that were utilized. Examples of specific strategies include continuously carrying a language phrase book or dictionary, not being afraid to ask many questions, being willing to listen a lot, and being willing to try to speak to anyone. One student described how food was a way to learn vocabulary words; he would go to the grocery stores in Italy where each food item had a picture and the name of the item on display (D, Italy). Another example of an important language learning strategy involved the willingness to not be discouraged if others laughed at your attempts to communicate:

Never be scared to immerse yourself in a society of non-English speakers. You will surely get laughed at once in a while but that is all part of the learning experience, and maybe when you think back about what you were actually telling someone, you might laugh yourself as well. (I, Panama)

All the learning strategies that students described, while perhaps helpful in any context, are specifically useful in immersion situations. Whether or not students had studied a language in the United States, the learning strategies highlighted would not have necessarily been utilized or considered until being immersed in a foreign language setting.

One more noteworthy consideration with regard to language skills is the frequency of the mention of issues with pronunciation, slang, or colloquial expressions. Even if students were familiar with a specific language, such as Spanish, most of them learned there were pronunciation issues unique to a specific geographical location. As one student explained:

I had to do a constant adjustment of colloquial expressions relevant to my background and even the background of the people who have taught me the Spanish language. The different ways that phrases are interpreted in one area of the world are very different than in my own culture. (Q, Peru).

Both the emphasis on language learning strategies and on language use illustrates the importance of context. Language learning that occurs in a foreign language classroom cannot provide the specific context and presence of locality. Participants’ reflections testify how crucial this immersion experience was to foster language skills.

Acquired living skills

Another area with regard to behavioral skills gained was an emphasis on basic living skills. Many participants highlighted specific, new experiences that taught them skills such as how to cook, wash dishes, ride public transportation, exchange money, and adjust to living in crowded living conditions, shown in this excerpt: “I learned how to cook the El Salvadoran way…how to figure out whether or not food is good to eat, and how to bargain…I learned how to wash my clothes by hand and how to light a gas stove” (C, El Salvador). Another student appears proud of the cooking skills he acquired:

Surprisingly, after all the cross cultural experiences and travel the one thing that I learned how to do well was cook. Using a small electric stove, some pots and pans and fresh Panamanian vegetables, fruit, spices, and meat I was able to keep myself fed everyday. (K, Panama).

These excerpts highlight two secondary themes that surfaced in this category, that of the prevalence of comments regarding food and also of public transportation. Besides learning how to cook for some, many participants commented on food, either about the chance to taste new flavors and dishes or also the chance to experience new eating habits, such as always eating dinner at 9 PM with the entire host family (H, Argentina). Along with food, another topic discussed with surprising frequency was aspects of public transportation. One student emphasized how her first taxi ride ever happened in Panama (A, Costa Rica and Panama). Because of the number of comments made about using public transportation, these were obviously memorable moments for participants and often implied a sense of accomplishment in being able to navigate on their own: “A new skill I learned…was learning how to use all the buses, ferries, subways, and taxis through Istanbul” (T, Turkey). For other students, the sense of accomplishment was achieved through the amount of walking done to either go to school or to get the shopping done.

One final skill that students mentioned was adapting to a more communal style of living. Participants were often housed in close quarters with many other students or in host family situations that involved extended family members. There were sharing of bathrooms and washing facilities, roommates to adjust to, and some developed a sense of community in ways that appeared to be novel to them. Therefore, within the category of acquired behavioral skills, besides discussing ways in which they learned how to better communicate, both linguistically and nonverbally, students also described different living skills that they gained, too.

Descriptions of Acquired Affective Skills

The third category involves the affective component of competence, which includes aspects of awareness, appreciation, and understanding with regard to attitudes, cultural group membership, and values. One main theme that arose with regard to affective skills has to do with the ability to deal with different perspectives, specifically by maintaining an open mind:

An ability I felt as if I acquired from Panama was the ability to be open-minded of others’ opinions. I have always been fairly hard-headed when it comes to listening to what others think about a certain topic but living with five other guys with entirely different personalities truly helped me understand that I should be more open to how others think . . . they offered new perspectives to subjects I thought I had a clear understanding with. (I, Panama)

Another acquired skill related to dealing with difference had to do with developing critical thinking skills, as demonstrated in this excerpt:

Studying and living with American students in the United States as well as Turkey, I started to think critically, and was able to ask questions, which made me think even deeper about issues and their implications. (N, Turkey)

Besides acquiring skills in being open to new perspectives, participants also emphasized how they learned to deal with situations that were unpredictable, specifically in which they could not feel a sense of control. As one student explained, “I learned that things don’t always have to go my way and things don’t happen on my time” (S, China); another emphasized this with regard to travel plans: “It pays to be flexible and not to get upset over a change in plans” (F, London and Paris).

In this same vein, many students wrote specifically about how life-changing their experience was. For example, consider these comments: “I had a profoundly spiritual and emotional experience. I learned to be more patient . . . to appreciate the simple things in life . . . I learned a new appreciation for the poor and the struggles they face” (C, El Salvador). Here is one more example of how life-changing the education abroad experience was:

I can definitely say that I came back as a new human being. Experiencing something such as this was something I couldn’t dream of because I didn’t really think it existed. The realization of it all was a learning experience in itself. (D, Italy)

When compiled, the list of what students’ learned with regard to experiencing personal change is a long list of inspirational values, such as learning to be more comfortable in uncomfortable situations, learning to view things from multiple perspectives, learning a new appreciation of the poor, learning to overcome stereotypes of homelessness, and learning to adopt an open mind.

To summarize, there were ample descriptions in the students’ reflection papers that fit all three of the main components of intercultural competence: cognitive, behavioral, and affective skills. The implications of these results will be addressed in the following section.

Discussion

In this study, we analyze reflective accounts of students who have been through an education abroad experience that has no specific requirement for predeparture intercultural training. Even so, it is apparent that education abroad has an impact on the participants, especially in terms of immersing them into an unfamiliar environment. With this immersion, participants learned new knowledge, such as connecting content learned in the classroom regarding the politics or economy of a country to the real site. Many participants demonstrated it was their first time being in the language minority, resulting in a realization of the importance of language skills and nonverbal communication that previously they may have taken for granted. More importantly, many participants expressed that the experiences encouraged them to be more open-minded, more patient, and more flexible. One student overtly said “I came back as a new human being.” The education abroad program certainly offers a powerful cross-cultural learning opportunity for many students.

However, we also are concerned that many of the participants’ accounts reflect only superficial levels of intercultural understanding. This may be why many scholars have advocated for better predeparture and postdeparture programs and education abroad programs that teach intercultural communication specifically (Arrúe, 2008; Bennett, 2009; Binder, 2008; Deardorff, 2008; Minucci, 2008; Paige & Goode, 2009; Savicki & Selby, 2008; Vande Berg & Paige, 2009). Many participants’ reflective accounts did not connect surface-level cultural norms with deeper values and cultural assumptions. For example, under cognitive skills, while students described their observations of the host country’s behavioral norms such as food and family ties, they made no connection between these behaviors and cultural values. The students were able to see the differences between cultural norms, but were they prepared for thinking more deeply about how these norms came to be and why the differences exist? In their reflection papers, students did not seem to articulate a deep understanding of the meaning of culture or demonstrate an awareness that observable cross-cultural differences derive from underlying different worldviews.

After examining how students describe the skills they feel they gained through their education abroad experiences, our goal is to consider ways that collaboration between the fields of intercultural communication and international education could help develop pedagogy for enhanced learning and improved intercultural competence. One way this collaboration could happen is for international education professionals to draw on educational materials designed for intercultural communication instruction. We will detail how basic concepts covered in intercultural communication courses would be beneficial to consider when developing training for preorientation and posto-rientation programs for education abroad, along with continuous mentoring during the experience. Based on these research findings, we provide the following recommendations for consideration in education abroad training:

Include elements of personal cultural awareness.

One of the most critical components of intercultural competence is self-exploration or the development of our own cultural awareness and identity (Arrúe, 2008; Ashwill & Oanh, 2009; Bennett, 2009; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2004; Kim, 2009; Tisdell & Tolliver, 2009). While some research participants stated that they became more aware of their cultural self, did they adequately demonstrate or show this cultural awareness? For example, the way that cultural difference was described was focused mainly on the other culture, not on insights learned about U.S. culture. Therefore, the descriptive comments seem to come predominantly from an ethnocentric perspective, where the participant’s cultural positioning is not articulated directly. Intercultural communication courses are typically developed around the objective of raising cultural self-awareness first. In fact, in a quick perusal of six current intercultural communication texts (Jandt, 2010; Liu, Volčič, & Gallois, 2011; Lustig & Koester, 2010; Martin & Nakayama, 2010; Martin & Nakayama, 2011; Samovar, Porter, & McDaniel, 2010), all texts provided a specific unit on cultural identity, all located in the introductory chapters of each text. Before students can fully understand aspects of other cultures, it is important for them to explore how much they adhere to cultural norms and values. Without this perspective, students can simply view their culture as the unstated standard by which to perceive and possibly judge others instead of understanding that their cultural background is simply that: a culture which informs their worldviews.

Include elements of positioning with regard to social identities such as race/ethnicity, social class, gender, and language.

Along with an objective of raising cultural self-awareness, within the field of intercultural communication more critical scholarship has recently become popular. Aspects of cultural self-awareness and identity are often presented in terms of power and privilege, focusing on cocultural groups in different contexts. Did the participants in this study demonstrate any overt reflection on their own social status or racial positioning with regard to the countries they visited? We did not see this in the data. For example, descriptions of behavioral skills highlighted the fact that students experienced a certain standard of living in their home culture that was different from their education abroad experiences. The standard of living that they are coming from obviously influences their perceptions and experiences, and therefore there are descriptions about having to adjust to a more communal style of living, experiencing smaller living quarters, and having to rely on public transportation systems when perhaps they have never had to do this before. Basic instruction in intercultural communication introduces and develops concepts of social identity so that students have the opportunity to examine their own social and personal positioning. Therefore, education abroad programs could consider developing curriculum that first encourages participants to consciously examine their own cultural identity, including aspects of power, privilege, and disadvantage, before participating in international experiences.

Encourage students to engage in critical reflection.

This suggestion is a combination of the previous two suggestions of raising personal and social cultural awareness, along with an emphasis on critical reflection. Savicki (2008) and Savicki and Selby (2008) stress the importance of fostering the skill of focused reflection. Transformative learning is one way to view the importance of reflection in the learning process (Mezirow, 1997, 2009; Taylor 2008). As part of the process of deep learning that eventually involves restructuring of assumptions and expectations, reflection can include “critically examining the epistemic assumptions supporting one’s values, beliefs, convictions, and preferences and reassessing reasons that support a problematic frame of reference” (Mezirow, 2009, p. 23). If students who are preparing for an education abroad experience are encouraged to critically reflect on their own personal cultural positioning, including their different social identities, this will better enable them to carry these practices of critical reflection into their overseas experience. For example, Tisdell and Tolliver (2009) describe how the use of transformative learning can shape “culturally responsive education” which is “a way to help participants connect to their own cultural roots and that of others” (p. 90). Therefore, specifically including aspects of critical reflection with regard to cultural positioning can foster intercultural competence. Also, a framework of critical reflection will also guide students to appropriately consider and frame the following suggestions regarding specific content to include in training courses.

Include specific instruction in culture-general frameworks.

Another observation from the data is that while students wrote about affective skills they acquired, they simply “tell” instead of “show.” In other words, students provided testimonials without including much supporting evidence. They said they have “an open mind” and are “very patient” without providing specific incidents that led to these conclusions. By only noting students’ self-evaluations without specific incidents, our concern is that these affective skills are possibly acquired in too general a manner. Culture-general frameworks, often the core of intercultural communication courses, are one way to combat vague statements about becoming more “open-minded.” For example, students who learn about frameworks such as Hall’s (1976) high-/low-context communication or Hofstede’s (1997) and Hofstede & Hofstede’s (2004) value dimensions might be able to not just explain observable differences between the education systems in the United States and China and then say that they are more “open-minded” about these differences, but they also might be able to explain that these differences could stem from underlying value systems, such as individualism/collectivism or small/large power distance. Students who learn about different time orientations might be able to articulate how they learned to be “very patient” because they had to adjust to a more polychronic culture. Another example of culture-general information that would be beneficial for students is to actually present a model of intercultural competence (such as Deardorff’s, 2006, 2008), since this concept does not need to remain “hidden” from students. If future education abroad students were aware of components of intercultural competence, it would help them place their own personal experience within the model as they engaged in intercultural experiences. Therefore, the culture-general cognitive frameworks that intercultural communication courses could provide to students would allow them to better process and learn culture-specific information, which in turn could influence the development of intercultural competence in affective skills.

Include instruction in aspects of perception, including concepts of ethnocentrism, stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination.

Another area within affective skills to consider is that of perception. Intercultural communication courses highlight ways in which to acknowledge and then diminish aspects of ethnocentrism, stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination (Jandt, 2010; Liu et al., 2011; Lustig & Koester, 2010; Martin & Nakayama, 2010; Martin & Nakayama, 2011; Samovar et al., 2010). As mentioned earlier, students’ comments were written from a predominantly ethnocentric perspective. While there were not overt comments that demonstrated strong aspects of prejudice within these student reflections, awareness about ethnocentrism and how easily stereotyping and prejudice can develop from ethnocentric positions would benefit students so that, once again, they might be able to be more descriptive in their attempts to explain how they have learned to be “open-minded.”

Include elements of instruction on both verbal and nonverbal communication.

We have demonstrated so far how main concepts in intercultural communication courses could be directly applied to training for education abroad experiences in ways that would directly address two of the main components of intercultural competence: cognitive and affective skills. We also want to point out that behavioral skills are also covered in intercultural courses, specifically with units on verbal communication/language issues and nonverbal communication (Jandt, 2010; Liu et al., 2011; Lustig & Koester, 2010; Martin & Nakayama, 2010; Martin & Nakayama, 2011; Samovar et al., 2010). Instruction in these topics could enhance communication efforts of education abroad students. Better understanding how language reflects culture and the role of context in language use would allow students to be more prepared to face language challenges. Also, since so many students reported the use of gestures and nonverbal communication as a new skill that they learned, information on nonverbal communication would greatly benefit them.

To summarize, we offer several recommendations for education abroad training programs based on our experiences with the curriculum included in intercultural communication texts and courses. Our emphasis is to identify possible content that could benefit training programs. This is, in part, an attempt to balance the notion that intercultural experience is enough to foster competence. At the same time, we do not mean to imply that inclusion of these topics in training programs should be approached solely didactically. With any one of these suggestions, there are pedagogical strategies to engage students experientially, affectively, and to bring in elements of critical reflection (including role-plays, critical incidents, discussions, cultural simulations, etc.). Therefore, our purpose in offering these suggestions is to highlight considerations with regard to content; how trainers utilize the content in a training program will hopefully best fit the specifics of the content and will be presented in a way that encourages students to develop skills in all three areas: cognitive, behavioral, and affective. These suggestions are also part of our effort to encourage dialogue and connection between intercultural theorists and education abroad practitioners. Training that includes these preceding recommendations has the potential to enable education abroad participants to develop deeper levels of intercultural competence.

While this study is based on only 18 students’ descriptions of their own education abroad experiences, the data still offers insightful accounts of experiences with intercultural competence. We are aware that the analysis is not intended to be representative of all education abroad experiences. Future studies could investigate more participants’ experiences and more written accounts to obtain more comprehensive results. Another limitation of this study is the specific prompt questions provided for students in the reflection paper assignment. These prompt questions shaped how students reflected on their experiences and what stories were reported. For example, our data consisted of stories concerning language barriers and how students collaborated with local people because the students were prompted to answer questions regarding language and collaboration. We may have received different stories or aspects of the experiences if different prompts were provided or if none were provided. The prompt questions were set by the program directors; we decided the data was still valid to analyze within the restrictions of the prompt questions.

Since data was only collected from one university, the student sample is obviously limited to the cultural and class backgrounds of the student population at that specific university. To address this, one possibility would be to compare similar type of data (students’ reflection papers) across institutions that have similar education abroad programs. Also, this study investigates only one type of data, which is the written reflection. While a personal narrative depicts a person’s thoughts and feelings, this form of self-assessment or self-report lacks the perspectives of others. Future studies may consider triangulation by investigating different types of data including, for example, observations of participants’ advisors and quantitative-based pretests and posttests of cultural sensitivity. The triangulation method may provide a more holistic understanding of students’ intercultural behaviors (Deardorff, 2009; Fantini, 2009). Continuing research will also need to assess specific predeparture and postdeparture training programs to see what impact these programs have on the continuing development of intercultural competence in education abroad students.

Education abroad programs in the United States have been established based strongly on the assumptions of the U.S. State Department pamphlet that was published in 1955 (Vande Berg & Paige, 2009). It is evident from this analysis that these assumptions still exist today. There is an overemphasis on acquired cognitive skills, specifically that of culture-specific skills learned through a contrastive method of discovery (Bennett, 2009). The assumption that an immersion experience alone is enough to trigger intercultural learning and therefore improve levels of intercultural competence still exists. However, we want to echo Savicki and Selby (2008) and Vande Berg and Paige (2009) in their efforts to highlight how intercultural learning is enhanced by much more than just immersion. Cultural mentoring throughout the entire study abroad experience, including predeparture training, support during the experience, and follow-up is crucial. Therefore, the overall results of this analysis indicate that, while education abroad provides indisputably rich firsthand experiences of culture, more guidance and knowledge about intercultural communication will better help students to analyze their own experiences, which in turn will hopefully raise levels of intercultural competence.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biographies

Elizabeth Root received a PhD in intercultural communication from the University of New Mexico. She is currently an assistant professor in speech communication at Oregon State University. Her research interests include intercultural communication in language teaching, internationalization efforts on university campuses, and exploring identity issues of intercultural instructors.

Anchalee Ngampornchai received a PhD in intercultural communication from the University of New Mexico. Her research focus is concerned with the complex relations between culture, nation, media, and power. She is currently working as an instructional developer in the College of Public Health at the University of South Florida.

References

Arrúe

(2008). The eye of the beholder: Study abroad in Spain viewed through multi-cultural lenses. In Savicki

(Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education (pp. 236-258). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Ashwill

M. A.

Oanh

D. T. H.

(2009). Developing globally competent citizens: The contrasting cases of the United States and Vietnam. In Deardorff

D. K.

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 141-157). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Binder

(2008). Action methods for integration of experience and understanding. In Savicki

(Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education (pp. 195-214). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Bennett

J. M.

(2009). Cultivating intercultural competence: A process perspective. In Deardorff

D. K.

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 121-140). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bok

(2006). Our underachieving colleges: A candid look at how much students learn and why they should be learning more. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Bradford

Allen

Beisser

K. R.

(1998). An evaluation and meta-analysis of intercultural communication competence research. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov

Chen

G. M.

(1990). Intercultural communication competence: Some perspectives of research. The Howard Journal of Communications, 2, 243-261.

Chen

G. M.

Starosta

W. J.

(1996). Intercultural communication competence: A synthesis. In Burleson

B. R.

(Ed.), Communication yearbook 19 (pp. 353-374). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Collier

M. J.

(1989). Cultural and intercultural communication competence: Current approaches and directions for future research. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13, 287-302.

10.

Deardorff

D. K.

(2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in Intercultural Education, 10, 241-266.

11.

Deardorff

D. K.

(2008). Intercultural competence: A definition, model, and implications for education abroad. In Savicki

(Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education (pp. 32-52). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

12.

Deardorff

D. K.

(2009). Implementing intercultural competence assessment. In Deardorff

D. K.

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 477-491). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

13.

Fantini

(2009). Assessing intercultural competence: Issues and tools. In Deardorff

D. K.

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 456-476). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

14.

Goode

M. L.

(2008). The role of faculty study abroad directors: A case study. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 15, 149-172.

15.

Hall

E. T.

(1976). Beyond culture. New York: Anchor/Doubleday.

16.

Hammer

M. R.

Gudykunst

W. B.

Wiseman

R. L.

(1978). Dimensions of intercultural effectiveness: An exploratory study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2, 382-393.

17.

Heisel

Stableski

(2009, May). Expanding study abroad: Where there’s a will, there’s a way. In Blumenthal

Gutierrez

(Eds.), Expanding study abroad capacity at U.S. colleges and universities (IIE Study Abroad White Paper Series, Issue No. 6, pp. 28-37). New York, NY: Institute of International Education.

18.

Hofstede

(1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.

19.

Hofstede

G. J.

(2004). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

20.

Howard Hamilton

M. F.

Richardson

B. J.

Shuford

(1998). Promoting multicultural education: A holistic approach. College Student Affairs Journal, 18, 15-17.

21.

Hunter

White

G. P.

Godbey

G. C.

(2006). What does it mean to be globally competent? Journal of Studies in International Education, 10, 267-285.

22.

Jandt

F. E.

(2010). An introduction to intercultural communication: Identities in a global community (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

23.

Kehm

B. M.

Teichler

(2007). Research on Internationalisation in Higher Education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11, 260-273.

24.

Kim

Y. Y.

(2009). The identity factor in intercultural competence. In Deardorff

D. K.

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 53-65). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

25.

Leeds-Hurwitz

(1990). Notes in the history of intercultural communication: The Foreign Service Institute and the mandate for intercultural training. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 76, 262-281.

26.

Liu

Volčič

Gallois

(2011). Introducing intercultural communication: Global cultures and contexts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

27.

Lustig

M. W.

Koester

(2010). Intercultural competence: Interpersonal communication across cultures (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

28.

Martin

J. N.

Nakayama

T. K.

(2010). Intercultural communication in contexts (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

29.

Martin

J. N.

Nakayama

T. K.

(2011). Experiencing intercultural communication: An introduction (4th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

30.

Mezirow

(1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 74, 5-12.

31.

Mezirow

(2009). Transformative learning theory. In Mezirow

Taylor

E. W.

& Associates (Eds.), Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace, and higher education (pp. 18-31). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

32.

Minucci

(2008). Italy: Every day another soulful experience to bring back home. In Savicki

(Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education (pp. 215-235). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

33.

Olson

C. L.

Evans

Shoenberg

R. F.

(2007). At home in the world: Bridging the gap between internationalization and multicultural education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

34.

Paige

R. M.

Goode

M. L.

(2009). Intercultural competence in international education administration. In Deardorff

D. K.

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 333-349) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

35.

Rogers

E. M.

Hart

W. B.

Miike

(2002). Edward T. Hall and the history of intercultural communication: The United States and Japan. Keio Communication Review, 24, 3-26.

36.

Ruben

B. D.

(1976). Assessing communication competency for intercultural adaptation. Group & Organization Studies, 1, 334-354.

37.

Ruben

B. D.

(1977). Guidelines for cross-cultural communication effectiveness. Group & Organization Studies, 2, 470-479.

38.

Ruben

B. D.

(1989). The study of cross-cultural competence: Traditions and contemporary issues. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13, 229-240.

39.

Ruben

B. D.

Kealey

D. J.

(1979). Behavioral assessment of communication competency and the prediction of cross-cultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 3, 15-47.

40.

Samovar

L. A.

Porter

R. E.

McDaniel

E. R.

(2010). Communication between cultures (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

41.

Savicki

(2008). Experiential and affective education for international educators. In Savicki

(Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education (pp. 74-91). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

42.

Savicki

Selby

(2008). Synthesis and conclusions. In Savicki

(Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education (pp. 342-352). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

43.

Spitzberg

B. H.

(1989). Issues in the development of a theory of interpersonal competence in the intercultural context. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13, 241-268.

44.

Spitzberg

B. H.

Changnon

(2009). Conceptualizing intercultural competence. In Deardorff

D. K.

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 2-54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

45.

Taylor

E. W.

(2008). Transformative learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 119, pp. 5-15.

46.

Tisdell

E. J.

Tolliver

D. E.

(2009). Transformative approaches to culturally responsive teaching: Engaging cultural imagination. In Mezirow

Taylor

E. W.

& Associates (Eds.), Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace, and higher education (pp. 89-99). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

47.

Vande Berg

Paige

R. M.

(2009). Applying theory and research: The evolution of intercultural competence in U.S. study abroad. In Deardorff

D. K.

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 419-437). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

48.

Zhang

(2011). CSCC review series essay: Education abroad in the U.S. community colleges. Community College Review, 39, 181-200.