ICT-enhanced Intercultural Transitions:
Creating a Community of Engaged, Reflective Explorers
Jane Jackson
Department of English
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Hong Kong SAR, China
jjackson@cuhk.edu.hk
Abstract: This paper reports on an ICT-enhanced intercultural transitions course that was designed for
undergraduates with recent or current international experience. Drawing on mixed-method
investigations of education abroad learning, core themes were identified; prompts were then
developed to stimulate critical, quality reflection in face-to-face and online discussions about such
issues as (reentry) culture shock/adjustment, intercultural friendship, identity change/misalignments,
and intercultural/global citizenship. As well as writing reflective essays and engaging in in-class
interactions, the participants posted comments and photos (or video clips) online as they unpacked
their international experience. In this 14-week course, the online components (e.g., Moodle Forum,
hypermedia blog entries) helped create a sense of community, fostering closer bonds between local
and international students. Through the process of guided/structured reflection, most gained deeper
understanding of their intercultural learning and made concrete plans for further international
experience. This paper describes the lessons learned from three offerings of this interactive, blended
course.
Introduction
In recent decades, the internationalization of higher education has intensified and the number of
students who are venturing abroad has increased significantly, with particular growth in semester-long
exchange programs, micro-term sojourns, intensive summer programs, service-learning, and global
internships (Vande Berg, Paige & Lou, 2012). While many educators assume that immersion in the host
environment leads to transformative learning, researchers are finding that developmental trajectories are
much more variable (Vande Berg 2007; Vande Berg et al. 2012). Without intervention (e.g., guided critical
reflection, web-enhanced support), student sojourners may avoid interaction with host nationals and
experience limited gains in intercultural/second language development; they may even return home with
reinforced stereotypes of people from other ethnic groups (e.g., Jackson, 2008, 2010; Kinginger, 2009).
Without systematic debriefings, returnees may shoebox their international learning as they fall back into
familiar routines; valuable opportunities for the consolidation of their new understandings are then lost and
their learning is not shared with other students who may be considering venturing abroad (Jackson, 2012,
2013; Meyer-Lee 2005). With this in view, more and more education abroad specialists are advocating
intervention to make the most of sojourn/reentry experience (Jackson 2012, Paige & Vande Berg, 2012;
Vande Berg, 2007; Vande Berg et al., 2012; Weber-Bosley, 2010).
With the support of a Teaching Development Grant and data from my investigations of sojourn
learning (short-term sojourns and semester-and yearlong exchange programs), I developed a blended creditbearing course to optimize and extend the learning of undergraduates with recent or current international
experience. Hence, the course would also aim to bring together local and international students. This paper
focuses on the design and delivery of the Intercultural Transitions course, with special attention paid to
asynchronous elements (e.g., hypermedia Moodle Forums, blogging) as they played a key role in developing
a community of reflective, globally-minded explorers. This paper summarizes the outcomes and lessons
learned from three offerings of the course. While my project was undertaken at a Hong Kong university, the
approach and findings should be meaningful for international educators and ICT (information and
communication technologies) specialists in other parts of the world.
The design, development, and evaluation of the Intercultural Transitions course
The following section centers on the design, development, and evaluation of the Intercultural
transitions course, including the rationale and groundwork, theoretical underpinning, desired learning
outcomes, core content and concepts, approach to learning and learning activities, mode of assessment, and
mechanisms for feedback from participants. The final sub-section summarizes the key findings related to the
three offerings of the course.
Rationale for the course and essential groundwork
The idea for the development of Intercultural Transitions, a three-credit elective course stemmed from
my growing awareness of the challenges our local returnees and incoming exchange students encounter as
they adjust or readjust to university life in a different cultural environment. Similar to student sojourners in
other geographic locations, many experience symptoms of reverse/culture shock, identity misalignments,
isolation, and problems adjusting/readjusting to differing cultures of learning (Jackson, 2012). Further, while
the number and diversity of our incoming international exchange students has increased significantly in
recent years, there is limited interaction between international and local students on campus. I hoped that my
course would help to change this by providing a supportive environment for lively intercultural discussions
about international experience. Therefore, I developed the course with this population in mind and advertised
the course to both local and incoming international students.
As well as literature on reflective/experiential learning, ICT, and education abroad, the Intercultural
Transitions course draws on my own education abroad research, including ethnographic investigations of
short-term sojourners from Hong Kong who took part in faculty-led sojourns in England, and large-scale,
mixed-method, experimental design studies of the ‘whole person development’ of outgoing exchange
students from Greater China. The material generated from these studies (e.g., focus group/interview
transcripts, surveys, diaries, journals, participant observation of student sojourners, my field notes) provided
rich ‘real world’ resource material for the course.
Theoretical underpinning
As well as being research-driven, the course is theory-based. The Intercultural Development
Continuum (IDC) (Hammer, 2011, 2012), an updated version of the Developmental Model of Intercultural
Sensitivity (DMIS) (Bennett, 1993, 2012) helped guide the selection and sequencing of materials and
activities, and facilitated the tracking of the intercultural learning of the course participants. The IDC centers
on one’s perception and response to cultural difference and the constructs of ‘monocultural mindsets’ and
‘intercultural mindsets’ (Hammer, 2012). If one has a monocultural or ethnocentric mindset, ‘the worldview
of one’s own culture is central to all reality’ (Bennett, 1993: 30), whereas an intercultural/global mindset
(ethnorelative orientation) is associated with ‘being comfortable with many standards and customs’ and ‘an
ability to adapt behaviour and judgments to a variety of interpersonal settings’ (p. 26). Bennett (1993)
maintains that the way individuals perceive and react to cultural difference impacts on developmental
intercultural competence, that is, the ‘ability to communicate effectively in cross-cultural situations and to
relate appropriately in a variety of cultural contexts’ (Bennett and Bennett, 2004: 149). Intercultural/global
mindsets and ethnorelative worldviews are thought to be much more effective in nurturing the attitudes,
knowledge, and actions that facilitate successful intercultural communication and acculturation/adjustment in
unfamiliar cultural settings (Bennett, 2008; Jackson, 2010; Kim, 2001, 2012).
The IDC theorizes that people move from ethnocentric stages (Denial, Defense) through
Minimization (a transitional orientation) to more ethnorelative stages of development (Acceptance,
Adaptation, and Integration) as they acquire intercultural competence (Hammer, 2011, 2012). Not all
individuals continuously progress from one stage to the next in sequence. Negative intercultural experiences
(e.g., acute culture shock, perceptions of racism, contested self-identities) may strengthen ethnocentric views
and individuals may retreat to a lower level of sensitivity.
To propel students to higher levels of intercultural competence, interculturalists (e.g., Bennett, 2008,
2012; Guilherme, 2012; Hammer 2012; Jackson 2012) recommend intercultural education coupled with
experiential learning (Kolb, 1983), with critical reflection as a core ingredient (Brockington & Wiedenheft,
2009; Passarelli & Kolb, 2012). ICT is also recognized as having the potential to create vibrant online
communities, which can stimulate reflection as well as intercultural awareness. When designing the
Intercultural Transitions course, I, therefore, aimed to build in ICT elements that would promote meaningful
intercultural interactions, create a sense of community, and nurture the capacity of the participants’ to be
critically self-reflective and open-minded.
Desired learning outcomes
When designing a course it is natural to begin by identifying desired learning outcomes for students.
My groundwork (literature review, education abroad research) helped me to accomplish this task. By the end
of the course, I expected that the participants should be able to:
 articulate how their international/intercultural experiences have affected their sense of self and
worldview (e.g., through reflective essays, online discussions);
 describe theories and models of culture shock, transitions, re-entry, identity (re)construction,
intercultural (communicative) competence, and global citizenship;
 test these theories and models, using their own international/intercultural experiences, and
narratives found in the literature, media, interviews, online sites/blogs, and research reports;
 assess their cultural self-awareness and communication style, and set realistic goals for further
enhancement of their intercultural (communicative) competence and global competencies;
 interact more effectively and appropriately with people who have been socialized in a different
linguistic and cultural environment;
 integrate their international/intercultural experiences into their academic/daily life and future
plans.
 express their ideas more clearly in English in both written and oral form (e.g., online and inclass discussions, oral presentation).
Core content and concepts
Another essential element in curriculum design is the identification of the key concepts and
content that will help the students achieve the learning outcomes. Drawing on my research and
literature review, I determined that the students in Intercultural transitions would explore the
following topics: intercultural adjustment and adaptation, differing cultures of learning, intercultural
competence in interpersonal relationships, intercultural interaction and identity change,
reentry/reverse culture shock, cultural marginality, intercultural (communicative) competence,
global citizenship, and the marketing of international experience/ intercultural/L2 communication
skills.
Pedagogical approach
Following experiential learning pedagogy (Kolb, 1983; Passareli & Kolb, 2012), I aimed to create
an open, supportive environment which would encourage meaningful interaction between local and
international students. The course participants would be encouraged to recount their international stories in
class and online before being introduced to theoretical understandings of intercultural transitions. Through
guided, structured reflection, they would gradually incorporate critical elements into their online and in-class
discussions and essays, making connections with relevant theories (e.g., adjustment, identity transformation).
Along with personal sojourner accounts (e.g., study abroad essays), they would be exposed to research
reports, which are more objective in nature. Thus, this pedagogical approach draws on theory and research
findings to better understand sojourn/reentry experience; it also encourages participants to apply new
understandings in future intercultural encounters whether at home or abroad.
Learning activities/the ICT dimension
After settling on the aims and content of the course, I turned my attention to the learning activities
that I believed would help students achieve the outcomes: in-class discussions, online interactions
(facilitated by Moodle), analysis of readings (e.g., study abroad essays, case studies) and visual media (e.g.
YouTube clips), brief interactive lectures, weekly online reflective postings/blogging guided by prompts, and
a reflective writing portfolio consisting of reflective essays and peer reviews. The following are sample
prompts for the online discussions:
 In five sentences, share something about your international experience that you would like
everyone in the class to know.
 Have you experienced culture shock? Please describe strategies you’ve found useful to cope
with unfamiliar situations.
 Do you think the way you see or define yourself has changed because of your international
experience? If yes, in what ways? How do you feel about that?
 Have you experienced any identity confusion while abroad? Have people misunderstand your
preferred identity or misidentified you? If yes, how did you deal with this?
 What challenges have you faced in an unfamiliar context? What have been your greatest
accomplishments? What are you most proud of?
 While studying abroad, what problems did you encounter in your academic work and
personal/social life? How did you cope? What life lessons have you learned?
 What does friendship mean to you? What challenges have you encountered in building
relationships with people from another cultural background who may have different
understandings of what friendship entails. How can we form healthy and strong intercultural
friendships? What are the benefits?
 Think back… What do you wish you had known before going abroad (e.g., for the first time,
for your last sojourn, for your current exchange experience)? What advice do you wish you
had been given (or followed)? What advice would you give local students who are planning to
go abroad next term?
 For those of you who have experienced reentry: What do you wish you had known about the
reentry process before heading back home? What did you experience when you returned
home? What advice would you give novice travelers (e.g., future exchange students) t o ease
their reentry?
 What does it mean to be an intercultural citizen? A global citizen? How can one cultivate a
global, intercultural mindset (an open attitude toward other ways of being)? What are some
reasons to take steps in this direction? What role does critical reflection play in this journey?
 Does everyone with international experience develop ‘intercultural personhood’ (a
multicultural identity, a global mindset)? Why or why not?
At the end of the semester, groups of students (ideally a mix of local and international students) would give a
presentation on issues related to intercultural transitions (e.g., reentry, advice for making the most of stays
abroad, identity reconstruction, global citizenship). These presentations would be advertised and open to all
students interested in education abroad as well as exchange program administrators. Students would also be
encouraged to submit an essay to the University’s Study Abroad Writing Contest that I initiated with the
support of a Teaching Development Grant. (Winning essays are posted on the University website. In this
way, international experiences and new understandings can easily be shared with students outside this class.)
Early on, I decided that eLearning would be a key element in the course. Moodle, our web-based
course management system, would facilitate: course announcements, the dissemination of hypermedia course
materials (e.g., powerpoint files; readings; links to websites, You Tube excerpts, weblogs and photos), online
discussion (weekly Forums with prompts), blogging, student work submission, and the administration of
surveys/feedback forms. I expected the ICT component to extend and enrich our in-class learning and nurture
more interpersonal, intercultural connections. Course participants would be able to easily connect with each
other throughout the semester (both in and out of class) and, hopefully, many would remain friends well
beyond our last official meeting together.
Mode of Assessment
All forms of assessment should resonate with the aims and philosophy of a course, as well as the
activities. For Intercultural Transitions: Making Sense of International Experience, 10% of the grade would
be for participation, a requirement for all courses in my Department. 35% would be devoted to online
reflection (hypermedia Forum postings and blog entries), while 40% would be reserved for the reflective
writing portfolio, which would consist of reflective essays and peer reviews. Finally, 15% would be for the
end-of-term oral presentation (sharing session), which could make use of powerpoint, videoblogs, and other
forms of computer-mediated technology. For most of the elements (e.g., blog entries/Forum contributions,
reflective essays, oral presentations) I developed detailed reflective rubrics/feedback forms that were posted
on Moodle at the beginning of the course. The assessment rubrics were designed to provide students with a
clear idea about what constitutes unacceptable and acceptable levels of work (e.g., degree of reflection
expected). While time-consuming, the preparation of specific guidelines, rubrics, and peer feedback forms
was essential.
As most students were new to this approach, it was important to scaffold their learning and devote
ample time to clarifying the aims and format of the course. For example, early in the course, the students
were shown two study abroad essays. While both authors were exchange students from the U.S. who went to
Madrid, their style of writing and depth of reflection were markedly different. One essay provided practical
advice (e.g., what to pack, what to see, what to avoid), whereas the other one described several critical
incidents in detail and demonstrated how she had changed as she engaged with local people. Her reflective
essay took the reader on the journey with her. The analysis of the two essays helped students better
understand the nature of the course and what was expected of them.
Feedback from participants
In the course design process, it is important to identify ways to gather feedback from students at
strategic intervals so that adjustments can be made while the course is underway. Student input is also
essential when preparing for subsequent offerings. For the Intercultural Transitions course, the students
would be encouraged to offer their views throughout the semester in the Moodle site (online drop-box), by
way of email, or in person. I also designed a brief survey to be administered midway through the course,
which they could complete in class or online. At the end of the semester, in every course students complete a
standard course evaluation form (a requirement of my Faculty), which I would supplement with a more
course-specific survey.
Summary of outcomes from three offerings
I have now offered the Intercultural Transitions course for three consecutive years. For the last two
cohorts, I have made adjustments based on previous offerings and the findings from my ongoing
investigations of international exchange students from Hong Kong. To date, 55 local and international
students have taken the course. In the first offering, there were 18 (17 locals and 1 incoming international
exchange student from Canada); in the second, 12 (9 locals and 3 incoming international exchange students
from Denmark, Japan, and the U.S.), and in the latest cohort, 25 (10 locals and 15 incoming international
exchange students from China, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, South Korea, Sweden,
the U.K., and the U.S.). In all offerings so far, the students have represented a range of disciplines and most
were near the end of their undergraduate studies. The course has become increasingly diverse in terms of
ethnicity as well as both the quality and quantity of the participants’ international/intercultural experience.
Most were proficient in at least two languages; the vast majority spoke English as an additional language,
with an advanced level of proficiency.
Near the end of each offering, the students were asked if they would be willing to allow me to
investigate and report on their learning. They were also invited to participate in a post-course interview that
would be conducted by a bilingual (Chinese-English) research assistant. Following my University’s ethical
guidelines, the students were assured that their decision would not have any impact on their grades;
anonymity was guaranteed and they were free to withdraw at any time. Nearly all agreed to participate and be
interviewed. None withdrew. Their candid comments provided insight into their learning and their
perceptions of their intercultural development. For each participant, I gathered together all of the material
related to the individual’s case (e.g., all online postings including their Forum chats, hypermedia blog entries,
and online surveys; three reflective essays and peer reviews, oral presentation handout, pre- and post- IDI
course results, in-class surveys, my field notes). As well as overall group profiles, I developed a rich case that
tracked the developmental trajectory of each participant.
At the beginning of the semester, all of the students completed the Intercultural Development
Inventory (IDI) to provide a measure of their intercultural sensitivity. In the IDI results, the Perceived
Orientation (PO) indicates where the respondents place themselves along the intercultural development
continuum (either Denial, Polarization (Defense/Reversal), Minimization, Acceptance, or Adaptation)
(Hammer, 2012). The combined results for the three cohorts revealed that their Perceived Orientation (PO)
on entry was 120.54 (Acceptance). In other words, they ewre convinced that they were very open-minded
and interculturally sensitive.
The Development Orientation (DO) provides an indication of the respondents’ actual orientation
toward cultural differences and commonalities. This is the perspective that the group is most apt to draw on
in intercultural encounters (Hammer, 2012). Similar to the Perceived Orientation (PO), the Development
Orientation (DO) can be Denial, Polarization (Defense/Reversal), Minimization, Acceptance, or Adaptation.
On entry, the combined scores for the three cohorts showed that their Developmental Orientation (DO), on
average, was 88.96 (in the first half of Minimization, the transitional phase). This indicated that they had a
tendency to minimize cultural differences. While more open than individuals in Denial or Defense,
Minimization is still an ethnocentric stage of development. In this phase, individuals are aware of other
cultures and have some basic understanding of different customs and celebrations. While much less negative
about people from other cultural backgrounds, people in this stage assume that everyone is similar to them
under the surface. They may naively assume that they understand situations in the same way as individuals
from a different background. There is a lack of recognition of differences (e.g., core values, identities,
religious beliefs) that may be important to others. While well intentioned, Hammer (2012) maintains that
individuals in this transitional phase are not yet interculturally competent.
The first administration of the IDI revealed that the Orientation Gap (OG), the difference between
the Perceived Orientation (PO) and Developmental Orientation (DO), for the three cohorts was 31.58.
According to Hammer (2012), a gap score of 7 points or higher indicates a meaningful difference. Hence, the
results indicate that the students who enrolled in the Intercultural transitions course significantly
overestimated their intercultural competence. Individuals with a high OG are apt to be very surprised by the
discrepancy between their Perceived Orientation (PO) score and their Developmental Orientation (DO) score.
Believing that they are very open-minded and interculturally competent they may not recognize the need for
further work in this area.
The IDI profiles also provide an indication of what Hammer (2012) refers to as Trailing
Orientations (TO), that is, unresolved dimensions that can influence the group’s Developmental Orientation
(DO). In times of intercultural stress or conflict, these trailing issues can pull individuals back from their
Developmental Orientation (DO). On entry, the analysis of Trailing Orientations (TO) for the combined
cohorts revealed that none of their worldviews were fully resolved. This means that they are apt to resort to
more ethnocentric behaviors and perspectives when under stress. An analysis of the students’ first essay and
Forum chats also pointed to their tendency to overestimate their level of intercultural sensitivity. I also noted
that some oral and written narratives were characterized by ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ discourse (e.g., either overly
critical of the host culture or the home environment). Some of their writing contained stereotypes of host
nationals, which were reinforced while abroad. In class discussions as well as in their writings, many
revealed that they had had difficulty making friends with people from a different cultural background and
they spent much of their free time with co-nationals. As we examined theories of intercultural adjustment and
identity expansion, they revisited their experiences and the choices they made (or were making) in the host
environment. They were guided to more critically look at how their attitudes and behavior impacted on their
interactions with people from a different background. Sharing experiences (in class and online) helped them
to realize that there were more constructive ways to cope with cultural difference and the natural ups and
downs of cross-cultural adjustment.
At the end of the semester, all of the students again completed the IDI. This time, the Perceived
Orientation (PO) of the combined cohorts was 122.84 in Acceptance, while their Developmental Orientation
(DO) was 94.26 in Minimization. This meant that the Orientation Gap (OG) was 28.58. As for Trailing
Orientations (TO), only the Minimization orientation was not yet resolved. A comparison of the pre- and
post-test results for the combined cohorts revealed that they still held significantly inflated self-perceptions of
their intercultural sensitivity, although the OG was reduced by 3 points. In terms of their actual intercultural
sensitivity (Developmental Orientation, DO), while they remained in Minimization, they gained 5.3 points,
moving closer to the second half of this transitional phase. A key development was the resolution of many
trailing issues, suggesting that they were less susceptible to reverting to higher levels of ethnocentricism
when under stress. The findings indicate that, on average, the students developed a higher level of
intercultural sensitivity after taking the Intercultural transitions course. Although still in an ethnocentric stage
of development, the increase in DO suggests that this period of intense critical reflection had a positive
impact on their ‘intercultural worldview’.
The IDI results and the analysis of the oral and written narratives (e.g., reflective essays, Forum
chats) suggest that this intervention (a semester-long period of ICT-enhanced guided, critical reflection)
helped propel the students towards a more ethnorelative perspective. End-of-course feedback forms offered
valuable insight into the impact of various course elements, including the ICT component, the process of
guided, critical reflection, and the sharing of experiences with their peers, both local and international. The
following comments were typical:
The Forum discussions let me see and analyze things from a different angle. Hearing the voices of
others pushed me to reenter the scenes that I experienced abroad and to relate them to the theories
that we learnt in class. (local returnee)
Sharing my experiences online and in class helped me to better understand myself. It was also
interesting to see how other people view Hong Kong… I think writing about your international
experience and sharing them with others puts them into perspective. It makes you think more deeply
about everything. You can see different sides to an issue— ideas you never thought of before. This
helps you grow as a person. (local returnee)
In the course I wanted to gain insight into the perspectives of people from other cultures and I
accomplished that. I liked the Moodle postings of other students the most. It’s time-consuming to
think and reflect on one’s experiences but it’s worth it. (Exchange student from the U.K.)
Writing blogs and essays allowed me to put my experience into words. When recording it, I had to
think about it in an organized way so that I could make sense of it… I constantly asked myself the
meaning of my experience. I also liked exchanging ideas with students from other cultural
backgrounds. I learnt to think more broadly and to see and think about issues from different aspects.
The Moodle discussion was interesting but also time-consuming. (local returnee)
While some students lamented the amount of time required to post and read comments online, the
majority recognized and appreciated the benefits of regular contributions to our virtual community as well as
the sharing sessions in our face-to-face meetings. Many revealed that they had developed intercultural
friendships with course participants; some had concrete plans in place for excursions together both locally
and in neighboring countries. Some students also disclosed their determination to pursue postgraduate studies
abroad or to travel internationally alone or with friends.
By the end of the course, many understood that stays abroad do not necessarily lead to higher levels
of intercultural competence as agency plays a key role in determining sojourn outcomes. The Forum
comments and final essays suggested that many were beginning to more fully understand how their attitudes
and actions impact intercultural learning and identity expansion. In the post-course survey, some also
revealed that they had become more aware of gaps in their intercultural competence and more determined to
develop themselves further in this area:
In the course, I liked writing Moodle entries the best and reading what others have written. I could
see how they handled situations differently from me. I realized that I should be more proactive in
making friends with people from other cultures. When I’m abroad again, I need to make more of an
effort to get to know about the local culture. (local returnee)
Through the writing process and sharing my stories with friends in class, I was able to reorganize
my experience. By revisiting those happy/disappointing moments that I would not normally revisit, I
discovered something very valuable. These realizations will help me to keep important things in my
mind when I next go abroad. For example, I’ve discovered that the key solution to solving cultural
differences and disappointment is to share difficulties with others to get a better understanding.
(Exchange student from South Korea)
It was great being able to write and think seriously about my experiences abroad and make sense of
them. I also enjoyed hearing and reading about the international experiences of other students
including locals. It made my transition to Hong Kong easier knowing that I was not alone in my
struggles and challenges. I’ve also learned that I identify with global nomads and I plan to take steps
to maintain my international identity in the future no matter where I live. I think that intercultural
sensitivity is important for people today and I aim to continue to develop in this area. (Exchange
student from the U.S.).
I learned that I still have a long way to go to become an intercultural citizen… The course pushed
me to give reasons for my feelings and actions during my sojourn and to think of ways to improve
how I interact with people from other cultures both in Hong Kong and abroad. This process opened
my eyes. (local returnee)
Many of their comments suggest that they have become more self-aware and determined to take a more
active role in intercultural interactions whether in their home environment or in an international setting.
Lessons learned
Many of the lessons gleaned from these three offerings will be relevant to international educators
and ICT enthusiasts in other contexts who may be contemplating the adoption of a similar approach to
reflective teaching and learning. First, it is important to recognize that it will take time to prepare students
(and perhaps yourself!) for novel roles and responsibilities. Reflective thinking and critical praxis were
unfamiliar to nearly all of the participants; most were not used to introspection or personal writing in
academic courses. Local students who had only been abroad for a short time were more accustomed to
traditional, transmission-modes of teaching with the lecturer as the ‘sage on the stage’. When implementing
an unfamiliar, interactive pedagogy, the facilitator must clearly identify and provide ample opportunity to
discuss the format and aims of the course. It is also essential to create a supportive climate so that
participants will feel comfortable enough to candidly share intercultural/international experiences and the
emotions linked to them. Courses of this nature are naturally rather intense and intimate and this takes some
adjustment for both the teacher and students. To facilitate lively interactions, ideally, the class size for this
learner-centered, reflective course should not be capped at twenty-five.
Second, facilitators need to be attuned to the participants’ level of intercultural awareness and
sensitivity, and their readiness to make the transition to critical, reflective thinking and more learner-centered
teaching. Qualified IDI administrators may administer the IDI at the beginning of the course to ascertain the
students’ level of intercultural sensitivity; they are then better positioned to select and sequence activities
(Bennett 2008; Jackson, 2012). With or without IDI data, facilitators can review the stages of the DMIS
(Bennett, 1993, 2012) or the IDC (Hammer, 2012) and then analyze the participants’ dialogue and narratives
(e.g., Forum comments, blog entries, essays) to gauge their readiness for more in-depth analyses of critical
incidents as well as the more challenging tasks that necessitate deeper personal engagement, self-analysis,
and critical reflection. Moving too quickly into critical self-analysis can be detrimental; it can lead to
resistant rather than receptive learners.
Third, while the use of eLearning is not apt to be problematic for most university students, build in
time at the beginning of the course for them to gain familiarity with the functions of whatever eLearning
platform has been adopted. In the first few weeks, students who are new to electronic course management
systems may need some additional support to post comments and photos.
Fourth, recognize that a significant amount of time, energy, and skills are required to design and
facilitate a course of this nature. Much of the work is done long before the students arrive (e.g., the
development of prompts for Forum discussions and reflective essays, the strategic selection of published
sojourner accounts that are uploaded to Moodle, the development of in-class tasks, the preparation of
powerpoint files on transition theories, the preparation of rubrics for multiple assignments, etc.). Adjustments
then need to be made once the students arrive and you discover more about their background, interests,
expectations, and level of intercultural sensitivity. In both face-to-face and online sessions, the facilitator
must keep students engaged and heading in the direction of higher levels of intercultural awareness and
global-mindedness. Some technical knowledge and patience are required to upload materials. Also, be
mindful of the amount of time needed to interact with students on line. The students’ participation and
interest level may wane without some input and feedback from the facilitator. Of course, the facilitator
should not dominate the discussion. Comments that summarize the points made by several students and
follow-up questions that prompt further discussion/critical analysis may keep the conversation going and
guide it to deeper levels of reflection. Providing feedback on individual online participation midway through
the course (rubrics) as well as general comments about contributions in class can help sustain student
engagement online as well as in face-to-face sessions.
Conclusion
The evaluations of the Intercultural Transitions course suggest that students benefit from guided,
structured analysis of intercultural interaction and the sense of community that can be created when
international and local students are brought together with a shared purpose. Critical, guided reflection (online
and in class) can make a meaningful difference in sojourn and reentry outcomes. It can help students
optimize their international experience and extend their learning once they are back on home soil. Courses of
this nature can be beneficial to both local and international students. Institutions of higher education often
assume that increasing the number of international students on campus results in more intercultural
interactions but that is often not the case. Courses like this can help make it happen. Much more work is
needed in a variety of contexts to better understand the impact of ICT, structured reflection, and other
curricular interventions on the intercultural transitions of student sojourners and returnees. I hope this paper
will encourage other educators to take up this challenge in their own context. The experience can be
immensely rewarding and enriching for both teacher and students.
References
Bennett, J.M. (2008). On becoming a global soul: A path to engagement during study abroad. In V. Savicki
(Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application
in International Education (pp. 13-31). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Bennett, M.J. (1993). Towards ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural sensitivity. In R.M.
Paige (Ed.), Education for the intercultural experience (pp. 21-71). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural
Press.
Bennett, M.J. (2012) Paradigmatic assumptions and a developmental approach to intercultural learning. In M.
Vande Berg, R.M. Paige, & K.H. Lou (Eds.), Student learning abroad: What our students are
learning, What they’re not and what we can do about it (pp. 90-114). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Brockington, J.L., & Wiedenhoeft, M.D. (2009) The liberal arts and global citizenship: Fostering
intercultural engagement through integrative experiences and structured reflection. In R. Lewin
(Ed.), The handbook of practice and research in study abroad: Higher education and the quest for
global citizenship (pp. 117-132), London: Routledge.
Guilherme, M. (2012). Critical language and intercultural communication pedagogy. In J. Jackson (Ed.),
Routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication (pp. 357-70). London:
Routledge.
Hammer, M.R. (2011). Additional cross-cultural validity testing of the Intercultural Development Inventory.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 421-443.
Hammer, M.R. (2012) ‘The Intercultural Development Inventory: A new frontier in assessment and
development of intercultural competence’, in M. Vande Berg, R.M. Paige, & K.H. Lou (Eds),
Student learning abroad, what our students are learning, what they’re not, and what we can do
about it (pp. 115-136). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Jackson, J. (2008). Language, identity, and study abroad: Sociocultural perspectives. London: Equinox
Publishing.
Jackson, J. (2010). Intercultural journeys: From study to residence abroad, Language and Globalization
Series. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Jackson, J. (2012). Education abroad, in J. Jackson (Ed.). The handbook of language and intercultural
communication (pp. 449-63). London: Routledge.
Jackson, J. (2013). The transformation of ‘a frog in the well’: A path to a more intercultural, global mindset.
In C. Kinginger (Ed.). The Social Turn in Study Abroad Research (pp. 179-204), Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Kim, Y.Y. (2012). Beyond cultural categories: communication, adaptation and transformation. Routledge
handbook of language and intercultural communication, pp. 229-43. London: Routledge.
Kinginger, C. (2009). Language learning and study abroad: A critical reading of research, New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Kolb, D. A. (1983). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Meyer-Lee, E. (2005). Bringing it home: Follow-up courses for study abroad returnees. In Internationalizing
undergraduate education: Integrating study abroad into the curriculum (pp. 114-116). Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota.
Paige, R.M., & Vande Berg, M. (2012). Why students are and are not learning abroad In M. Vande Berg,
R.M. Paige, & K.H. Lou (Eds.) Student learning abroad: What our students are learning, what
they’re not and what we can do about it (pp. 29-59), Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Passarelli, A.M., & Kolb, D.A. (2012). Using experiential learning theory to promote student learning and
development in programs of education abroad In M. Vande Berg, R.M. Paige, & K.H. Lou (Eds.)
Student learning abroad: What our students are learning, what they’re not and what we can do
about it (pp. 137-161), Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Vande Berg, M. (2007). Intervening in the learning of U.S. students abroad. Journal of Studies in
International Education, 11(3-4), 392-99.
Vande Berg, M., & Paige, R.M. (2009). Applying theory and research: The evolution of intercultural
competence in U.S. study abroad. In K. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural
competence (pp. 419-37). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Vande Berg, M., Paige, R.M., & Lou, K.H. (2012) Student learning abroad: paradigms and assumptions, In
M. Vande Berg, R.M. Paige, and K.H. Lou (Eds.) Student Learning Abroad: What our students are
Learning, What they’re not and what we can do about it (pp. 3-28), Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Weber-Bosley, G. (2010). Beyond immersion: Global engagement and transformation through intervention
via student reflection in long-term study abroad. In E. Jones (Ed.), Internationalisation and the
student voice: Higher education perspectives (pp. 55-67). New York and London: Routledge.
Acknowledgements
The curriculum/ICT project described in this paper was supported by Teaching Development Grants
(#4170338, #4170356) from the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) and a competitive General
Research Fund award (#444709) from the University Research Grants Council of Hong Kong. The latter
facilitated an investigation of the developmental trajectories of outgoing yearlong and semester-long
international exchange students from Hong Kong and Mainland China. The author greatly appreciates the
willingness of the local and international students in the Intercultural Transitions course to share their stories
and views about the course.