Generation Study Abroad Summit
Thursday, October 1, 2015
Intercultural Competencies: the
Unique Value of Study Abroad
Dan E. Davidson, Chair President
American Councils for International Education
Darla Domke-Damonte, Associate Provost
Global Initiatives, Coastal Carolina University
Robert O. Slater, Co-Director
American Councils Research Center
Richard D. Brecht, Co-Director
American Councils Research Center
Measuring and Sharing Global
Citizenship Outcomes through
Study Abroad
Dr. Darla Domke-Damonte
Associate Provost for Global Initiatives
Coastal Carolina University
Guiding Questions…
• What processes and resources can we use to
provide evidence of learning through study abroad
experiences that transcend class or program
assessment?
• Who needs to be involved in the development of
these processes?
• How do these processes fit into regular assessment
activities of our institution?
Assessing Study Abroad:
What to Include?
Disciplinary
Knowledge
Program
Logistics
Global
Citizenship
Adjustments Needed: The Status
BEFORE
• Logistics long measured through dated instrument that was
lengthy & Disciplinary Knowledge measured through course
evaluation (short-term only).
• Larger challenge of assessing global awareness in core
curriculum.
• Extensive review of internationalization at institution took
place looking at best practices and our mission. We needed
to be assessing global citizenship impact.
• Began with LT study abroad programs in Spring 2014 and
extended to ST faculty led programs in Summer 2014.
Adjusting Our Assessment to
Include Global Citizenship
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Review and tie goals to mission
Engage the participant leaders across disciplines
Reflect the research to show benefit to all
Find common ground
Review fit with current practices/cycles of assessment
Consider costs and sustainability of the efforts
Engage reporting to reach goals
Adjust activities and processes based on feedback
Focused Global Citizenship Assessment
 The program increased my global awareness/appreciation for cultural
diversity.
 I learned skills that contributed to my ability to function in a new
environment.
 I'm better able to see similarities and difference between my own culture
and other cultures.
 I am better able to understand and appreciate my own culture.
 I'm more aware of social problems and global issues facing the world.
 I feel more responsible for getting involved in the world around me.
 I am more likely to interact with people who are different from me.
 I am more likely to invest more effort to improve my foreign language skills.
 Over the next six months, I plan to participate or volunteer in a project or
program related to global issues.
 I am more likely to work or study abroad in the future.
Results and Action
• Adjusted orientation programs for outbound students based
on information received.
• Added a while-abroad support course (INTL 398) to help
students explore their transformation, identify issues and their
processing of them, and prepare to tell their story upon return.
• Enhanced our marketing information to students and parents
with the results
• Transformed the communication with students
• Developed media to tell the story of the transformation
• Expanded evidence pool for reporting on mission-specific
activities
Concluding Comments
• What processes and resources for assessment?
Engage research, your colleagues, and a realistic understanding of
the resources and assessment processes of your institution
• Who needs to be involved?
All those involved in developing and leading programs, managing
logistics of the programs, and in assessment practices
• How do these processes fit together?
Mission-driven
Goals
Realistic
Expectations
Engaged
Solution
Actionable
Improvements
OCTOBER 1, 2015
Impact of SA on Language
and Impact of Language on SA
Dan E. Davidson
American Councils for International Education
Bryn Mawr College
Generation Study Abroad Summit
High-Level Impact of Intercultural Development: Advanced
Critical Thinking Abilities
Recent research has also established linkages between successful L2 acquisition
in the SA context and the development of
-critical thinking skills,
-thinking “outside the box”
-advanced problem-solving,
-multiple lenses,” heteroglossia” which contributes, in turn, to
-decrease in bias,
-increased tolerance
Specific cognitive functioning:
-rapid task-switching (cognitive multi-tasking)
-improved executive function and self-management skills
-expanded short-term memory
All of which can lead to high-level abilities to work and communicate effectively
across cultural divides. Today’s globalized economy requires understanding of the
internal dynamics that shape market, social movements and political trends.
Intercultural Development: Internal/External Aspects
• Internal traits and attributes (Deardorff, 2004, 2006)
•Respect for other cultures & openness to intercultural learning;
•Curiosity for discovery, motivation for L2 and SA
•Tolerance for ambiguity
•Knowledge and comprehension of cultural contexts and of how
culture shapes world views,
•Knowledge of culture-specific information, socio-linguistic
awareness, cultural and socio-linguistic self-awareness.
•Interactional Skills:
•Adaptability to different communication styles and behaviors
•Cognitive and emotional flexibility in selecting and using
appropriate communications styles and behaviors,
•Developing increasingly nuanced ethno-relative lense
•Increased sense of empathy across cultures (withhold judgment)
Assessing IC: New cognitive frames> manage internal
processing>expand repertoire of L2 Interactional skills
•Individuals demonstrate IC by the ability to adapt to different cultural
environments and the cognitive flexibility to utilize culturally-specific
and appropriate communication techniques.
•The capacity to create an internal self that considers social identities
(race, ethnicity, class, gender, etc.) in a global and national context. -Deardorff (2004).
•in the mature stage of cognitive development have the ability to
consciously shift perspectives and behaviors into an alternative culture
worldview and to use multple cultures frames.” --Magolda (2005).
Validation of the “contact hypothesis” (Allport, 1954), i.e., “contact between groups
of differing ethnic origins or nationalities is likely to produce positive change in the
attitudes of both groups toward the other, provided certain conditions are met. If
not, sustained contact may increase prejudice.
Intercultural Development Inventory v.3 (IDI) Organization Group Profile Report by Mitchell R.
Hammer, Ph.D. IDI, LLC copyrighted
Beyond L-2 Linguistic Variables.
Culturally and Socially Appropriate Responses
“In order to develop their own voice, the FL learner must
first develop an “ear” for other voices.” Kramsch, 2014.
FROM THE SUBJECTIVE WORLDS OF RUSSIAN AND AMERICAN
YOUTH: SUCCESS/УСПЕХ
Money, Wealth
•
The most important indicators of success for
Americans are money and material
possessions, as well as power. Success to
Americans is a matter of business,
achievements, and personal performance.
•
Russians think of success as joy, happiness,
love, well-being, and satisfaction. Work and
labor are also sources of success. Russians
view success somewhat fatalistically and as a
matter of luck.
•
These differences in perspectives reflect
social experiences between the two systems,
one which glorifies business and
entrepreneurial skills and one which glorifies
work.
Happiness, Joy
Power, Glory
Achievement, Victory
Luck, Goals
Work, Business
Education
Family, Friends
Failure, Greed, Pain
House, Car, Clothes
Life, Future
Misc
US
Russia 0
5
10
15
N = 1723 US, 1555 Russia
20
25
30
35
Mobilizing ICC and L-2 Competencies at Level 3 in
actual speech situations*
At Level 3 the L2 learner must:
• make choices based on contexts that have real consequences
• produce meaning with words (requesting, apologizing, thanking,
etc.);
• interpret situations requiring these speech acts;
• monitor the appropriateness of their utterances (e.g., for register)
• repair their utterances, as needed;
• evaluate the effectiveness of repairs and corrections
*Note: The fixed model of the L2 NS is changing under the forces of globalization in
the way languages are used, mixed, and “meshed” NNS is taught a normative
language, but must process much more.
SOCIO-PRAGMATICS AT LEVEL 3
• Strategy selection is culturally bound and rarely taught:
–
–
–
–
–
Requests (idyocentric/allocentric)
Apologies (locus of control)
Persuasion (cajole versus challenge)
Admonition (praise, then criticize)
Expressing disagreement (rhetorical skills also culturally
textured)
– Expressing and acknowledging gratitude
– (culturally-bound in many cases)
Intercultural Communicative Competence at Level 3
•Able to participate successfully in most social, practical, and professional interactions,
including those that may require a range of formal and informal language and behavior.
• Can adapt to a variety of individuals and groups without being misconstrued and transition
smoothly from informal to formal styles of communication.
•Controls nonverbal responses, such as gestures, and handles unfamiliar situations
appropriately, including those involving taboos or emotionally-charged subjects.
•Rarely misreads cultural cues, and can almost always repair misinterpretations.
•Can understand and make appropriate use of cultural references and expressions, and can
usually discuss a variety of issues and subject matter that refer to the culture, such as history,
politics, literature, and the arts.
•Can interpret reading materials and recognize subtleties, implications, and tone.
•Able to communicate via social media. In professional contexts, the individual can interact
appropriately during meetings and provide detailed explanations or reports both in person and
in writing.
•Social behavior and interactions reflect significant knowledge and understanding of
cultural expectations.
AC OVERSEAS FLAGSHIP PROGRAM (ARABIC, CHINESE, RUSSIAN)
PRE- AND POST-PROGRAM SPEAKING SCORES FOR 2012/13 THROUGH
2013/14 ACADEMIC YEAR PROGRAM (N = 120)
100
90
80
Percent
70
68
65
60
50
40
28
30
20
15
10
5
1
6
2
9
2
1
0
1
1+
2
2+
3
3+
Proficiency Levels
Pre-program
Post-program
4
4+
DISTRIBUTION OF CAPSTONE PRE- AND POST-PROGRAM
DEVELOPMENTAL ORIENTATION SCORES: 2014-15 AY
PROGRAMS (N=119)
100
Percent
80
53
60
58
32
40
20
5
26
16
11
0
Denial
Polarization
Pre-program
Minimization
Post-program
Acceptance
Comparison of Pre-/Post-Program IDI Scores
Arranged by Early/Mid/Advanced Proficiency Levels (N=378)
Mean Pre
SD Pre
Mean Post
SD Post
Mean
Difference
97.11
16.34
102.26
14.11
5.15
97.92
16.47
103.05
14.13
5.14
RLASP Program (N=103)
95.53
12.78
97.84
14.91
2.31
NSLI-Y Program (N=131)
92.66
13.73
93.94
13.85
1.28
YES Program (N=25)
95.32
12.02
95.48
14.32
0.16
Program Name
Capstone Programs Only (N=119)
OPI ILR 3 and above
22
PAIRED SAMPLE T-TESTS FOR NSLI-Y PROGRAM (N=131)
Variable
Mean Pre
SD Pre
Mean
Post
SD
Post
Mean
Differe
nce
t
p
Acceptance
3.839
(0.717)
4.218
0.654
0.379
4.688
Adaptation
3.836
(0.530)
4.056
0.540
0.220
3.257
Cognitive Frame Shifting
3.701
(0.703)
3.947
0.645
0.246
2.658
Behavioral Code Shifting
3.945
(0.546)
4.142
0.551
0.197
2.899
0.00
0
0.00
2
0.01
0
0.00
5
23
OCTOBER 1, 2015
“Bow wave” of
language-competence
students in future SA
Robert O. Slater,
American Councils Research Center
Generation Study Abroad Summit
OCTOBER 1, 2015
““Language Matters”
The Impact of Language on SA
Richard D. Brecht,
American Councils Research Center
University of Maryland
Global Professional Search LLC
Generation Study Abroad Summit
IMMERSION + LANGUAGE
LANGUAGE
STUDY
ABROAD
CURRENT STUDY ABROAD SITUATION
Immersion +
Language
KNOWLEDGE,
SKILLS & ABILITIES
• Language
proficiency
• Cultural
Competence
• Cognitive skills
(reasoning &
perception)
INDIVIDUAL IMPACT
COMMUNITY IMPACT
• Personal development
Government
• Increased Security,
Social & Economic
Benefits
• Educational
achievement &
Attainment
Education
• Language study & SA
integrated into core
• Global Talent
• Employment
Private Industry
• Global Economic
Competitiveness
27
SA + LANGUAGE
NATURAL PARTNERSHIP
LANGUAGE
STUDY
ABROAD
ASPIRATIONAL STUDY ABROAD SITUATION