International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

Developing intercultural communicative competence in foreign

language classrooms – A study of EFL learners in Taiwan
Li-Jung Daphne Huang
Department of English Language, Literature, and Linguistics, Providence University, 200, Sec. 7, Taiwan Boulevard, Shalu Dist., Taichung, 43301,
Taiwan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Internationalisation has accentuated the importance of intercultural communicative competence

Intercultural communicative competence (ICC) among language learners in higher education in the 21st century. As in the case of Taiwan,
Intercultural learning universities worldwide have begun to emphasise intercultural ‘literacy’ in language classrooms.
Explicit instruction
Following Byram’ (1997) ICC model, this study adopts an intercultural approach to language
Foreign language education
EFL learners
classroom in order to investigate the effectiveness of explicit instruction in developing ICC among
EFL (English as a Foreign Language) learners in Taiwan, and to discover how this development is
related to the background factors of overseas experience and English proficiency. The accom­
panying research therefore has two purposes: (1) to evaluate the effectiveness of explicit in­
struction on EFL learners’ development of ICC by employing both self-assessment and other
assessment tools and (2) to investigate the relationship between the development of ICC and two
background factors. The results show that (1) explicit instruction is effective in raising students’
development of ICC, especially the knowledge and skills dimensions, and (2) English proficiency
and overseas experience are significantly related to better acquisition of ICC.

Introduction

Globalisation, despite its merits and problems, has brought diverse cultures into more intense contact, such as that in Taiwan
between foreign students from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds and local Taiwanese people. Because of increasing in­
ternational contact worldwide, the field of intercultural communication has received multi-disciplinary attention since the late 20th
and the early 21st century from language teachers, linguists and international business trainers emphasising different aspects of the
topic (e.g. Byram, 1997; Deardorff, 2006; Gudykunst & Kim, 2003; Sinicrope et al., 2007; Ting-Toomey, 1999). In foreign language
education, the emphasis of language teaching is now directed toward developing intercultural communicative competence (hereafter
as ICC) among language learners (e.g. Byram, 2008). In its broadest sense, ICC is defined as ‘a complex of abilities needed to perform
effectively and appropriately when interacting with others who are linguistically and culturally different from oneself’ (Fantini &
Tirmizi, 2006, p. 12). Chen and Starosta (1998) define ICC as ‘the ability to effectively and appropriately execute communication
behaviors that negotiate each other’s cultural identity or identities in a culturally diverse environment’ (p. 28). Despite the diverse
definitions, scholars in the field agree on the multi-tiered nature of such competence. In particular, Byram (1997) proposed a
comprehensive model, highlighting the specific components of ICC and rendering its teaching and assessment quantifiable. Deardorff
(2004) then developed an ICC model under internationalisation to highlight its importance in higher education. Both models
emphasize the development of ICC in the language classroom and suggest that ICC does not ‘just happen’ for most individuals. Instead,

E-mail address: ljhuang@gm.pu.edu.tw.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2021.04.015
Received 12 November 2020; Received in revised form 11 March 2021; Accepted 30 April 2021
Available online 14 May 2021
0147-1767/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

it is a competence that needs to be systematically taught, consciously fostered, and gradually internalised by language learners
(Deardorff, 2006). That is, the competence needs to be fostered by ‘explicit instruction’ (Archer & Hughes, 2011), a purposeful way of
teaching students, which includes clear and direct instructional and delivery procedures and allows guided and independent practices
(see Fletcher et al., 2019). Following this line of thought, the effectiveness of courses aiming to develop language learners’ ICC in the
EFL context has received attention in the field of foreign language education (Byram, 1997; Deardorff, 2006).
To respond to the emphasis on ICC development in foreign language education, the aim of the current research investigates whether
explicit instruction is indeed effective in developing EFL learners’ ICC and if such development is related to background factors of EFL
learners. The purposes of this project are twofold: (1) to evaluate the effectiveness of explicit instruction on a group of EFL learners in a
university setting and (2) to investigate the relationship between the development of ICC and two factors – language proficiency and
overseas experience.

Literature review

Intercultural communicative competence (ICC)

Throughout the literature, a consistent usage of the terminology and definitions for ICC is lacking. The range of terms used includes
intercultural competence, intercultural communicative (or communication) competence, global competency, transcultural commu­
nication competence, and intercultural sensitivity (see Fantini, 2006). These terms refer broadly to the ability to step beyond one’s own
culture and function effectively and appropriately with speakers from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Byram (2000)
defined ICC as ‘the ability to interact effectively with people of cultures other than one’s own’ (p. 297). Bennett and Bennett (2004)
define ICC as ‘the ability to communicate effectively in cross-cultural situations and to relate appropriately in a variety of cultural
contexts’ (p. 149). Deardorff (2004) identified the most highly rated definition of ICC in institutions as ‘the ability to communicate
effectively and appropriately in intercultural situations based on one’s intercultural knowledge, skills and attitudes’ (p. 194). These
definitions point to the common ground that the competence requires the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately.
Further, in their discussion of various components of ICC, most researchers have classified ICC into three dimensions: affective,
cognitive, and behavioural (e.g. Bennett, 2004; Chen & Starosta, 1996). For example, Chen and Starosta (1998) identify the three
components of ICC as affective, cognitive, and behavioural processes. Bennett (2008) also describes competence as ‘a set of cognitive,
affective, and behavioural skills and characteristics that support effective and appropriate interaction in a variety of cultural contexts’
(p. 97). Regardless of their differences, scholars agree that one component alone is not enough to ensure competence (Deardorff, 2006).

Models of intercultural communicative competence

In the context of foreign language education, Byram’s 1997 monograph has emphasized the development of ICC in the language
classroom. Byram’s work is based on the European context, and his model stresses the importance of linguistic competence as well as
identity and cultural understanding. In this sense, foreign language education aims to produce an ‘intercultural speaker’ instead of a
native-like speaker. In order for language learners to achieve such ‘interculturality’, Byram (1997) proposed a comprehensive
framework that includes three components – knowledge, skills, and attitudes, of which knowledge and skills are considered the
foundation of ICC. Knowledge is further divided into two categories: (1) knowledge of others and of social processes of social groups
and (2) knowledge of self and of critical cultural awareness, which involves an ability to evaluate practices and products of one’s own
and others’ cultures. Skills are divided into two categories: (1) skills to interpret and relate and (2) skills to discover and/or to interact.
Finally, attitudes refer to the ability to relativize one’s self and to value others with ‘curiosity and openness, readiness to suspend
disbelief about other cultures and about one’s own’ (Byram, 1997, p. 91).
Another theoretical framework that informs the current research is Deardorff’s model. Deardorff (2006) emphasized the impact of
internationalisation in higher education in a process model which emphasises the progressive nature of ICC development and posits
that, while attitude is the fundamental element for developing ICC and knowledge, comprehension and skills can be established to
advance to the next stage, internal outcome, which through interaction can be realised as external outcome. The external outcome,
effective and appropriate communication and behaviour in an intercultural situation, is then fed into attitude, forming a loop in the
development of ICC.
Both models have been widely cited and serve as the impetus for quantitative research instruments in the field. Moreover, the
process nature of Deardorff’s model provides a theoretical framework for a teaching approach that enters the loop by building up the
necessary knowledge and skills required in one’s intercultural interactions, further fostering intercultural attitudes. As they are
pedagogically applicable in formal language learning contexts and both of them support the effectiveness of explicit instruction in the
language classroom, the current research is based on Byram’s and Deardorff’s models.

ICC research in Taiwan

In the Taiwanese context, research on the development of ICC in the language classroom has become popular in the past ten years.
The focus has been on assessing such competence among language teachers or learners and the relationship between the development
of competence and English proficiency.
Chao (2014, 2015, 2016), who has worked extensively on ICC assessment examining the competence of both English language
learners and their teachers, developed an intercultural competence scale for Taiwanese EFL learners and applied the self-assessment

56
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

tool to see their ICC development. Chao’s 2014 study showed that the affective orientation to intercultural interaction (i.e. motivation,
willingness and attitudes) and intercultural consciousness (i.e. self-monitoring and reflection) are evaluated more positively than
behavioural performance (i.e. use of English) and cultural knowledge. Chao consequently recommended that knowledge of local and
world cultures should be integrated into English courses and that cultural content should be systematically addressed in English
classrooms in order to develop EFL learner’s ICC.
Chao (2015, 2016) then developed a 50-item questionnaire to assess teachers’ beliefs and practices in ICC-oriented EFL classrooms.
She investigated the affective components of ICC among 356 non-native English teachers from kindergarten to university in Taiwan.
Her studies showed that Taiwanese teachers had a vague concept of ICC and many did not see the need for intercultural learning in EFL
classrooms. Due to the lack of an intercultural perspective in the current English curriculum in Taiwan, Chao suggests that the
educational policy for English curriculum and instruction in Taiwan should include intercultural perspectives. In sum, Chao has
worked consistently with self-reported questionnaire measures and urges the integration of ICC programs in English language edu­
cation in Taiwan.
Different from Chao, Wu (2016) and Weng (2018) investigated ICC development in relation to language proficiency and inter­
cultural experiences. Wu (2016) examined Taiwanese EFL learners’ intercultural sensitivity1 in relation to English proficiency and
English use. She found no significant correlation between intercultural sensitivity and English proficiency, indicating that the rela­
tionship was not a simple cause and effect one. Furthermore, Weng (2018) investigated the development of intercultural sensitivity
among a group of Taiwanese EFL learners in relation to English proficiency and intercultural experiences. The latter included study
abroad experience and having foreign friends. Similar to Wu, Weng found no correlation between English proficiency and intercultural
sensitivity. In terms of intercultural experiences, study abroad experience was found to promote the overall development of inter­
cultural sensitivity. But it was having foreign friends that played the most significant role. This finding corresponded to Jackson’s
(2011) which emphasised the importance of sustained intercultural interaction among language learners either at home or abroad.
Previous research has also examined language proficiency and overseas experiences as influential factors on ICC development (e.g.
Anderson et al., 2006; Jackson, 2011; Olson & Kroeger, 2001). Contrary to these earlier studies, both Wu and Weng found that the
development of intercultural sensitivity did not correspond to greater foreign language proficiency. This shows that there have been
mixed results, providing a ground for research addressing the relationship. In addition, Weng confirmed that intercultural experiences
helped raise intercultural sensitivity (e.g. Altshuler et al., 2003; Taguchi & Roever, 2017). This suggests that study abroad experiences
and international contacts facilitate the development of ICC.

Gap in the literature and research questions

Despite the urge to incorporate ICC training in language classrooms, few studies in the Taiwanese context have focused on the
effectiveness of explicit instruction and its assessment by using a combination of assessment tools. Moreover, mixed results about
language proficiency and overseas experience on ICC development have been found. To fill this gap in the literature in the Taiwanese
context, three research questions were raised:
31. Is explicit instruction effective in the ICC development among Taiwanese EFL learners?
32. What components of ICC do Taiwanese EFL learners acquire after instruction?
33. Is there a relationship between two selected background factors of the learners and their ICC development?
(3.1) Is there a relationship between English proficiency and ICC development?
(3.2) Is there a relationship between overseas experience and ICC development?

Research method

A mixed-method approach with a self-assessment tool (questionnaire) and an other-assessment tool (video task) was employed for
the purpose of the study. Pretests and post-tests for both tools were conducted among a group of university EFL learners in Taiwan to
see if explicit instruction is effective in enhancing learners’ ICC development. The questionnaire was designed to elicit learners’ self-
evaluations of their ICC progress and the video-task was designed to explore more details about such development. In addition, the
relationship between ICC development and English proficiency and overseas experience was explored through the questionnaire.

The course

A course was offered to English-major students in order to equip language learners with ICC through explicit instruction. The course
introduced major theories and concepts in the field of language and culture, with a focus on intercultural communication. According to
Deardorff (2006), the promotion of ICC at the university level coincides with the top three elements of higher education: (1) awareness,
valuing and understanding of cultural differences (2) experiencing other cultures (3) self-awareness of one’s own culture. The course
design thus included three objectives: (1) to raise students’ awareness of self-identity and personal characteristics, (2) to introduce
different communication styles across cultures, and (3) to train intercultural abilities and sensitivity. Case studies were presented and
discussed in relation to the theories and concepts introduced in the course.

1
Based on Bennett (1993), Wu (2016) used the term ‘intercultural sensitivity’ to refer to ICC.

57
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

According to Byram et al. (2017), foreign language education which develops ICC should include critical cultural awareness, a
focus on ‘others’ who live beyond our national boundaries and speak another language, and comparative analysis of our situation and
theirs. To include these elements, cultural concepts and definitions (e.g. culture, culture shock, and stereotype), frameworks about
world cultures (e.g. identity and cultural values), terms for analysis (e.g. verbal styles and non-verbal cues) and cross-cultural com­
parisons were introduced in the course. The main themes of the course included:

• Definitions of culture and intercultural communication (Eckert, 2006; Levine & Adelman, 1993; Samovar et al., 2007)
• Culture shock and stereotype (Eckert, 2006)
• Cultural values (Hofstede, 1980, 1991)
• Identity (Samovar et al., 2007)
• Verbal communication styles (Ting-Toomey, 1999)
• Non-verbal communication (Samovar et al., 2007)
• Cross-cultural contact and conflict (Levine & Adelman, 1993)
• Intercultural relationships (Holliday et al., 2010; Martin & Nakayama, 2010)
• Cultural adaptation (Dodd, 1998)

Following the prototypical structure of explicit instruction proposed by Archer and Hughes (2011), each lesson was structured in
the following order: (1) opening (state the goal of the lesson, review prerequisite skills/knowledge, discuss relevance, and link new
content to previous content), (2) body (model, prompt, check, and present examples), (3) closing (review, preview and group practice),
and (4) practice (independent practice). The course was delivered in two principal modes: lecture and discussion of case studies. The
main theories and concepts were introduced and case studies relevant to the theories were presented in the form of video or text and
then analysed. Case studies were compared to a possible encounter in the local culture. Through analysis of case studies and com­
parison, students were to understand cultural values of others and their own. Class activities also included group discussion as well as
independent work.

Participant

Students selecting the course were recruited as participants of the study. The class included Taiwanese English-major students and
exchange students from various countries (i.e. France, Indonesia, Japan and the United States). Only the former group was recruited
for the purpose of the study. Therefore, a total of 54 students of Taiwanese background consisting of 13 males and 41 females
participated in the study.

Instrument

The research adopted a mix of self-assessment tool (questionnaire) and other-assessment tool (video task) to assess ICC. The
following describes the instruments.

Questionnaire
A questionnaire was designed to investigate ICC development. The questionnaire consisted of two parts. Part 1 contained a series of
demographic questions about students’ background information including linguistic repertoire, gender, English proficiency, and
overseas experience. Part 2 included 25 statements designed on a five-point Likert Scale (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree). The
25 statements were divided according to the three-dimensional model: knowledge (9 statements), skills (9 statements), and attitudes (7
statements). The questionnaire was in Chinese as it was imperative that the participants were able to complete the questionnaire in
their native language to ensure understanding.

Video-task
Despite the popularity of investigating ICC through questionnaires, shortcomings of the self-report nature have been discussed in
the literature (Altshuler et al., 2003). To address the shortcomings of the self-report nature of the questionnaire, a video task – an
other-assessment tool – was implemented. This involved a selection of two video clips (about 3 min each) about two cases of inter­
cultural conflicts. The two video clips were from Joy Luck Club and Bend it like Beckham. The first scenario involved a family gathering
where one of the female characters introduced her American partner to her family while the second one involved a conflict between
parents and the daughter in the lounge. The two scenarios were selected as they involved a conflict that occurred due to possible
cultural differences. The video task required the students to evaluate the two scenarios by identifying and analysing the conflicts
resulting from cultural differences. The participants were asked specifically to: (1) identify if there was a conflict; (2) describe what the
conflict was; and (3) explain possible reasons account for the conflict. The aim was to see if students were able to identify and account
for intercultural conflicts based on the knowledge learned in the class (i.e. theoretical terminology and cultural values about others and
self) and to use the skills of analysis and interpretation. During the process, attitudes implicit to the understanding of an intercultural
encounter may be revealed. In short, the video task was incorporated so that the combined assessment methods could provide more
comprehensive accounts of intercultural phenomena (e.g. Fantini, 2006; Sinicrope et al., 2007).

58
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

Data collection procedure

Data collection took place in five stages. Stage one was the design of the questionnaire and the video task. Stage two focused on
refining the questionnaire. Stage three involved data collection, implementing pretests (questionnaire and video task), at the beginning
of the course. Stage four was the implementation of the post-tests (questionnaire and video task) at the end of the semester. 54 students
completed both the pretest and the post-test of the questionnaire, accounting for 54 valid questionnaires. Among the 54 students, 41 of
them completed the video task. Stage five involved data analysis. The questionnaire was analysed by: (1) paired sample t-test, (2)
independent t-test, and (3) One-way ANOVA. The video task was analysed by using content analysis by the researcher and her research
assistant. A coding system was derived and agreed upon by the two analysts.

Results and discussion

The questionnaire and the video task were designed with two purposes in mind: (1) to evaluate the effectiveness of explicit in­
struction on a group of English-major students and (2) to investigate the relationship between the development of ICC and individual
background factors. Both questionnaire and video task were used to address the first purpose and the questionnaire was used to address
the second purpose. The results include two parts: results from the questionnaire and from the video task.

Results from the questionnaire

The following reports the results from the questionnaire in two sections: (1) development of ICC in terms of the ICC dimensions and
(2) development of ICC in relation to overseas experience and English proficiency.

Development of ICC in terms of the ICC dimensions

The paired sample t-test of pretest and post-test showed that explicit instruction was effective in developing students’ ICC in terms
of all dimensions. A comparison of the mean values showed an increase in all three dimensions. Table 1 showed that of all the three
dimensions, that of attitudes was evaluated most positively in both pretest and post-test. However, learners improved their inter­
cultural competence most extensively in the skills dimension, followed by the knowledge dimension and the attitudes dimension.
Table 2 further showed that the increase was significant in all dimensions (p < .05). In the knowledge and skills dimensions, the p-
value was less than .01 (p < .01), suggesting that explicit instruction was particularly effective in enhancing students’ knowledge and
skills of ICC.
Table 3 showed the mean values of individual statements according to dimension. The table showed that the statements demon­
strating the most extensive progress included (18) ‘I can interpret cultural practices, beliefs or values of other cultures’ (skills), (6) ‘I
can explain the differences between cultures of English-speaking countries and my own culture’ (skills), (8) ‘I know that my culture
influences the way I interpret behaviours of people from other cultures’ (knowledge) and (5) ‘I know about cultures of English-
speaking countries’ (knowledge), all showing an increase over .50. The first two statements are in the skills dimension and the
latter two are in the knowledge dimension. This corresponds with the result in Table 2 that the increase in the knowledge and skills
dimensions is higher than the attitudes dimension. The statements showing the least increase included (3) ‘I know about the
communicative rules of my own culture’ (knowledge), (12) ‘I respect the values of people from other cultures’ (attitudes) and (16)
‘When people from other cultures behave differently, I can respect the differences’ (attitudes). All three statements received a high
evaluation in the pretest (over 4). This may lead to little room for improvement; thus, less progress was shown in these statements.

Development of ICC in relation to language proficiency and overseas experience

The independent samples test was conducted to see if overseas experience is significantly related to the development of ICC. The
participants were divided into two groups: those who had stayed in a foreign country for over three months (11) and those who had not
(43). Table 4 provides descriptive statistics of ICC development of the two groups. It showed that both groups made progress in all
dimensions. However, the overseas group made more progress. In particular, the overseas group made extensive progress in terms of
knowledge and skills
To examine if the difference between the two groups was significant, an independent t-test was conducted. Table 5 showed that
overseas experience was a significant factor in the acquisition of the knowledge and skills dimensions (p < .05). The differences in the
attitudes dimension is not significant.

Table 1
Mean and standard deviation values of ICC dimensions.
N Mean SD Std. Error Mean

Pretest (Knowledge) 54 3.6380 .39270 .05344

Pair 1
Post-test (Knowledge) 54 3.9386 .38622 .05256
Pretest (Skills) 54 3.3704 .53068 .07222
Pair 2
Post-test (Skills) 54 3.7377 .51762 .07044
Pretest (Attitudes) 54 4.0556 .58072 .07903
Pair 3
Post-test (Attitudes) 54 4.2704 .45995 .06259

59
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

Table 2
Result of paired sample t-test (two-tailed).
Paired Difference Sig.

Mean SD t df

Pair 1 Pretest (Knowledge) Post-test (Knowledge) − .30051 .58200 − 3.794 53 .000*

Pretest (Skills)
Pair 2 − .36728 .72712 − 3.712 53 .000*
Post-test (Skills)
Pretest (Attitudes)
Pair 3 − .21481 .77103 − 2.047 53 .046*
Post-test (Attitudes)
*
indicates statistical significance.

Table 3
Mean values of ICC dimensions.
Dimension Statement Pretest SD Post-test SD Paired
Mean Mean Difference

1. I know about my own culture. 3.74 .650 4.09 .652 0.35

2. I know about the demographic situation of Taiwan. 3.37 .784 3.76 .799 0.39
3. I know about the communicative rules of my own culture. 4.24 .642 4.30 .571 0.06
4. I am aware of challenges and benefits of cultural diversity. 3.93 .723 4.13 .674 0.20
5. I know about cultures of English-speaking countries. 3.02 .566 3.54 .693 0.52
Knowledge 8. I am aware that my culture influences the way I interpret behaviors of people
3.67 .890 4.19 .646 0.52
from other cultures
13. I know that although someone may look different from me, we may share a
4.20 .786 4.39 .685 0.19
lot in common.
17. I know there are cultural differences in nonverbal communication. 3.22 .769 3.50 .746 0.28
23. I am familiar my own cultural rules and biases. 3.44 .769 3.85 .656 0.41
6. I can explain the differences between cultures of English-speaking countries
3.15 .737 3.70 .662 0.55
and my own culture.
7. I can recognize cultural rules and biases different from those of my own. 3.06 .856 3.54 .719 0.48
Skills 15. I can communicate with people from other cultures easily. 2.56 .883 2.76 1.063 0.20
18. I can interpret cultural practices, beliefs or values of other cultures. 3.22 .691 3.80 .711 0.58

Skills 19. I can change and adapt my way of thinking according to the context. 3.78 .691 3.98 .629 0.20
20. I am confident in conducting conversations with people from different
3.52 .795 3.70 .768 0.18
cultures.
21. I am confident in my abilities to resolve intercultural conflict. 3.17 .841 3.67 .727 0.50
22. I am confident in my abilities to adapt to a new country or culture. 3.35 .731 3.50 .720 0.15
24. I am confident in telling people about my own country and culture. 3.65 .756 3.94 .738 0.29
9. I like spending time exploring my own culture. 3.69 .968 4.06 .811 0.37
10. I am interested in learning about and understanding other cultures. 4.04 .726 4.30 .717 0.26
11. I enjoy interacting with people from other cultures 4.13 .848 4.22 .664 0.09
Attitudes 12. I respect the values of people from other cultures 4.50 .637 4.67 .476 0.17
14. When I meet someone from another country, I show an interest in
4.13 .728 4.33 .673 0.20
understanding his/her cultures.
16. When people from other cultures behave differently, I can respect the
4.30 .690 4.44 .572 0.14
differences.
25. I don’t immediately draw negative conclusions when people from other
4.15 .763 4.28 .656 0.13
cultures do or see things differently.

Table 4
Group statistics (overseas experience).
Overseas experiences N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

1 11 .6157 .50139 .15117

Knowledge
2 43 .2199 .57871 .08825
1 11 .8182 .62563 .18863
Skills
2 43 .2519 .71211 .10860
1 11 .3455 .83948 .25311
Attitudes
2 43 .1814 .75947 .11582

English proficiency was also examined in relation to ICC development. One-way ANOVA was conducted for this purpose. Participants
were divided into three groups according to self-reported English proficiency level: upper-intermediate (8), intermediate (39), and lower-
intermediate (7). Table 6 showed a significant difference among students of different English proficiency (p > 0.5). English proficiency was
a significant factor in the development of the knowledge and the skills dimensions, but not the attitude dimension.

60
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

Table 5
Result of the independent t-test (overseas experience).
Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances t -test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df Sig. (2 tailed)

Equal variances assumed .243 .624 2.075 52 .043

Knowledge
Equal variances not assumed 2.261 17.494 .037*
Equal variances assumed .304 .583 2.407 52 .020*
Skills
Equal variances not assumed 2.601 17.275 .018*
Equal variances not assumed .071 .791 .626 52 .534
Attitudes
Equal variances not assumed .589 14.475 .565

To examine the relationship between English proficiency and development of ICC in terms of knowledge and skills, post hoc analysis
was carried out. Table 7 showed the relationship between various levels of English proficiency and the development of knowledge and
skills. There is a significant difference between upper-intermediate and lower-intermediate groups and between intermediate and
lower-intermediate groups (p > 0.5) in the knowledge dimension. The table also showed that there was a significant difference be­
tween upper-intermediate and lower-intermediate groups in the skills dimension (p > 0.5). The upper-intermediate and intermediate
groups showed a more significant increase in the knowledge and skills dimensions than the lower-intermediate group.
Overall, the results from the questionnaire indicated that the development of ICC in terms of the three dimensions was advanced
through explicit instruction and that the skills component was the one which can be best acquired, followed by knowledge and at­
titudes. As for individual factors, overseas experience and English proficiency were significant in the learning of the knowledge and
skill components of ICC.

Result from the video task

41 students completed both the pretest and the post-test of the video task. The pretest and the post-test were organised and
classified based on three elements: (1) identification of a conflict (2) the conflict per se and (3) reasons accounting for the conflict. The
following describes the results from the video task.

Result from video (1) – Joy Luck Club

The analysis of the pretest showed that all of the video task participants identified a conflict in the video. In terms of what the
conflict was, 36 participants identified the conflict as about ‘food culture’, seven participants identified it as about ‘verbal style’, and
the other four identified it as about ‘culture shock’. Some participants identified two reasons. For example, two participants identified
the conflict as about both ‘food culture’ and ‘culture shock’ and another two as about both ‘food culture’ and ‘verbal style’. As the
setting of the scene was a family dinner party where an American male was introduced to a Chinese family as the partner of the
daughter, many of the participants focused on the conflict as about different table manners, thus interpreting it to be about different
food cultures. As for reasons accounting for the conflict, they were grouped into two categories: (1) cultural difference and (2) un­
familiarity with the respective culture. 38 participants identified the conflict as due to cultural differences (including background
difference and education difference) while seven participants interpreted the conflict as a result of being unfamiliar with each other’s
culture. The analysis of the pretest showed that prior to the instruction, the participants were able to identify a conflict, to describe the
conflict and to provide a brief explanation.
Regarding the third question ‘What are the possible reasons for the conflict?’, a comparison of the pretest and the post-test showed
that the participants were able to analyse and interpret the conflict in greater length and in more specific terms after the instruction as
illustrated in Table 8. The table showed that prior to the instruction, the participants mainly provided a one-sentence explanation
while after the instruction, they were able to explain in further detail. In addition, the table showed that the participants were able to
use theoretical terms learned in the classroom in their analysis. These terms included high-context and low-context cultures, inter­
cultural sensitivity, individualism/collectivism, low/high power distance cultures, and direct/indirect verbal style2 . They were used
to compare two different cultures as shown in Example (2).
A closer look at the analysis of the post-test showed that the participants not only demonstrated the ability to compare two different
cultures but also to step away from a subjective view and to ‘relativise and value the culture of others’ (Byram, 1997, p. 34). Examples
(3) and (4) in Table 8 illustrated that the participants could suspend judgement and relate to others when explaining a case of conflict, a
demonstration of the attitudes dimension.

Result from video (2) – Bend it like Beckham

Similar to the analysis of video (1), the analysis of the pretest showed that all the video task participants identified a conflict in
video (2). The selected scene was about a dispute between a mother and a daughter in an Indian family living in the UK, so the conflict
can be interpreted as a result of a mother-daughter conflict or a British-Indian cultural difference conflict, or both. 33 participants
identified it as a mother-daughter conflict – mother-daughter dispute about the daughter’s intention to join a soccer team. Three

2
These terms are underlined in Tables 8 and 9.

61
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

Table 6
Result of one-way ANOVA (English proficiency).
Knowledge Sum of square df Mean square F Sig.

Between Groups 1.420 2 0.710 5.362 0.008*

Within Groups 6.753 51 0.132
Total 8.173 53

Skill Sum of square df Mean square F Sig.

Between Groups 4.090 2 2.045 9.626 .000*

Within Groups 10.836 51 .212
Total 14.926 53

Attitude Sum of square df Mean square F Sig.

Between Groups .815 2 .408 1.219 .304

Within Groups 17.058 51 .334
Total 17.873 53

Table 7
Post hoc analysis.
Knowledge 95 % confidence intervals mean
(I) English (J) English proficiency Mean difference (I–J) Std. Error Sig.
Lower bound Upper bound
proficiency

3 .23424 .12578 .068 − .0183 .4868

2
4 .55372* .16909 .002 .2143 .8932
2 − .23424 .12578 .068 − .4868 .0183
3
4 .31948 .14260 .029 .0332 .6058
2 − .57392* .16909 .002 − .8932 − .2143
4
3 − .33838 .14260 .029 − .6058 − .0332

Skill (I) English 95 % confidence intervals mean

(J) English proficiency Mean difference (I–J) Std. Error Sig.
proficiency Lower bound Upper bound

3 .29221 .15933 .072 − .0277 .6121

2
4 .92614* .21418 .000 .4962 1.3561
2 − .29221 .15933 .072 − .6121 .0277
3
4 .63393* .18063 .001 .2713 .9966
2 − .92614* .21418 .000 − 1.3561 − .4962
4
3 − .63393* .18063 .001 − .9966 − .2713

(2=upper-intermediate level; 3=intermediate level; 4=lower-intermediate level).

Table 8
Exemplary analysis of video (1).
Example Participant Pretest Post-test

(1) 5 ‘The man did not know much about the Eastern ‘There are two reasons: The different communication styles (low and high
culture and said that the woman’s family lacked context communication styles) and the lack of intercultural sensitivity.’
tolerance’.
(2) 35 ‘The conflicts result from cultural differences.’ ‘Independence and autonomy are emphasized in western cultures, which are
individualistic cultures. They tend to use a direct communication style and
their power distance is low. Chinese culture tends to emphasize group and they
tend to express their opinions indirectly. It is a high power distance culture’.
(3) 27 ‘Their backgrounds are different.’ ‘The food culture is different, and the Chinese family should also be aware of
the difference without having stereotypical judgment’.
(4) 38 ‘They did not know about their respective table ‘Misunderstanding results from not knowing the culture of the other. Both
manners.’ should try to know the cultural differences and be more tolerant’.

participants identified it as a general family conflict, one participant as a religious conflict, and four participants did not mention what
the conflict was. The reasons identified in the pretest can be grouped into three categories: (1) gender stereotype (2) cultural difference
and (3) generational difference. 28 participants identified the conflict as due to gender stereotype, 14 considered the conflict as due to
cultural difference, and 12 regarded the conflict as due to generational difference. Those who considered the conflict as due to cultural
difference focused on how Indian and British cultures view female roles differently. Similar to the result from video (1), the analysis of
the pretest showed that prior to the instruction, the participants were able to identify a conflict, to describe the conflict and to provide a
brief explanation.
Regarding the possible reasons for the conflict, a comparison of the pretest and the post-test showed that the participants were able
to analyse the video in further detail after the instruction as shown in Table 9. The analysis of the post-test also showed that the

62
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

participants could use specific terms in their explanations. These terms included: masculine/feminine cultures and low-contact/high-
contact cultures. As the scene involved gender stereotype in the Indian culture, Example (7) in Table 9 showed that the participant
applied the distinction between masculine and feminine cultures to the explanation of cultural difference. Similarly, Example (8)
showed that the participant used the distinction between low-contact culture and high-contact culture to compare the different
perceptions about body contact between the Indian and British cultures.
Overall, the analysis of the video task showed that the participants were able to identify intercultural conflicts and provide brief
explanations before the instruction. The comparison of the pretest and post-test further showed that in both conflict situations, the
participants exhibited the ability to make use of the knowledge, analyse the conflict situations, compare cultural differences and
provide more in-depth interpretations after the instruction. Moreover, the video task showed that the attitudes dimension could be
elicited.

Discussion and implications

In this study, three research questions were raised regarding the effectiveness of explicit instruction in the ICC development and the
relationship between ICC development and two selected factors. The following will address the questions and provide a discussion and
implications.

Effectiveness of explicit instruction on intercultural communicative competence

To address research question (1) “Is explicit instruction effective in the ICC development among Taiwanese EFL learners?”, the
results from both the questionnaire and video task showed that explicit instruction was effective in developing EFL learners’ ICC.
Research question (2) asked “What components of ICC do Taiwanese EFL learners acquire after instruction?”. The study found that the
EFL learners made progress in all dimensions – knowledge, skills and attitudes. Such results concur with previous studies (e.g.
Deardorff, 2006; Klak & Martin, 2003) that explicit instruction is effective in developing ICC.
In particular, the result from the questionnaire showed that the learners acquired knowledge both about cultures of others and their
own. They evaluated themselves as being more familiar with English-speaking cultures and more competent in explaining differences
between cultures of English-speaking countries and their own. Moreover, the result indicated that the skills dimension could be most
effectively taught through explicit instruction. The analysis of the video task further demonstrated that the learners were able to
analyse intercultural conflicts in further detail after instruction. Learners were able to apply the knowledge acquired through the
course and analyse incidents of intercultural conflicts. They were able to recognise cultural rules and biases and to interpret cultural
practices, beliefs or values of two different cultures. The learning outcomes corresponded to the course materials in which intercultural
communication related terminology was introduced and comparisons between Asian cultures and English-speaking cultures were
discussed. The finding illustrates that the skills (of interpreting and relating documents or events) can be taught by reflecting upon the
skills of ‘reading’ a document or ‘watching’ a video (Byram, 1997) in the classrooms.
Furthermore, the result showed that the EFL learners made least progress in the attitudes dimension. This may be due to two
reasons. First, having high initial scores in the attitudes dimension meant there was little room for improvement. Prior to instruction,
the learners showed avid interest in learning about and understanding other cultures and in interacting with members from other
cultures. Similarly, Chao (2014) discussed the initial high motivation of EFL learners resulted in little progress in the development of
intercultural competence. Second, it is difficult to “teach” the attitudes dimension through explicit instruction. Instead, it needs to be
cultivated through the development of knowledge and skills. This developmental cycle can be explained by Deardorff’s (2004) process
model which suggests that individuals develop knowledge and skills through instruction, which are then practiced and reinforced
through interaction. And together this leads to a change in attitudes. Although the relationship between attitudes and knowledge or
skills is not a simple cause and effect one (Byram & Morgan, 1994), increased knowledge helps foster positive attitudes towards
‘others’. In short, explicit instruction may not necessarily lead to a direct change in attitudes; yet the learning of knowledge and skills
help raise implicit intercultural awareness.
According to Hughes et al. (2018), explicit instruction needs to provide specific content and purposeful practice. Therefore, the
design of the ICC course included description of selected national cultures, comparison of cultures based on theoretical models, and
introduction and analysis of case studies. Materials were presented in both text and video, allowing students to develop knowledge of
other cultures and their own and skills of interpretation and analysis. The research thus confirms that language learners can benefit

Table 9
Exemplary analysis of video (2).
Example Participant Pretest Post-test

(5) 25 ‘The conflict is between the conservative mother ‘The conflict happened because of the gap between the two generations and
and the teenage girl. There is generation gap.’ between the traditional Indian culture and British culture’.
(6) 35 ‘Gender stereotype. The mother does not allow the ‘Indian culture is more conservative and in their culture women are expected to
girl to do things that boys do.’ stay home. In the western culture, people are equal and men and women are
individuals. This difference influences gender [roles] in the society’.
(7) 31 ‘There is deeply rooted gender stereotype in ‘India is a masculine culture. In the masculine culture, there is clear division of
India.’ what males should do and what females should do.’
(8) 27 ‘The mother didn’t want her daughter to have ’Indian culture is a low-contact culture while British culture is a high-contact
body contact with males.’ culture. That’s why the mother was angry with the girl’.

63
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

from explicit instruction based on the presentation, description and analysis of text and video materials in the classroom setting.
Through explicit instruction, the language learners not only acquired cultural knowledge, but also skills to analyse, evaluate and
interpret cultures of their own and others.

The development of ICC in relation to English proficiency and overseas experience

Research question (3) asked: ‘Is there a relationship between two selected background factors of the learners and their ICC
development’. The study found that both English proficiency and overseas experience were significant in the development of ICC. In
terms of English proficiency, higher English proficiency was found to lead to better learning in the knowledge and skills dimensions of
ICC. This is not surprising since the language of instruction is English; higher English proficiency entails better understanding of the
course materials, and therefore, highlights the importance of target language proficiency in the development of ICC (Fantini, 2009).
However, higher proficiency did not necessarily lead to the build-up of awareness since no significant difference was shown in the
attitudes dimension. Such a finding provides further insights into the learning of the three dimensions of competence. On the one hand,
as claimed by Bennett et al. (2003), there is a ‘typical fit between language proficiency levels and developmental levels of intercultural
sensitivity’ (p.255). Language learners need to attain certain level to ensure the learning of knowledge and skills. On the other hand,
language proficiency does not guarantee intercultural competence (Levine & Adelman, 1993). This is reflected in the attitudes
dimension. Although higher language proficiency enhances the learning of knowledge and skills, it does not directly lead to a change in
attitudes. The findings of this study, which addressed the complex relationship between language and culture learning, were in this
respect similar to the findings of Jackson (2011) and Wu (2016).
Overseas experience was found to play a significant role in the development of ICC. EFL learners with overseas experience over
three months demonstrated significant improvement in the knowledge and skills dimensions. Both groups made progress in all three
dimensions, but the overseas group consistently outperformed the local group, with the skills dimension showing the biggest difference
and the attitudes dimension the least. The result can be accounted for by the fact that students with overseas experience have had more
intercultural experiences (Weng, 2018). Having overseas experience means more opportunities interacting with people of different
linguistic backgrounds in the target language (Taguchi & Roever, 2017). This allows the language learners to brush up on their skills of
interaction (i.e. understanding, interpreting and reacting). This result validates those from previous research. Both Anderson et al.
(2006) and Jackson (2011) examined the effects of short-term study abroad programs and found that even programs of three to seven
weeks improved intercultural competence. Finally, overseas experience does not play a significant role in the attitudes dimension.
Salisbury et al. (2013) discussed the effects of study abroad programs on attitude change and found that a better predictor was stu­
dents’ attitude before the exchange. This suggests that overseas experience may not entail a change in attitudes, again highlighting the
difficulty of changing learners’ attitudes through explicit instruction.
In sum, the study confirmed that explicit instruction was effective in enhancing the EFL learners’ ICC in all dimensions. The design
of the course materials and class activities corresponded with the definition of an intercultural speaker. An intercultural speaker is
‘someone who can “read” texts of all kinds – linguistic and non-linguistic, spoken, written, visual, digital, and multimodal for instance –
in a critical and comparative mode, analysing their meaning in their context but also knows how they can be interpreted from another
context’ (Porto et al., 2017, p. 5). Through explicit instruction, the EFL learners were exposed to knowledge of others through
comparison of two or more cultures and through analysing texts and videos developed knowledge of other and their own cultures and
skills of analysing and interpreting intercultural encounters. In addition, the study showed that English proficiency and overseas
experience were important factors in the development of ICC, again in the knowledge and skills dimensions. However, due to the
limited number of sub-groups, the result should be interpreted with caution.

Implications

To address the role of explicit instruction on ICC in language classrooms, the current study offers additional evidence that inter­
cultural competence-building instruction enhances different dimensions of the competence. Accordingly, three implications are
proposed. First, the current study adds to the growing literature by providing evidence for the significant role of explicit instruction on
ICC development and suggests that instruction should follow the principles of explicit instruction (Archer & Hughes, 2011), making
explicit to the learners the knowledge relevant to intercultural encounters. Second, the current research is informative to the design of
course materials and instructional activities that facilitate independent and group practices to foster ICC in the classroom setting.
Course materials in intercultural studies should emphasize building up the knowledge dimension through the presentation of theo­
retical notions about others and self and instructional activities should focus on fostering the skills dimension through discovering,
interpreting and relating documents or events (see Byram, 1997). Explicit instruction allows knowledge and skills to be delivered in a
more systematic and structured way (Hughes et al., 2018), promoting intercultural awareness and sensitivity (Okayama et al., 2001),
which potentially contribute to a change in attitude. Finally, regarding the assessment of ICC, the study proposes to use a mixed
method approach for the evaluation of such competence in order to provide a more comprehensive understanding of language
learners’ development. Other-assessment tools like the video task employed in the study can be incorporated in the evaluation of ICC
development to complement the traditional self-report measures. Similar to the video log analysis proposed by Tarchi et al. (2019),
these tools allow the learners to conduct plot analysis and use cultural relevance terminology, which demonstrate learners’ knowledge
and skills as well as attitudes implicit in the interpretation and analysis of intercultural encounters.

64
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

Conclusion

This research takes on an intercultural approach to foreign language education and suggests that explicit instruction facilitates the
development of ICC. Although internationalisation has been promoted and emphasised by the Ministry of Education since 2000
(Ministry of Education, 2015), the development of ICC in language classrooms has been largely neglected in Taiwan. Therefore, this
study was initiated to provide evidence for the effectiveness of explicit instruction in developing ICC among EFL learners in Taiwan
through two assessment tools. The research fulfilled two goals: (1) integrating the teaching of ICC in foreign language education
through explicit instruction and (2) providing an alternative and effective tool of assessment for the evaluation of ICC. The research
confirmed that language learners can benefit from explicit instruction based on the presentation, description and analysis of text and
video materials, and, furthermore, that they can acquire knowledge about cultures of their own and others, and skills to analyse,
evaluate and interpret intercultural interaction. In addition, video analysis proved to be a useful measure to further understand
language learners’ ICC development.
Nevertheless, there are three limitations to the present study. First, the study included a small number of participants and in
particular, small sub-groups of students. The number of the participants was restricted to those enrolled in a selected course. A
balanced number in the sub-groups was, therefore, not achieved. Consequently, the small sample size of sub-groups limited the ability
to extrapolate the findings to a larger group and renders comparison difficult (Brysbaert, 2019). It is suggested that future research
should include a larger number of participants and a more balanced number of sub-groups so that greater generalization can be drawn.
Second, only one participant group was recruited and investigated. To investigate the different degrees of instructional effects on
learners’ development of ICC, a control group could be established of students who do not participate in explicit instruction. It is
suggested that future studies should include a control group in order to further explore the instructional effects on language learners’
ICC development. Finally, the language proficiency of the EFL learners was determined by a self-reported questionnaire. To address the
limitations of self-reports (e.g. Denies & Janssen, 2016), it is suggested that other assessment measures are used in future studies.

Acknowledgement

This research was sponsored by Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan [MOST 106-2410-H-126-009]. I would like to thank
the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions which have helped improve the overall quality and integrity of
the paper. All remaining errors are of course my own.

References

Altshuler, L., Sussman, N. M., & Kachur, E. (2003). Assessing changes in intercultural sensitivity among physician trainees using the intercultural development
inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27(4), 387–401.
Anderson, P. H., Lawton, L., Rexeisen, R. J., & Hubbard, A. C. (2006). Short-term study abroad and intercultural sensitivity: A pilot study. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 30(4), 457–469.
Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. Guilford Press.
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). Intercultural Press.
Bennett, M. (2004). Becoming interculturally competent. In J. Wurzel (Ed.), Toward multiculturalism: A reader in multicultural education (pp. 62–77). Intercultural
Resource Corporation.
Bennett, M. (2008). Transformative training: Designing programs for culture learning. In M. A. Moodian (Ed.), Contemporary leadership and intercultural competence:
Understanding and utilizing cultural diversity to build successful organizations (pp. 95–110). Sage.
Bennett, J. M., & Bennett, M. J. (2004). Developing intercultural sensitivity: An integrative approach to global and domestic diversity. In D. Landis, J. Bennett, &
M. Bennett (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (pp. 147–165). Sage.
Bennett, J. M., Bennett, M. J., & Allen, W. (2003). Developing intercultural competence in the language classroom. In D. Lange, & M. Paige (Eds.), Culture as the core:
Perspectives on culture in second language learning (pp. 237–270). Information Age Publishing.
Brysbaert, M. (2019). How many participants do we have to include in properly powered experiments? A tutorial of power analysis with reference tables. Journal of
Cognition, 2(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.72.
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Multilingual Matters.
Byram, M. (Ed.). (2000). Routledge encyclopedia of language teaching and learning. Routledge.
Byram, M. (2008). From foreign language education to education for intercultural citizenship: Essays and reflections. Multilingual Matters.
Byram, M., & Morgan, C. (1994). Teaching and learning language and culture. Multilingual Matters.
Byram, M., Golubeva, I., Hui, H., & Wagner, M. (Eds.). (2017). From principles to practice in education for intercultural citizenship. Multilingual Matters.
Chao, T. C. (2014). The development and application of an intercultural competence scale for university EFL learners. English Teaching & Learning, 38(4), 79–124.
Chao, T. C. (2015). Constructing a self-assessment inventory of intercultural communicative competence in ELT for EFL teachers. Asian EFL Journal, 17(4), 94–111.
Chao, T. C. (2016). A preliminary study of Taiwanese NNETS’ self-assessment of intercultural communicative competence in English language teaching. Taiwan
Journal of TESOL, 13(1), 71–103.
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1996). Intercultural communication competence: A synthesis. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.), Communication yearbook 19 (pp. 353–383). Sage.
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1998). A review of the concept of intercultural sensitivity. Human Communication, 1, 1–16.
Deardorff, D. (2004). The identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of international education at institutions of higher education in the
United States [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. North Carolina State University..
Deardorff, D. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International
Education, 10(3), 241–266.
Denies, K., & Janssen, R. (2016). Country and gender differences in the functioning of CEFR-based can-do statements as a tool for self-assessing English proficiency.
Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(3), 251–276.
Dodd, C. H. (1998). Dynamics of intercultural communication (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Eckert, S. (2006). Intercultural communication. Thomson.
Fantini, A. (2006). Exploring and assessing intercultural competence.
Fantini, A. (2009). Assessing intercultural competence: Issues and tools. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), Handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 456–476). Sage.
Fantini, A., & Tirmizi, A. (2006). Exploring and assessing intercultural competence. World learning publications. Paper 1.

65
L.-J.D. Huang International Journal of Intercultural Relations 83 (2021) 55–66

Fletcher, J., M, Lyon, G., R, Fuchs, L., S, Barnes, M., A, et al. (2019). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention (2nd edition)). Guildford Press.
Gudykunst, W. B., & Kim, Y. Y. (2003). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Sage.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw-Hill.
Holliday, A., Hyde, M., & Kullman, J. (2010). Intercultural communication: An advanced resource book for students. Routledge.
Hughes, C. A., Riccomini, P., & Morris, J. R. (2018). Use explicit instruction. In J. McLeskey, L. Maheady, B. Billingsley, M. Brownell, & T. Lewis (Eds.), High leverage
practices for inclusive classrooms (pp. 215–236). Routledge.
Jackson, J. (2011). Host language proficiency, intercultural sensitivity, and study abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 21(1), 167–188.
https://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v21i1.308.
Klak, T., & Martin, P. (2003). Do university-sponsored international cultural events help students to appreciate differences. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 27(4), 445–465.
Levine, D. R., & Adelman, M. B. (1993). Beyond language: Cross-cultural communication (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.
Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Intercultural communication in context (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Ministry of Education. (2015). Education in Taiwan 2014-2015. Ministry of Education.
Okayama, C., Furuto, S., & Edmondson, J. (2001). Components of cultural competence: Attitudes, knowledge, and skills. In R. Fong, & S. M. Furuto (Eds.), Culturally
competent practice: Skills, interventions, and evaluations (pp. 89–100). Allyn & Bacon.
Olson, C. L., & Kroeger, K. R. (2001). Global competency and intercultural sensitivity. Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(2), 116–137.
Porto, M., Houghton, S., & Byram, M. (2017). Intercultural citizenship in the (foreign) language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 22(5), 1–15.
Salisbury, M. H., An, B. P., & Pascarella, E. T. (2013). The effect of study abroad on intercultural competence among undergraduate college students. Journal of Student
Affairs Research and Practice, 50(1), 1–20.
Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E., & McDaniel, E. R. (2007). Communication between cultures (6th ed.). Thomson Wadsworth.
Sinicrope, C., Norris, J., & Watanabe, Y. (2007). Understanding and assessing intercultural competence: A summary of theory, research, and practice. Second Language
Studies, 26(1), 1–58.
Taguchi, N., & Roever, C. (2017). Second language pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
Tarchi, C., Surian, A., & Daiute, C. (2019). Assessing study abroad students’ intercultural sensitivity with narratives. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34(4),
873–894.
Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. Guilford Press.
Weng, I.-J. J. (2018). Predicting Taiwanese college students’ intercultural sensitivity: What truly matters? The Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 240–253.
Wu, J.-F. (2016). Impact of foreign language proficiency and English uses on intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 8
(8), 28–35. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2016.08.04.

Li-Jung Daphne Huang is Assistant Professor at the Department of English Language, Literature and Linguistics at Providence University, Taiwan. She holds a PhD in
Applied Linguistics from University of Melbourne and a MA in Centre for Language Teaching and Research from University of Queensland. Her research interests include
intercultural communication, language attitude, and email discourse of language learners. Her current research focuses on the development of intercultural commu­
nicative competence among language learners, the teaching of cultural values through explicit instruction and email discourse of Taiwanese EFL learners.

66