Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 15

This article was downloaded by: [Mount Allison University 0Libraries]

On: 06 October 2014, At: 07:12


Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Intercultural Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ceji20

Developing intercultural competence


and global citizenship through
international experiences: academics’
perceptions
a a a
Franziska Trede , Wendy Bowles & Donna Bridges
a
The Education For Practice Institute, Charles Sturt University,
Locked Bag 450, Silverwater Sydney NSW 2128, Australia
Published online: 25 Aug 2013.

To cite this article: Franziska Trede, Wendy Bowles & Donna Bridges (2013) Developing
intercultural competence and global citizenship through international experiences: academics’
perceptions, Intercultural Education, 24:5, 442-455, DOI: 10.1080/14675986.2013.825578

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2013.825578

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Intercultural Education, 2013
Vol. 24, No. 5, 442–455, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2013.825578

Developing intercultural competence and global citizenship


through international experiences: academics’ perceptions
Franziska Trede*, Wendy Bowles and Donna Bridges

The Education For Practice Institute, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 450, Silverwater
Sydney NSW 2128, Australia
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

International education is a key priority for Australian universities, government


and employer groups. For students, an international professional experience is
uniquely placed in providing opportunities for developing intercultural learning,
intercultural competence and global citizenship. Employers see graduates with
international experiences as interculturally competent, viewing them as proficient
in analysing and responding appropriately to culturally significant values and
perceptions. This research seeks to understand how students are prepared for
international experiences and how intercultural learning is integrated into course
programmes. Academic staff responsible for international experiences were
interviewed in one-on-one qualitative interviews about their practices and per-
ceptions of preparing students for these experiences. Although all international
programmes were procedurally well planned, we found that most participants
did not include intercultural pedagogies into their programmes, nor did they
purposefully seek to develop intercultural competence and global citizenship in
their students. Professional development opportunities need to be created for
academics to rethink their pedagogical intent regarding international experiences.
Immersion in culture is not, on its own, an assurance of intercultural learning.
Providing international experiences without a pedagogical framework that helps
students to reflect on self and others can be a wasted opportunity and runs the
risk of reinforcing stereotypical thinking and racist attitudes.
Keywords: intercultural learning; intercultural competence; pedagogy; global
citizenship; professional experience

Introduction
There is a growing trend to internationalise university education and offer students
international experiences as part of their university curriculum. Providing such expe-
riences without a pedagogical framework that helps students to reflect on self and
others, and make meaning of their experiences can run the risk of reinforcing unre-
flected beliefs and values about other countries, customs and norms. Well-developed
pedagogical frameworks can enable students to develop their intercultural compe-
tence and qualities for global citizenship. However, this requires academic educators
who are skilled in developing intercultural competence and global citizenship. In this
paper, we explore academics’ perceptions and practices in preparing students for
international experiences as part of Charles Sturt University’s professional entry
programmes. In particular, we are curious about academics’ understandings of

*Corresponding author. Email: ftrede@csu.edu.au

© 2013 Taylor & Francis


Intercultural Education 443

intercultural competence and global citizenship and their pedagogical intentions to


develop these in students.

Global citizenship
Global citizenship is a concept closely aligned to notions of intercultural
competence. Israel, Miller, and Reed (2011, 309) argue that global citizenship ‘…
involves a sense of self that is grounded in specific places (home communities and
nations), while also being conscious of those commitments in the broader context of
global belonging and global collaboration’. In their view, global citizenship brings
the global and local together; for example it involves ‘inclusive debates’ about how
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

to protect the environment, respect human rights and respond to disasters in other
countries. Thus, ‘… global citizenship is a pluralistic, postmodern identity that
cannot be reduced to a single essence or single allegiance’ (Israel, Miller, and Reed
2011, 313). We conceive global citizenship as a conceptual value framework
underpinned by social responsibility, global equality and human rights. Such a
global citizenship framework aligns well with notions of intercultural competence.
However, we are well aware that other value frameworks can underpin intercultural
competence. This paper shares the understanding of the term ‘global citizenship’ as
discussed by Israel, Miller, and Reed (2011) and eloquently articulated by Morais
and Ogen (2011, 449):

Thus, global citizenship is understood as a multidimensional construct that hinges on


the interrelated dimensions of social responsibility, global competence and global civic
engagement.

Intercultural competence in student international experiences


The term ‘intercultural competence’ denotes dispositions and capabilities rather than
measurable skills. We concur with Perry and Southwell (2011, 453) who assert that
most scholars understand intercultural competence as: ‘… the ability to effectively
and appropriately interact in an intercultural situation or context’. The term ‘compe-
tence’ can be misleading, if viewed from a narrow instrumental skills perspective
because it omits the socio-cultural context and dispositions that inform abilities to
engage with intercultural and global situations (Chappell, Gonczi, and Hager 2000).
For instance, it is possible for educationists to teach skills of intercultural
competence for purposes of competitive gain, profit or exploitation rather than
global cooperation in support of sustainability, human rights and social justice.
While there is an abundance of research into the key elements of intercultural
competence also known as ‘international competence’, ‘intercultural communica-
tion’, ‘intercultural sensitivity’ and ‘cultural intelligence’ McRae and Ramji (2011)
only a few papers locate their framework within a self-reflective and critical
perspective. A critical pedagogy perspective is a good fit to explore intercultural
competence and global citizenship because it is based on critiquing knowledge,
power and language and on questioning traditions and norms. Brookfield (2012) a
leading critical pedagogue states that ‘the point of getting students to reflect
critically is to get them to recognise, and question, the assumptions that determine
how knowledge in that discipline is recognised as legitimate’. Such critical reflection
of what counts as fact and knowledge opens up opportunities for students to view
444 F. Trede et al.

the world differently. Giroux (2005, 164) adds that critical reflection enables
students to become aware of how knowledge excludes other ways of thinking and it
‘rejects distinctions between high and low culture’.
Trede and Hill (2012) identify critical self-awareness, respect for diverse
interpretations of practices and the use of inclusive dialogues as key principles of
cultural competence. Yashima (2010) discusses culture-general attributes such as
self-efficacy, tolerance of ambiguity, critical thinking/creativity, non ethno-centric
and openness which can be applied in specific cultural contexts where other attri-
butes such as social, political and cultural knowledge, language ability and specific
communication skills are needed. McRae and Ramji (2011, 347–348) categorise
intercultural competence into ‘active and passive skills’. The latter include skills
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

such as general knowledge, language skills or political knowledge, and ‘active


skills’ which relate to more personal qualities such as empathy, resilience to stress,
self-awareness and ‘intercultural sensitivity’.
Outcomes-based studies that explore international experiences commonly
conclude that these experiences have potential to enrich student intercultural
learning, competence and global citizenship (e.g. Chieffo and Griffiths 2004;
McLaughlin and Johnson 2006; Wals and Sriskandarajah 2010; Yashima 2010).
Realising this potential, however, proves more difficult. While immersion in culture
has been shown to enhance cross-cultural learning which is critical for professionals
who will encounter an ‘increasingly globalised and culturally diverse work place’
(Balandi et al. 2007), upon graduation, immersion alone is simply not enough
(McAllister et al. 2006). Webber (2005, 475) calls for more research into interna-
tional experiences and warns that simply increasing the amount of international
placements and ensuring immersion in them does not provide a guarantee of learn-
ing intercultural competence. A lack of purposeful pedagogical planning and student
preparation can see the international placement become a wasted opportunity. To
date, there has been a focus on measuring the success of internationalisation on the
quantity of students who include an international component within their degree
programme (Deardorff 2004). This has been to the detriment of exploring the
pedagogical aspects of intercultural learning and improving the educational quality
of international experiences. Intercultural pedagogy and with it the quality of
learning, reflecting upon and becoming interculturally competent appears to be a
neglected aspect of international experiences.
Intercultural pedagogy has the potential to guide students’ attention to becoming
aware of their own cultural values and heightening awareness of other cultures. Le
Roux (2002) found that greater student awareness of self and others enhances
intercultural competence. This awareness is based on identifying assumptions and
questioning taken-for-granted behaviours and practices of the learners’ culture, as
well as the culture of others. Intercultural teaching and learning can raise ethical and
moral dilemmas and questions about values and identity.
The literature in the area of intercultural education (Fantini 2000; Coulby 2006;
Sercu 2006) warns that exposing students to international experiences, without
adequately preparing them or supporting them to make sense of their experience,
can result in negative learning outcomes. The need to locate teaching and learning
strategies within a humanistic and critical framework cannot be understated due to
the danger that non-facilitated experiences can nurture or even strengthen stereotyp-
ing and racist attitudes. Poor intercultural competence can lead to embarrassment,
misunderstandings, unproductive work (Mohan et al. 2004), frustration, intercultural
Intercultural Education 445

conflict (Le Roux 2002) and reinforcing existing inequalities. Without critical self
reflection and adequate support students can retreat into taken for granted ways of
coping that denigrate rather than appreciate and engage with difference.

In today’s globalised world, no matter what path students choose to take in their career
upon graduation, they will be living and working in a culturally diverse setting.
(McRae and Ramji 2011, 347)

This quote highlights that the ability to live and work in a culturally diverse
setting, in other words to develop intercultural competence, is becoming a survival
skill in today’s globalised world. It also implies a close interconnection between
global citizenship and intercultural competence.
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

Context of internationalisation of higher education


In an increasingly globalised world and with the rise of the ‘knowledge society’,
higher education has become an important international commodity. Viewed through
an economic lens, globalisation is ‘big business –’ making large profits for universi-
ties and countries of the global north and also meeting important needs in the global
south (Altbach and Knight 2007). Australian universities are under increasing pres-
sure to produce graduates who will be competitive in a globalised economy (Jones,
Torezani, and Luca 2012). Vincent-Lancrin (2009) argues that whereas 20 years ago
internationalisation of higher education reflected ‘political, geostrategic, cultural and
development aid motivations’ (64), in latter times it is characterised by economic
motives (revenue-making) buoyed by globalisation. As Altbach and Knight (2007,
291) point out however: ‘Globalization may be unalterable, but internationalization
involves many choices’. These authors argue that while international academic
mobility can compound existing economic inequalities favouring the global north, a
thoughtful and careful approach to internationalisation of higher education can also
lead to important benefits for the public good – including people from the global
north and south.
The OECD (2004) identifies four approaches to internationalised or cross-border
higher education, three of which: skilled migration, revenue raising and capacity
building, are economically driven and emerged strongly during the 1990s. Amongst
OECD countries, Australia has been noticeably successful in the revenue-making
forms of internationalised or cross-border higher education. Since the early 2000s, it
has ranked in the top ten countries receiving foreign students and it is even closer to
the top of the list of countries establishing higher education programmes outside
their own borders, in foreign students’ home countries (OECD 2004; Meek 2005;
Vincent-Lancrin 2009).
Of the four types of internationalised higher education identified by the OECD
(2004), only one approach, the ‘mutual understanding approach’, is listed as not
being driven by economic imperatives. This older form of international higher
education, sometimes referred to as ‘study-abroad’, ‘… encompasses political,
cultural, academic and development aid goals’ (OECD 2004, 4). Australia does not
appear in the list of countries ranking highly in this approach; instead Japan,
Mexico, Korea, Spain and the European Union’s Erasmus programme dominate.
The ‘mutual understanding approach’ is however still a priority for the Australian
government and universities due to its potential to contribute to intercultural
446 F. Trede et al.

exchanges, to create international links between institutions and people, and to lay
foundations for international diplomacy. This level of internationalisation is seen as a
vital contribution to Australia’s ability to communicate, collaborate and contribute
globally (DEEWR 2009). International workplace learning placements and short-term
mobility programmes are part of this approach to international higher education and
offer the opportunity to provide Australian students with an international experience
as part of their domestic study programme or course. Short-term mobility
programmes have been described as ‘a short burst of international experience relevant
to your degree and … something that you could do in your break or as part of your
subject’ (CSU Global 2010).
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

Internationalisation at Charles Sturt University


Charles Sturt University is a multi-campus inland Australian university. The
University strategy identifies four means by which the university will work towards
‘strengthening Australia’s participation in the international community’. Two of
these are based in the revenue-raising approach: offshore (transnational) offerings of
courses and expanding opportunities for international students to study courses in
Australia, while two draw from the mutual understanding approach: ‘including
international learning experiences within courses’, and ‘providing courses that
support collaboration in international education for social development’. One of the
indicators of quality and success of the university’s course profile is identified as:
‘increasing the proportion of students undertaking international experiences’
(Charles Sturt University 2011). This university is in its early efforts to introduce
international workplace learning placements and short-term mobility programmes as
part of its overall strategy. CSU Global provides basic travel information, travel
warnings and risk minimisation, coping with culture shock, developing appropriate
expectations for the experience and ambassadorship. This programme does not
include an intercultural education component with a focus on intercultural
competence and global citizenship.

Methodology
The research questions that guided our research design were: how do academics
prepare students for international experiences and how do they integrate understand-
ings of intercultural competence into their course programmes? We sought to under-
stand more deeply preparation practices for intercultural learning by engaging
participants in a question and answer dialogue. This study adopted a philosophical
hermeneutics approach which is a good fit with dialogically exploring the percep-
tions and practices of participants. Philosophical hermeneutics is the art and science
of interpreting dialogues (Gadamer 1996). The focus is on shared understanding of a
chosen phenomenon. Shared understanding means that interpretations are not
imposed but generated through explorative dialogues. In this study, the data
collection phase comprised dialogues between research participants and researchers.
The data analysis phase comprised dialogues amongst the researchers.
Ethics clearance was obtained. We recruited participants for this project via the
university’s electronic newsletter and in collaboration with the university’s global
programme. We used a purposeful and snowball sampling technique (Minichiello,
Aroni, and Hays 2008). It was not our aim to generalise about preparation practice
Intercultural Education 447

but to gain deeper understanding of perceptions that inform preparation practices.


Twelve academics from three of the four faculties at Charles Sturt University
contacted us and volunteered to participate. Seven were from the Faculty of Science,
three from the Faculty of Education and two from the Faculty of Arts. Single,
one-on-one, semi-structured interviews lasted between 60 and 120 min and were
conducted face-to-face or via telephone due to interspersed campuses. Interviews
were audio taped, transcribed verbatim and de-identified. The aim of the interviews
was to reveal the participants’ pedagogical purpose and framework. Interviewees
were asked to discuss their teaching and learning strategies and what pedagogical
framework, if any, informed their preparation of students for intercultural learning
and global citizenship and the challenges they faced.
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

The data analysis consisted of three stages: description, interpretation and


critique. The 12 transcripts were divided up between the three authors. Each scrutin-
ised their allocated transcripts for interviewees’ understanding of intercultural
competence and global citizenship, and how it could be facilitated and learnt. Each
developed codes that informed participants’ perceptions and practices, and generated
initial descriptive themes (Guba and Lincoln 1981). In stage two, the three research-
ers compared their codes and themes and developed a deeper interpretation of shared
themes by clustering them (Miles and Huberman 1994). In the final stage, the
authors critiqued these themes by searching for contrast in practices and contradic-
tions of perceptions or whether there was a good match. Analytical lenses that
guided stage one and two were informed from the literature review and included
such aspects as inclusiveness, raising cultural awareness, respect and tolerance for
difference and sensitising students to power issues. Key questions that guided the
third stage included: where are these participants self-critical, do they assign a
pedagogical purpose to their student preparation?

Findings
Our findings reveal that there was not one shared pedagogical approach to prepare
students for intercultural competence and global citizenship amongst the participants
in this study. Interviewees who had well-developed pedagogical approaches also had
an ability to articulate their understandings of intercultural competence and global
citizenship, whereas others who felt that the international experience in itself was
sufficient to enable students to develop intercultural competence had un-informed
positions towards intercultural competence and global citizenship. We discuss our
findings as they emerged from our data analysis under the following themes:
perceived purposes and benefits, courses approach, informal preparation, assessment
of intercultural preparation and perceptions of developing intercultural competence
and global citizenship.

Perceived purposes and benefits of international experiences


We extrapolated understandings of intercultural competence by scrutinising the
purposes that participants offered as a rationale for conducting international experi-
ences. These purposes varied widely. Most participants believed in the intrinsic
worth of the international experience for its own sake. Overwhelmingly, participants
pointed to the opportunities that such experiences generated for students by
providing the following reasons for their involvement in such programmes:
448 F. Trede et al.

 Providing unique learning experiences.


 Reinforcing the values of the course (social justice).
 Providing cross-cultural learning and exposure to culture.
 Giving students’ confidence in an international and globalised world.
 Providing clinical learning experiences not available in Australia.
 Optimising connections and professional associations.
 Meeting university targets.

Most participants did not explicitly mention the development of intercultural


competence and global citizenship in their students; at best, they took it for granted.
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

Experiential learning was adopted without planning and reflecting. The underlying
values of raising awareness of global inequality and human rights issues were only
discussed by a minority of our participants.
Ten of the twelve participants reported that attendance by students at the
pre-departure workshops delivered by CSU global’s student mobility unit was
mandatory. In these workshops, students were prepared for immunisation and visa
requirements focusing on procedural essentials without addressing cultural and
global issues in the host countries. Eight interviewees did not offer additional socio-
cultural preparations for their students, besides taking part in informal discussions
and ad hoc advice. Two interviewees felt that their course itself prepared students
adequately for the cultural aspect of their international placement and that additional
preparation was not necessary. It was beyond the scope of this study to review
course curricula to establish their pedagogical intent.

A course approach to intercultural education


Three participants reported that their course offered subjects that embedded notions
of intercultural education. These courses were teacher education (from kindergarten
to year 12), social work and occupational therapy. The interviewee from the teacher
education course reasoned that the study for social justice and equity related well to
preparing students for international experiences:

Interviewee 4: [There is a focus on] being amongst people that are from other cultures,
bringing and unpacking all their prejudice and bias. So we spent a lot of time …
because they’re going to work with a whole range of … people who will be from a
range of backgrounds and cultures.

The interviewee from the social work course stated that students are exposed to
intercultural literature throughout their studies:

Interviewee 11: The actual preparation begins about one year before the placement
and students are asked to read cross cultural literature, particularly the cultural context
of the country where they are going … And students are also informed about the
working culture and how it is different from developed countries.

Students of the occupational therapy course are exposed to inequities and


globalisation as part of their course curriculum:

Interviewee 12: Things like universal human rights, again that underpins our whole …
course, we talk about … human rights all the time … Globalisation, is certainly
Intercultural Education 449

addressed and it gets progressively addressed as students’ progress through the course
more. So in fourth year, in fact, right at this point in time, the students are doing a con-
temporary practice issue subject which concentrates on things like the bigger picture of
the profession and anti oppressive practices and cultural sensitivity.

Each of these courses has accreditation standards which require them to


address issues and professional practice relating to social justice, human rights
and intercultural competence. For example, to be accredited by the australian
association of social workers (AASW), social work courses must include curricu-
lum addressing social work ethics (which is based on notions of social justice
and human rights) as well as several ‘core content’ areas, one of which is ‘cross
cultural practice’ (AASW 2007, 8). Cross-cultural practice involves teaching many
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

of the concepts and skills associated with global citizenship and intercultural
competence discussed above.

Minimal and informal intercultural preparation


Eight interviewees reported minimal intercultural preparation. Students were
reminded of their host country’s history and economic and developmental status.
They were simply asked to be open-minded and appreciative. Some examples are
below:

Interviewee 9: ‘We do talk to them about the country … informally we talk to them
about the country and how it’s structured and they’re all aware that it’s … gone
through a lot of political instability … in the past and that there’s a lot of subsistence
… and lower well-being. So they have a general understanding of all that and we
definitely talk to them informally about that. We don’t sit them down and give them
lectures at length about the country, we’d rather them see it for themselves …

Interviewee 6: I get an [experienced expert] to talk to them about their experiences so


that when we actually visit the place … they have an appreciation for what actually
happened there … we also cover some of the history. So we talk about colonialisation
… And we go through the history a little bit so that they can appreciate the change
that’s occurred through various forms of government and socialism and capitalism and
… the history of the war and that sort of thing …

Interviewee 7: In our pre-departure meeting, I prepared basic greetings and I passed


them out and asked them to memorise, we practised it on the aeroplane … Understand-
ing the culture and being open minded. That’s what I emphasised when I had the
pre-departure meeting with our students, I asked them to be open-minded and to
appreciate all the differences in culture.

Amongst the preparatory activities there were some innovative strategies


although their pedagogical intent remained obscure. These included:

 Vietnam veterans come to speak with students.


 Students who went previously talked to students.
 One session subject of student-focused class discussion.

The pedagogical intentions behind these pre-departure activities were not further
elaborated. The danger is that if these intentions are not explicit such activities could
be a disservice to sensitising students for complex and diverse experiences abroad,
450 F. Trede et al.

rather than raising their awareness and preparing them to be open to the upcoming
experience.
The diversity in preparation for international experience is evident from these
responses. Whereas some courses have globalisation, social justice and multicultur-
alism embedded others perceive international experiences as an add-on to a course
without explicit integration. Apart from the general travel preparation workshops
organised by CSU Global, it appears to be a matter of chance and the attitude of the
academic whether and how students are prepared for international experiences
before they leave Australia.

Assessment of intercultural preparation within a subject


Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

Only one interviewee reported that the subject incorporating the international
experience included two preparatory assessment tasks prior to departure and
reflection tasks upon return. The assessment tasks required preparation of a literature
review on a self-chosen topic that related to understanding the theories, the current
level of knowledge around development, the role of tourism in cultural change,
economic change, the responses of local communities to that and the models for
achieving good outcomes. This participant articulated the pedagogical purpose of his
preparation design as follows:

Interviewee 2: And so we talk about the ethics, the philosophy of it … you know the
environment, society, culture, the economy, the tourist experience, they’re all so totally
interlinked that you can’t exclude one.

Using mandatory pre-departure assessments indicate to students that intercultural


and global preparation is important. Although it is valuable to, for example, write a
pre-departure assignment on the history of the host country, it is important, too, for
students to include a critical appraisal of their chosen lens they used to explore this
history. A colonial lens on developing countries may perpetuate the dominant
discourse and strengthen a them and us sentimentality. A quantitative abstract lens
that describes, for example, facts of war and economic structures may omit the
human experience and consequential suffering (Kazanjian 2011).

Perceptions of developing intercultural competence and global citizenship


Six interviewees did not articulate explicit intentions to develop students’
intercultural competence and global citizenship. They had no elaborate concept of
an intercultural pedagogy. Interviewees 7 and 10 spoke about the value of appreciat-
ing overseas experience and having confidence to work overseas, rather than
discussing pedagogy of facilitating intercultural learning. Interviewee 9 felt that
students learn through unexpected, unplanned, accidental events. These interviewees
placed little value on preparation. Interviewee 11 felt that it is up to students to make
sense of their overseas experiences. Interviewee 5 did not think that intercultural
learning would occur at all:

Interviewee 5: It is perceived that the placement is seen as a holiday and [The


experience is] not an ‘enlightenment’ culturally … Making it international means it’s
just further away, but it’s not any different … because the practice of [x] is very
common throughout the world, you know, you … do the same job [in Botswana] that
you can do here.
Intercultural Education 451

This quote exemplifies a belief that disciplinary rather than professional practice
was the key focus of the international placement. Interviewee 6 emphasised the
importance of simply being there as a tool for intercultural learning. Preparation was
believed to be difficult to integrate into the course. Students have ‘enough on their
plates doing core subjects’. Furthermore, this interviewee believed that the interna-
tional experience is the best way to be exposed to intercultural issues and to learn
by seeing and living it. He believed that experience and dealing with the issues in
the country is richer and better than theory.
Interviewee 12, while emphasising the importance of learning intercultural
competence and preparing students for global citizenship, believed that preparation
is far less important than carefully structured experiential learning in the
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

international context. While his students undergo a two day preparation session, it is
more about the actual professional practices they will be doing while overseas, than
cultural preparation.

Interviewee 12: I’m not real sure of the value of doing it (preparation about culture,
language, politics). This is a contention in our school with some staff who feel that our
lack of not doing these sort of things is if you like, not enhancing the student’s experi-
ence. Whereas I prefer a much more experiential way of students doing it and when
they’re talking with their interpreters or talking with their language teacher, or talking
with people at the orphanage, they find out more about things that happen and get
different views.

This interviewee had a sophisticated and articulate pedagogy based on how


students acquire intercultural competence through relational learning and actively
participating with people who are different, from within a different culture. Working
from a perspective of valuing human rights and learning to respect difference with-
out having to accept all practices within a different culture, he structures experiences
such as having interpreters of the same age working with students and getting to
know them, as well as language classes and tutorials while away as part of the
intercultural experience.

Interviewee 12: So there’s that issue, um, we deal with stereotypes, I don’t outwardly
deal with stereotypes, but I challenge students when they start to complain about the
way things are done and that sort of thing, but it’s not the stereotypes as such, it’s a
lack of understanding that, that this is not Australia and things are done differently in
this country at this time. And we’ll talk about that, the whole of idea of the language
and the communication and that, to me it’s really important that we have the interpret-
ers and we have some language classes … and then the interpreters who are with us
give us another perspective, from their point of view and from a young Vietnamese
person’s point of view.

In contrast, there were three interviewees who expressed doubt that the
experience alone could develop intercultural competence. These respondents placed
importance on intentional preparation for and reflections after international
experiences as illustrated by this quote:

Interviewee 03: I don’t know if you can just send someone overseas and they come
back and you tick the box that they’re culturally competent and aware and they
become global citizens … I think you could prepare people a little bit … making
people consider some of the cultural, contextual factors … I think it’s a real challenge
because it’s such a hard concept to define, it’s not like you can just write an essay and
452 F. Trede et al.

all of a sudden you become competent in that area … Perhaps the debrief afterwards
and the reflection is something that is really perhaps, as important.

Interviewee 2 thought it was important to have an educational purpose and to


expose students to preparatory educational tasks. He felt that the preparation was at
least as important as the experience itself:

Interviewee 2: I would suggest to you that everybody that’s taking their students
overseas has to find some reason for doing that. It can’t be just because the university
wants them to. There’s gotta be some reason for it to contribute to the student’s
education and then their experience.
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

One interviewee expressed concern that a lack of adequate intercultural


preparation could foster intercultural competence:

Interviewee 8: I think they [students] needed more preparation than what they were
given. CSU Global had given them a generic presentation on how to be an ambassador
for CSU and international travel … and I had had two sessions with the students …
trying to give them information about the country and culture but that was nowhere
near enough. They should have had some academic component or some serious
cultural studies and intercultural communication studies prior to the trip … But the
programme is not set up to prepare them, basically they apply, they get accepted, they
pay, they go.

There was no shared understanding amongst these participants about what is


pedagogically required to prepare students to optimise their international experiences
for developing intercultural competence and global citizenship. Perceptions ranged
from leaving it up to individual students to make sense of their experiences, to writ-
ing pre- and post-reflection assignments and participating in collective debriefs. This
diversity in perceptions of intercultural competence and global citizenship points to
a need to raise awareness and critically debate the potential of pedagogical
frameworks to enhance student learning from international experiences.

Conclusion and implications


Although all international programmes were procedurally well-planned, most partici-
pants did not articulate a clear intercultural learning purpose in developing intercul-
tural competence and global citizenship in their students. The notion of global
citizenship appeared to be not well-understood. We can only conclude from this
study that the global citizenship discourse is superficial. We argue, by drawing on
critical pedagogues such as Freire (1972), Giroux (2005) and Brookfield (2012), that
an intercultural learning pedagogy is underpinned by intentions to sensitise students
to difference and diversity, knowledge and practice, to enable them to understand
international experiences from new perspectives and to transform their perceptions
and identity in this process. Building capacity to question is crucial to developing
intercultural competence, global citizenship and a self-owned professional identity.
Teachers who manage international experiences need to take up the role of
problematising students’ pre-departure understanding of the host country. Encourag-
ing students to explore their own cultural values and positions from which
they understand their world is a starting point for developing global citizenship and
intercultural competence. This process of critical awareness raising requires a
Intercultural Education 453

dialogical environment where all (students and teachers) can respectfully and safely
make critical sense of their experiences and learn from each other. The participants
in this study did not articulate this reciprocal and participatory aspect of their peda-
gogical role.
From our findings, we conclude that there is a need for professional development
and course reviews to strengthen the higher education imperative of internationalis-
ing courses. Professional development can enable academics to become effective
facilitators of intercultural competence. Opportunities need to be provided to course
teams to learn how to create collective spaces to rethink their pedagogical intent
regarding international experiences as part of the wider course curriculum. Further,
we recommend a list of ‘minimum requirements’ to consider when designing
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

international experiences including the following:

 Develop explicit purposes for the international placement, with links to other
parts of the course and preparation for professional practice in order to provide
a more integrated approach to learning and teaching.
 Introduce strategies to draw on critical awareness raising and collective sense-
making to help students to enhance their intercultural experience to develop
intercultural competence and global citizenship. This could include reflective
exercises before and after the international experience, to develop awareness
of students’ own cultural lenses, and to debrief and integrate learning into
other parts of the students’ education for professional practice.
 Develop a systematic approach to cultural preparation including the socio-
political-cultural and historic context in which the placement and professional
practice occurs using multiple perspectives.
 Discuss with students what constitutes appropriate dress and behaviour in host
country and sensitise students to differences in values and practices.

These recommendations imply that appropriate and pedagogically rewarding


international experiences also depend on adequate resources. Further research needs
to be conducted to explore students’ perceived value and role of pre-departure
preparation for intercultural competence and global citizenship. In addition,
researching the consequences for host countries could provide better understanding
of the effectiveness of the ‘mutual understanding approach’ of internationalisation of
higher education. International experiences provide an enormous potential to prepare
students for an intercultural globalised world of work. This potential is best realised
with a purposeful pedagogy that enhances intercultural competence and active global
citizenship in future graduates.

Acknowledgements
We want to acknowledge and are grateful for funding by the Scholarship in Teaching grant
of the Charles Sturt University. The authors thank all our participants who gave their time so
freely. We also thank our colleagues Dr Gates, Dr McEwen and Dr Swirski for their thought-
ful feedback to earlier drafts.

Notes on contributors
Franziska Trede is associate professor and deputy director of The Education For Practice
Institute where she leads the research programme. She researches about cultural competence,
social inclusion, professional identity development and professionalism in higher education.
454 F. Trede et al.

Wendy Bowles is associate professor of social work and sub dean professional placement in
the school of humanities and social sciences. She researches about ethical practice, rural and
global settings and fieldwork education.

Donna Bridges is lecturer of sociology in the school of humanities and social sciences at
CSU. She researches about sociological issues that encompass gender, feminisms, women in
non-traditional occupations and educating for professional practice.

References
AASW. 2007. AASW Australian Social Work Education and Accreditation Standards.
Canberra: AASW. http://www.aasw.asn.au/document/item/100.
Altbach, P. G., and J. Knight. 2007. “Internationalization of Higher Education: Motivations
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

and Realities.” Journal of Studies in International Education 11 (3–4): 290–305.


doi:10.1177/1028315307303542.
Balandi, S., M. Lincoln, R. Sen, D. P. Wilkins, and D. Trembath. 2007. “Twelve Tips for
Effective International Clinical Placements.” Medical Teacher 29: 872–877.
Brookfield, S. D. 2012. Teaching for Critical Thinking: Tools and Techniques to Help
Students Question their Assumptions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Chappell, C., A. Gonczi, and P. Hager. 2000. “Competency-based Education.” In
Understanding Adult Education and Training, edited by Griff Foley, 2nd ed., 191–205.
Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.
Charles Sturt University. 2011. University Strategy 2011–2015. Accessed May 2012. http://
www.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/124106/F1743-Update-2011-2015-CSU-Strat
egy_WEB.pdf.
Chieffo, L., and L. Griffiths. 2004. “Large-Scale Assessment of Student Attitudes After a
Short Term Study Abroad Program.” Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study
Abroad 10: 65–177.
Coulby, D. 2006. “Intercultural Education: Theory and Practice.” Intercultural Education 17
(3): 245–257.
CSU Global. 2010. Short Term Programs. Accessed May 2012. http://www.csu.edu.au/
csuglobal/short-term-programs/overview.
Deardorff, D. K. 2004. “Internationalization: In Search of Intercultural Competence.”
International Educator 13 (2): 13–15.
DEEWR. 2009. Budget Statement: Outcomes and Performance. Accessed June 20, 2012.
http://www.deewr.gov.au/department/publications/documents/09200809pbsdeewroutcome6.
doc.
Fantini, A. E. 2000. A Central Concern: Developing Intercultural Competencies. In Sit Occa-
sional Papers Series, Addressing Intercultural Education, Training and Service: About our
Institution, 25–33. Brattleboro, VT: World Learning School for International Training the
Experiment. In International Living.
Freire, P. 1972. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Gadamer, H. G. 1996. Reason in the age of science. Translated by F. G. Lawrence.
Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Giroux, H. A. 2005. Border Crossings: Cultural Workers and the Politics of Education. New
York: Routledge.
Guba, E., and Y. Lincoln. 1981. Effective Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Israel, R., V. Miller, and S. Reed. 2011. “Global Citizenship Education.” In Ethnicity and
Race: Creating Educational Opportunities Around the Globe, edited by E. L. Brown and
P. E. Gibbons, 309–321. North Carolina: Information Age.
Jones, N., S. Torezani, and J. Luca 2012. “A Peer-to-Peer Support Model for
Developing Graduate Students’ Career and Employability Skills.” Intercultural
Education 23 (1): 51–62.
Kazanjian, C. J. 2011. “The Border Pedagogy Revisited.” Intercultural Education 22 (5):
371–380.
McAllister, L., G. Whiteford, B. Hill, N. Thomas, and M. Fitzgerald. 2006. “Refection in
Intercultural Learning: Examining the International Experience through a Critical Incident
Approach.” Reflective Practice 7 (3): 367–381.
Intercultural Education 455

McLaughlin, J. S., and D. K. Johnson. 2006. “Assessing the Field Course Experiential
Learning Model: Transforming Collegiate Short-Term Study Abroad Experiences into
Rich Learning Environments.” Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad
XIII: 65–85.
McRae, N., and K. Ramji. 2011. “Enhancing Cultural Intelligence through Cooperative and
Work-Integrated Education.” In International Handbook for Cooperative and Work-
Integrated Education, edited by R. K. Coll and K. E. Zegwaaard, 2nd ed., 347–353.
Lowell, MA: WACE World Association for Cooperative Education.
Meek, V. L. 2005. Country Paper on Australia: Cross-Border Higher Education in Australia.
In Implications of WTO/GATS on Higher Education in Asia and the Pacific,
UNESCO Forum Occasional Paper Series Paper, No. 9, 45–8. Paris: United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). Accessed 20 May, 2012.
http://repository.unimelb.edu.au/10187/8878.
Downloaded by [Mount Allison University 0Libraries] at 07:12 06 October 2014

Miles, M., and A. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Minichiello, V., R. Aroni, and T. Hays. 2008. In-depth Interviewing. 3rd ed. French’s Forest:
Pearson Education Australia.
Mohan, T., H. McGregor, S. Saunders, and R. Archee. 2004. “Intercultural Communication
Competence in Business and the Professions.” In Communicating as Professionals, edited
by T. Mohan, H. McGregor, S. Saunders, and R. Archee, 77–105. Southbank Victoria:
Thomson.
Morais, D. B., and A. C. Ogen. 2011. “Initial Development and Validation of the Global
Citizenship Scale.” Journal of Studies in International Education 15: 445–466.
OECD. August, 2004. Policy Brief Internationalisation of Higher Education. Organisation
for Economic Cooperation and Development. Accessed May 17, 2012. http://www.oec-
d.org/education/educationeconomyandsociety/33734276.pdf.
Perry, L. B., and L. Southwell. 2011. “Developing Intercultural Understanding and Skills:
Models and Approaches.” Intercultural Education 22 (6): 453–466.
Le Roux, J. 2002. “Effective Educators are Culturally Competent Communicators.”
Intercultural Education 13 (1): 37–48.
Sercu, L. 2006. “The Foreign Language and Intercultural Competence Teacher: The
Acquisition of a New Professional Identity.” Intercultural Education 17 (1): 55–72.
Trede, F., and B. Hill. 2012. “Intercultural communication.” In Communicating in the health
sciences, edited by J. Higgs, R. Ajjawi, L. McAllister, F. Trede, and S. Loftus, 3rd ed.,
Chapter 20, 195–205. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Vincent-Lancrin, S. 2009. “Cross-border Higher Education: Trends and Perspectives.” In
Higher Education to 2030, Volume 2, Globalisation, 63–88. Paris: OECD Publishing.
doi: 10.1787/9789264075375-4-en.
Wals, A. E. J., and N. Sriskandarajah. 2010. “Mediated Cross-Cultural Learning through
Exchange in Higher Agricultural Education.” Journal of Agricultural Education and
Extension 16 (1): 5–22.
Webber, R. 2005. “Integrating Work-Based and Academic Learning International and Cross
Cultural Settings.” Journal of Education and Work 18 (4): 473–487.
Yashima, T. 2010. “The Effects of International Volunteer Work Experience on Intercultural
Competence of Japanese Youth.” International Journal of Intercultural Relations 34 (3):
268–282.

You might also like