Tài liệu International experience and intercultural sensitivity of american and vietnamese high school students

Vietnam national university, Hanoi University of languages and international studies Faculty of English language teacher education ®ång thÞ thïy linh International experience and INTERCULTURAL SENSITIVITY OF AMERICAN AND VIETNAMESE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (tefl) Ha Noi, May 2012 Vietnam national university, Hanoi University of languages and international studies Faculty of English language teacher education ĐỒNG THỊ THÙY LINH International experience and INTERCULTURAL SENSITIVITY OF AMERICAN AND VIETNAMESE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (tefl) SUPERVISOR: NGÔ HỮU HOÀNG, PHD Ha Noi, May 2012 I hereby state that I: Đồng Thị Thùy Linh, 08.1.E8, being a candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (TEFL) accept the requirements of the College relating to the retention and use of Bachelor‟s Graduation Paper deposited in the library. In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan and reproduction of the paper. Signature May 15, 2012 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT On completing this paper, I would like to expressly thank to those who made this research possible. First and foremost, I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Mr. Ngô Hữu Hoàng PhD, whose guidance and support from the initial to the final period enabled me to develop an understanding of the subject as well as of the way to write up this paper. Furthermore, I would like to say the grateful thanks to Mr. Vu-Duc Vuong, Resident Director of School Year Abroad Vietnam for his invaluable information and full permission for my classroom observation; also, the big thank-you to Ms. Lê Trà Ngân, Ms. Trần Thị Phương Thanh and Ms. Nguyễn Phương Hà for their precious assistance to approach Xuan Dinh High School classes. To all School Year Abroad Vietnam 2011 – 2012 and Xuan Dinh High School students who have willingly participated in this study, I feel like saying “Thank you so much!!” Without their help, I would not have been able to complete this thesis. I also owe a great debt of gratitude to all the teachers at ULIS, VNUH, especially Mr. Ngô Xuân Minh and Ms. Trần Hoài Giang for their valuable instructions on academic writing. What is more, I am forever indebted to my family and friends who have never failed to cheer me up during the thesis crisis. Last but not least, I owe my sincerest thanks to the readers for their interests in and comments on this paper! ABSTRACT In today‟s international setting, students have been dramatically increasing their exposure to different cultures worldwide. Following this trend, American students thus can be seen studying in Vietnam and vice versa. These students are in force of developing intercultural sensitivity so as to avoid culture shocks and survive successfully in culturally-distinct environment. This study then aims at exploring this under researched area of international experience and intercultural sensibility of American and Vietnamese high school students. With triangulation method, the study was divided into two phases. In the first phase, survey questionnaires were employed to study 100 students‟ intercultural sensitivity in regard to their interaction engagement, respect for cultural differences, interaction enjoyment, interaction attentiveness, and interaction confidence. In the second phase, two classes selected from two sets of sample were observed with highly structured checklists. The data collected from both phases formulated to answer the two key research questions. A brief summary of the findings reveals that (1) American students with their wide range of international experience reached a higher level of interaction engagement, enjoyment and attentiveness in comparison with their Vietnamese fellow students (2) Concerning students‟ self-reports on their intercultural sensitivity development over the period of American – Vietnamese interaction, the two current programs are perceived to expand a limited influence on their intercultural sensitivity (3) Frequency of foreign language in class plays a deciding role in the development of students‟ intercultural sensitivity. At last, this paper concludes with some implication and application which are hoped to be found helpful to some extent for students, teachers, and researchers who are also interested in this topic. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLES OF CONTENTS Acknowledgement ……………………………………………..…………. PAGE i Abstract ………………………………………………………..…………. ii List of tables, figures and abbreviations ……………………………..…… iii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION I. Rationale for the study …………………………………………..... 1 II. Aims of the study …………………………………………………. 2 III. Scope of the study ……………………………………….….…..… 3 IV. Significance of the study ………………………………....….…… 4 V. Overview of the rest of the paper ……………….……….….……. 4 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW I. Previous studies …………………………………………………… 6 II. Key concepts …………………………………………………….... 9 1. Intercultural communication ………………………………….. 9 1.1. Definition of intercultural communication ……………….. 9 1.2. Intercultural communication vs. cross – cultural …………. communication ………………………………………….… 11 2. Intercultural sensitivity ………………………………………... 12 2.1. Definition of Intercultural Sensitivity …………………….. 12 2.2. Components of Intercultural Sensitivity ………………...... 13 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY I. Selection of subjects ………………………………………………. 16 II. Research instruments ……………………………………………… 17 1. Phase one ……………………………………………………… 17 III. IV. 1.1. Justification for the use of survey questionnaires ………… 17 1.2. Questionnaire Development ……………………………… 18 2. Phase two ……………………………………………………… 20 2.1. Justification for the use of structured observation scheme .. 20 2.2. Structured Observation Scheme Development …………… 21 Procedures of data collection ……………………………………... 21 1. Obtaining permission ………………………………………….. 21 2. Administering the questionnaires ……………………………... 21 3. Conducting classroom observations …………………..……… 22 Procedures of data analysis ……………………………………….. 22 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION I. Findings …………………………………………………………… 23 1. Research question 1……………………………………………. 23 1.1. International experience background ……………………... 23 1.2. Intercultural Sensitivity Scale …………………………….. 24 1.2.1. Interaction engagement ……………………………. 24 1.2.2. Respect for cultural differences …………………… 26 1.2.3. Interaction confidence ……………………………... 27 1.2.4. Interaction enjoyment ……………………………... 28 1.2.5. Interaction Attentiveness …………………………... 29 2. Research question 2 …………………………………………… 30 2.1. Students‟ self perception of intercultural sensitivity ……... 31 2.1.1. Findings about SYA students ……………………… 31 2.1.2. Findings about XD students ……………………….. 33 2.1.3. Summary …………………………………………... 35 2.2. International experience in term of using foreign language 35 II. Implications ……………………………………………………….. 37 III. Application ………………………………………………………... 38 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION I. Major findings of the study ……………………………………….. 40 II. Limitations ………………………………………………………… 41 III. Suggestions for further study ……………………………………... 42 REFERENCES APPENDICES Appendix 1: Factor Loadings and Factor Reliabilities Appendix 2: Questionnaire – English version Appendix 3: Questionnaire – Vietnamese version Appendix 4: Classroom Observation Tally Sheet LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES, AND ABBREVIATIONS TABLES PAGE Table 1: Participants in the study ………………………………………... 17 Table 2: Interaction Engagement ………………………………………… 25 Table 3: Respect for Cultural Differences ……………………………….. 27 Table 4: Interaction Confidence …………………………………………. 28 Table 5: Interaction Enjoyment ………………………………………… 29 Table 6: Interaction attentiveness ………………………………………... 30 FIGURES Figure 1: Intercultural Competence Dimensions ………………………… 15 Figure 2: Confirmatory factor analysis (measurement error not shown) ... 19 Figure 3: Participants‟ experience of travelling abroad …………………. 23 Figure 4: SYA students‟ self perception of intercultural sensitivity …….. 32 Figure 5: XD students‟ self perception of intercultural sensibility ……… 34 Figure 6: Classroom Language Use ……………………………………... 36 ABBREVIATIONS SYA: School Year Abroad XD: Xuân Đỉnh CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION I. Rationale for the study “No culture can live, if it attempts to be exclusive.” ~ Mahatma Gandhi (cited in Kirn and Hartmann, 2007, p.106) ~ This view of the admired Indian political leader Mahatma Gandhi has been powerfully reinforced in today‟s world of “global village” (Knowles, 2008, p.42), where countries all over the world are not only exchanging goods and services, but also knowledge and cultures among each other (Penbek, Yurdakul, and Cerit, 2009). In this sense, Vietnam has started implementing an open-door policy since 1986. Thanks to this policy, together with guaranteed family income and a wide range of international scholarship programs, the number of Vietnamese students studying abroad, especially in the USA has increased significantly (Phan, 2008, p.1). Meanwhile, American students, particularly who enrolled in Asian and environmental courses have often seen traveling to Vietnam for their intensive study. Since all of these students are regularly placed in American – Vietnamese contact situations where each individual embraces far different culture values from the others, it is a requisite of intercultural sensitivity that helps “survive successfully” and rather “enjoy these differences” (Chen, 1997, p.5). As the demands on heightening the level and strength of intercultural sensitivity, as “future citizens” (Roy, 2006, p.1), students have now been increasing their exposure to “intercultural challenges” (Kupka, Everett, and Wildermuth, 2007, p.30) at a younger age. Considering the last few decades, students might not have studied abroad before finishing their high school for they are often considered to be more vulnerable to challenge cultural differences than university students. However, this decade has witnessed a total different scene. High school students are now encouraged to leave their schools and their countries to study abroad if the opportunities arise. The logic behind this is spending time in intercultural settings could provide students at any age with knowledge and experience that help develop their intercultural sensitivity to higher level (Deardorff, 2004). However, this direct and positive relationship between international experience and intercultural sensitivity is still open to debate. Does international experience contribute directly and positively to intercultural sensitivity in deed? The academic community worldwide has made fairly bold attempts to examine this connection. Nevertheless, the results vary from studies to studies and research implications cannot be applied universally in every cultural context. Thus, it has been suggested that further research is needed. Particularly, in Vietnam, intercultural sensitivity can still be viewed as a fairly new approach and by no means considered as a thoroughly explored topic. All these points above rationalize the need for more research into American – Vietnamese high school students‟ intercultural sensitivity as well as the contribution of their international experience on it. Therefore, the researcher has decided to conduct a study of “international experience and intercultural sensitivity of American and Vietnamese high school students.” II. Aims of the study The study aims to provide a comparative description of the intercultural sensitivity of American and Vietnamese high school students in relation to their international experience. The researcher is interested in framing a broad picture of these students‟ intercultural sensitivity by sketching out their level of intercultural interaction engagement, attentiveness, enjoyment, and confidence, as well as their attitude towards cultural differences. Moreover, the researcher wants to get a profound insight into the contribution of international experience on intercultural sensitivity of these students. These modest aims could be accomplished by answering the following research questions: 1) To what extent are the levels of intercultural sensitivity of American and Vietnamese high school students different? 2) How does international experience contribute to intercultural communication of these students? III. Scope of the study As suggested by the title, this paper places a focal point on examining the relationship between intercultural sensitivity and international experience. Besides, it is mostly considered that listening to and speaking a foreign language is a crucial part of international experience; therefore, the contribution of foreign language use is also examined properly in this current study. Furthermore, for the aim of this study is to analyze comparatively intercultural sensitivity of American and Vietnamese high school students in relation to their current international education program, the sample does not include students from American teacher – American student class and Vietnamese teacher – Vietnamese student class. The two sets of samples chosen from both schools (School Year Abroad Vietnam”1 and “Xuan Dinh” high school) are learning in the intercultural environments (American teachers – Vietnamese students and Vietnamese teachers – American students). Lastly, it is notable that not only the student‟s self-perception of their own intercultural sensitivity but also the researcher‟s observation is brought into account. The data supporting this study thus come in the forms of the students‟ self-reports and the researcher‟s checklists. No people from other perspectives such as teachers and parents of the students were involved in the current study. (1) School Year Abroad is the program allowing American high school students to live with a European or Asian family for an entire academic year while earning U.S. graduation credits and preparing for selective U.S. colleges and universities. In 2009, School Year Abroad has opened a new school in Vietnam with a curriculum focusing on sustainable development and environmental science. (www.sya.org) IV. Significance of the study Hopefully, after being accomplished, to some extent, the study could be found helpful for not only the researcher herself but also the teachers and students who work collaboratively hands-on in intercultural environment as well as other researchers who are also interested in this topic. As the study delves into American – Vietnamese communication in educational settings, its findings could provide teachers who are involved in teaching English or Vietnamese to foreign students with descriptive information on their students‟ level of intercultural sensitivity. The researcher hopes this study can draw teachers as well as policy-makers‟ attention to their students‟ intercultural sensitivity level since these pieces of information may help teachers and policy-makers make more informed decisions which can better promote students‟ intercultural communication. Also, this study expectantly contributes to students‟ self-perception of their own intercultural sensitivity. After all, the students themselves play a decisive role in their success with their intercultural communication. Last but not least, for the current research into the area of students‟ intercultural sensitivity in the setting of American – Vietnamese interaction is apparently limited, this study would partly narrow the gap in the literature and might serve as a source of reference for other researchers who are also interested in the same or related issues. V. Overview of the rest of the paper The rest of the paper includes four more chapters as follows: Chapter two – Literature Review introduces the theoretical foundations for the research and provides the definitions of key terms appearing throughout the paper. Chapter three – Methodology describes in detail and justifies the methodology as well as the method tools used to conduct the research. Chapter four – Results and discussion reveals the research results and the researcher‟s analysis. Chapter five – Conclusion summarizes the major findings and then concludes with some recommendations for future research. CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW This current chapter presents a number of studies both worldwide and in Vietnam related to the research topic and discusses the literature gap revealed, which accounts for the need to carry out the current study. After that, an account of the working definitions of key terms appearing throughout the paper is offered in detail. I. Previous studies In the world of growing complexity, intercultural communication has gradually been receiving more and more attention and becoming the centre of a large body of studies. Particularly, studies on American – Vietnamese interaction have received lots of attention from both American and Vietnamese researchers and educators. On the one hand, regarding the studies from the side of the USA, it is apparently paradoxical that since 1975, studies on Vietnamese cultures in the USA have dramatically been declining (Beal, 1982 cited in Nguyen, 1984, p.91), but at the same time the number of studies on Vietnamese people in the USA has considerably increased since there was a great demand for understanding and consideration of “how best to assimilate Vietnamese refugees into the mainstream of democratic society” (Boss, 1983, p.4). Evidence of this concern over Vietnamese – American interaction in the host country of America has been shown through a large body of publications including “A handbook for teachers of Vietnamese refugee students” (Muirhead and Crown, 1977), “The Vietnamese in America” (Brown, 1978), “Vietnamese students in the public schools” (Winnepeg, 1980), “Vietnamese refugees since 1982” (Home Office Research Study 142), “The influence of cultural values on classroom behaviors of adult Vietnamese refugees” (Boss, 1983) and etc. On the other hand, intercultural communication Vietnam-based studies on American – Vietnamese interaction appear admittedly limited, partly for the full diplomatic relations between the two countries has just been restored for only nearly 17 years. Since the year 1995 of political normalization, American – Vietnamese communication in Vietnam national borders has been gradually reestablished through education, politics, business and trade. Then, Vietnamese researchers have got chances to make some attempts to assist participants who are placed in American – Vietnamese intercultural contact situations. Particularly, at ULIS, VNUH, there have been a fair number of BA graduation papers contributing fundamental insight into different aspects of American – Vietnamese communication including “politeness and conversations” (Trang, H.V., 2002; Ly, P.T.T., 2002; Thuy, D.B., 2002; Lan, N.T.P., 2004; Hang, D.T.T, 2006; Thuy, N.T.T., 2006; Linh, B.T., 2007; Lien, P.T., 2007; Trang, B.T.H., 2007 and Thuy, N.T.P., 2009), “small talk after introduction” (Thanh, N.T., 2002; Hue, N.T.T., 2003 and Linh, P.H., 2004), “greeting and responding” (Tra, L.T.T., 2000; Xuan, P.T., 2000 and Thuy, P.T.T., 2001), “directness and indirectness” (Lan, N.C., 2001; Yen, N.T., 2003; Hanh, L.T.B., 2003 and Nhung, P.T., 2007), “gestures” (Thao, D.T.T., 2003; Ha, D.T.T. , 2004; Thanh, N.T.K., 2004; Lan, N.T.P., 2004 and Mai, V.T.T., 2008), “postures” (Tuyết, B.T. B., 2002 and Dương, T.T.T., 2006) and etc. Still, as far as the researcher has investigated, most of these attempts majorly aim to enhance individuals‟ knowledge and capabilities of different dimensions of communication across cultures so as to make it smooth and successfully. Then, there is a paucity of information on intercultural sensitivity – one of the most crucial factors helping people “survive successfully in the culturally diverse society” (Chen, 1997). Meanwhile, individuals‟ intercultural sensitivity has been studied worldwide in many papers. It is mostly recognized that numerous attempts have been made to explore intercultural sensitivity among students in regard to genders, education, and oversea experiences. Among studies in this line of research, Altshuler, et al. (2003) has found out that both “gender and multicultural experiences” expanded marked influence on the level of intercultural sensitivity (Penbek, Yurdakul and Cerit, 2009). Concurrently, Straffon (2003) has suggested that “the length of time spent at the school” and intercultural sensitivity are closely related. Specifically speaking, students who spent longer time at school have got the higher scores on “Acceptance and Adaptation” and lower scores on “Denial and Defense” categories (Straffon, 2003 cited in Sinicrope, Norris and Watabe, 2006, p.17). Also, in “The idea of intercultural competence” (2003), Klak and Martin have examined whether international events held by universities could help their students to respect the cultural differences. Then, the results indicate that intercultural sensitivity can be improved over time participating in those cultural programs. In a latter attempt to focus examining adaptability and sensitivity, global competency and intercultural sensitivity, Williams (2005) has confirmed that students after studying abroad show a greater intercultural communication skills than students who only stay on campus. In 2009, for often hearing their college students describe study abroad experience as “life changing”, Clarke, Flaherty, Wright and McMillen have conducted the study of “Student Intercultural Proficiency From Study Abroad Programs” so as to investigate the influence of oversea experience on their students‟ intercultural proficiency. The study results show that students who study abroad have “a greater intercultural sensitivity” and more “globally minded” than their peers studying at home campus. However, the effect of international experience to intercultural sensitivity is still being argued over for “exposing to difference is not necessarily improving intercultural sensitivity level”, and also some studies have indicated that “study abroad does not benefit all students” (Fuller, 2007 cited in Shentu and Tjitra, 2010, p.15). In short, the connection of intercultural sensitivity and international experience still need further examining. After culling the literature on intercultural sensitivity, the researcher acknowledged that most of the aforementioned studies are restricted to university students. Then, the present study attempts to test a different set of subject – high school students in a different context – Vietnam in an attempt to clarify the ambiguity to some extent. II. Key concepts 1. Intercultural communication 1.1. Definition of intercultural communication Initially, two major concepts that frame the phrase “intercultural communication” would be briefly analyzed. As for the first key term - “culture”, there has been numerous definitions proposed from around the globe. As early as 1952, Kroeber and Kluckholm (cited in Fishman, 2000) have already found out more than 200 definitions of this concept and then written up a classic of culturology that is a 400-page review of “culture” definitions. However, in this current study, the researcher would not dig deep in the work of Kroeber and Kluckholm as well as any other range of culture‟s definitions due to the paper length constraint. “Culture” hereafter would be simply viewed as “all the characteristics common of a particular group of people that are learned and not given by nature” (Allwood, 1985, p.1). What is more, concerning the other key concept - “communication”, the researcher would closely follow the broad definition presented by Penbek, Yurdakul and Cerit (2009) which is “Communication is interaction of individuals, organizations, and countries with each other for sharing information to reach a common understanding”. In this definition, all of the signaling system, sensory mode, verbal, non-verbal behaviors, and etc. which usually appear in other definitions of communication are eliminated. Since using any definition of communication including one of these factors might require a more in-depth and systematic approach, the researcher would like to briefly characterize communication as the sharing of information among people to fulfill a goal just the same as the definition of Penbek, Yurdakul and Cerit (2009). Basing on what is defined as “culture” and “communication” above, “intercultural communication” could be seen as the sharing of information between individuals, organizations, and countries possessing different cultural characteristics that are not given but learned. Still, it might be natural for international researchers and academics not to agree fully on this view for each has a different approach to perceiving the concept “intercultural communication”. Having started with Goodenough, Geertz, and ABS‟s definitions of „culture‟ and „communication‟, Knapp (199-) defined “intercultural communication” as the interpersonal interaction among people of different groups possessing distinguishing knowledge regarding “linguistic forms of symbolic behaviors”. More specifically, Samovar, Porter & Stefani (2000 cited in Ibad, n.d.) added greater emphasis on “cultural perceptions” by defining intercultural communication is “communication between people whose cultural perceptions and symbol systems being different enough to alter the communication event”. With regard to technology application, Vertovec and Cohen (2002 cited in Ibad, n.d.) assume that intercultural communication is “a process of interaction of diverse cultures which are being increasingly marked by new information and communication technologies”. In 2009, Miric who labeled “intercultural communication” as “a buzz word of our times” has provided her own definition “intercultural communication is a multi disciplinary academic field of research and study that seeks to understand how people from different countries and cultures behave, communicate and perceive the world by creating a cultural synergy.” Recently, Blommaert, from his angle of an anthropological linguist and sociolinguist, restricts the meaning of intercultural communication to “real” communication between people from different cultures, “what people actually do when they engage in an exchange of meaningful semiotic symbols” (Blommaert, 2011). Meanwhile, broadly speaking, another definition believes that “whenever a message created in one culture is received and interpreted in another culture, intercultural communication occurs” (Ibad, n.d.). Regardless of apparent differences deriving from different approaches and different focal points, all of these aforementioned definitions intersect with the researcher‟s inference about intercultural communication from Allwood‟s definition of culture and Penbek, Yurdakul and Cerit‟s definition of communication at one point that is the sharing of information between individuals or countries possessing different cultural characteristics. For the sake of clarity and consistency, this paper will refer to this definition whenever the term “intercultural communication” is mentioned. 1.2. Intercultural communication vs. cross – cultural communication The discussion of “intercultural communication” often calls along careful attention to the term of “cross-cultural communication” at same time, since the two expressions are from time to time used as synonyms. According to English translation of "Tvärkulturell kommunikation" (Allwood, 1985, p.1), the two terms are distinguished as follow: The term intercultural is chosen over the largely synonymous term cross-cultural because it is linked to language use such as “interdisciplinary” that is cooperation between people with different scientific backgrounds. Perhaps the term also has somewhat fewer connotations than cross-cultural. It is not cultures that communicate, whatever that might imply, but people (and possibly social institutions) with different cultural backgrounds that do. In general, the term “cross-cultural” is probably best used for comparisons between cultures (“cross-cultural comparison”). In Allwood‟s above differentiation between intercultural communication and cross-cultural communication, the connotations of two prefixes (inter- and cross-) are considered carefully. While inter- simply refers to 'between or among the stated people, things or places' (Cambridge Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary), cross- echoes with comparison and contrast between people, things or places. In addition, Gudykunst & Kim (1997 cited in The institute for working futures, n.d.) and Read Dwyer (2005 cited in The institute for working futures, n.d.) also insisted that intercultural communication is “a transactional, symbolic process involving the attribution of meaning between people from different cultures” whereas cross cultural communication implies “a comparison of some phenomena across cultures”. Besides, the researcher‟s supervisor took the stance that the nature of “intercultural communication” is essentially “static” which only refers to the context in which people from different culture come into contact, while the term “cross cultural communication” implies a “dynamic” situation in which similarity and difference arise from interaction across the cultures.