Transcript Assessing and giving feedback on students* cultural competence

Assessing and giving
feedback on
students’ cultural
competence
Presented by
Catherine Smyth
The Faculty of Education & Social Work
The University of Sydney
Page 1
Overview
–
–
–
–
Part 1: Motivation, assumptions and definitions
Part 2: Framework
Part 3: Student work- assessment task and feedback
Part 4: Issues and future directions
The University of Sydney
Page 2
Part 1: Motivation, assumptions and definitions
– Teaching intercultural competence requires the development of
critical cultural awareness (Talkington, Lengel, & Byram 2004).
– Teaching ‘culture’ (e.g. the institutional, historical and political
aspects of culture) is not enough, and that the development of
intercultural competence requires the teaching of subjective
culture, in which the focus turns to exploring alternative
worldviews and cultural self awareness (Bennett, 2009).
– Some form of challenge is necessary for education in
intercultural competence (Paige 1993; Talkington, Lengel, &
Byram 2004).
The University of Sydney
Page 3
Untangling the terminology
Intercultural communication, intercultural competence, intercultural
understanding, culture, intercultural sensitivity
– Intercultural competence is the most commonly used term in the
literature.
– Intercultural understanding encompasses both cognitive and
affective domains (Hill 2006).
– Intercultural communication: the ability to effectively and
appropriately communicate with people from different cultures
(Arasaratnam, 2009)
The University of Sydney
Page 4
Part 2 Framework
Epistemological resources (Hammer and Elby, 2002)
Individuals hold a range of epistemological resources
Epistemological resources change, or are activated, within specific
contexts
The University of Sydney
Page 5
Individual Sense Making = Originates in one’s
personal experiences and activated and combined in
different ways in interaction with various contexts
The University of Sydney
Page 6
4 ideas about sense making
(Harbon & Smyth, In Press)
1. Sense making is situated in a
physical AND social context
2. Sense making is situated in
contexts of beliefs and
understandings about
cognition that differ between
individuals and social groups
(Greeno, 1989)
3. Students have the capacity to
generate new knowledge
4. Sense making as “knowledgein-pieces” not cohesive
(diSessa, 1988, 2000)
The University of Sydney
Page 7
Part 3: Assessment
– Short Term International Exchange ignited ideas and research
of students’ sense making
– Adapted for assessment task in EDUP2009 “Intercultural
Understanding in HSIE K-6”
The University of Sydney
Page 8
Making sense of China
– 10 students for 10 days
– Asiabound funding
– Primary & secondary
preservice teachers
– Minzu University
– School visits -pre-service
teachers worked with teachers
and students in those schools
– Inner Mongolia and China
– Negotiated individualised
sense making task
– “How will you make sense of
China?”
The University of Sydney
Page 9
Place is profoundly pedagogical
The University of Sydney
Page 10
This semester- Making sense of a cultural practice
Intercultural inquiry- documentation
and reflection on the intercultural
communication process
– 120 students for 12 weeks
– 2nd year preservice primary
teachers
– Intercultural site visit & reflection
– Students prepared and conducted
their inquiry following ‘Intercultural
communication process’
– “How will you make sense of a
cultural practice that is not your
own?”
The University of Sydney
Page 11
Intercultural communication process for site visit
1.
Prepares
8. Takes
risks
2.
Observes
7.
Respects
3.
Compares
6.
Emphasises
4.
Reflects
5.
Inquires
The University of Sydney
Page 12
Intercultural communication process
– Step 1: Select an authentic cultural practice that is of interest,
but is unfamiliar to you
– Step 2: Identify an appropriate and relevant site
– Step 3: Use questions on Prepares card as a guide, to write a
½ page response
– Step 4: Make arrangements to visit site. Conduct and
document your visit by following suggested activities in the
Observes card. Take 3-5 digital photographs (abide by cultural
guidelines for taking photographs). Write ½ page reflection.
– Step 5: Following your site visit. Use compares card to compare
and contrast home and target culture. Write ½ page
reflection.
– Steps 6-9: Begin to reflect on your sense making (reflects,
inquires, empathises, respects and takes risks).
The University of Sydney
Page 13
Giving feedback
– Identified criteria (analysis of home and target culture,
documentation of process, reflection on the impact of the
experience on personal intercultural understanding, reflection
on how the process could be used in teaching)
– Examined rubrics from other universities
– Designed EDUP2009 rubric
– Negotiated rubric with students
The University of Sydney
Page 14
The University of Sydney
Page 15
The University of Sydney
Page 16
The University of Sydney
Page 17
Part 4: Issues and future directions
– Sense making requires that students “elaborate and
reorganise” their knowledge and understanding, rather than
simply “applying and acquiring” new ideas. (Greeno, 1989,
p.135)
– Plan assessment tasks around experiences
– Make the intercultural communication process explicit
– Study abroad has been shown to enhance intercultural
understanding among university students (Kitsantas and Meyers
2001; Medina-Lopez-Portillo 2004; Olson and Kroeger 2001).
– Researchers agree that intercultural competence can and
should be measured, and that both qualitative and quantitative
methods are appropriate (Deardorff 2006b).
The University of Sydney
Page 18
The University of Sydney
Page 19
References
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Association of American Colleges and Universities (2015). Intercultural Knowledge and Competence VALUE Rubric. Retrieved from
https://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/intercultural-knowledge
Arasaratnam, L.A. (2009). The development of a new instrument of intercultural communication competence.
http://www.immi.se/intercultural/nr20/arasaratnam.htm
Bachner, D. & Zeutschel, U. (2009). Long-term effects of international youth exchange. Intercultural Education, 20 (sup1), S45 – S58. DOI:
10/1080/14675980903370862
Bennett, M.J. (1993). Towards ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural sensi- tivity. In Education for the intercultural
experience., ed. M.R. Paige, 21–71. Yarmouth: Intercultural Press.
Bennett, M.J. (2009). Defining, measuring, and facilitating intercultural learning: A conceptual introduction to the intercultural education
double supplement. Intercultural Education 20, no. 4: 1–13.
Bennett, J. M. (2008). Transformative training: Designing programs for culture learning. In Contemporary leadership and intercultural
competence: Understanding and utilizing cultural diversity to build successful organizations, ed. M. A. Moodian, 95-110. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Greeno, J.G. (1989). A perspective on thinking. American Psychology, 44 (2), 134 – 141.
Greeno, J.G., & Nokes-Malach, T.J. (2014, March 4). Situative cognition. Presented at the NAPLeS Conference, University of Pittsburgh,
USA.
Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2002). On the form of a personal epistemology. In B. K.
Hammer, D. M., & Elby, A. (2003 ). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 53–90.
Harbon, L. & Smyth, C.L. (In Press). Creating an ecology of conceptual blending: Australian pre-service teachers getting to know and make
sense of China. In Margaret Robertson and Po Keung Eric Tsang (Eds.). Everyday knowledge, education and sustainable futures:
Transdisciplinary approaches/research in the Asia/Pacific Region. Springer
Hill, I. (2006). Student types, school types and their combined influence on the development of intercultural understanding. Journal of
Research in International Education 5, no. 1: 5–33.
Paige, M.R. (1993). On the nature of intercultural experiences and intercultural education. In Education for the intercultural experience, ed.
M.R. Paige, 1–20. Yarmouth: Intercultural Press.
Paige, R.M., Fry, G.W., Stallman, E.M., Josic, J., & Jon, J. (2009). Study abroad for global engagement: the long-term impact of mobility
experiences. Intercultural Education, 20 (sup1), S29 – S44. DOI: 10.108012675980903370847
Perry, L.B. & Southwell, L. (2011) Developing intercultural understanding and skills: models and approaches, Intercultural Education, 22:6,
453-466, DOI: 10.1080/14675986.2011.644948
Talkington, B., L. Lengel, and M. Byram. (2004). Setting the context, highlighting the impor- tance: Reflections on interculturality and
pedagogy. www.llas.ac.uk/resources/paper.aspx? resourceid=2048
Thomlison, T.D. (1991). Effects of a study-abroad program on university students: Toward a predictive theory of intercultural contact.
Paper presented at the 8th Annual Intercultural and Communication Conference, Miami, USA. Eric Document: ED 332 629.
The University of Sydney
Page 20