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

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 culturallydistinct 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’ selfreports 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.

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)

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

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

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

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

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

III Procedures of data collection ……… 21

1 Obtaining permission ……… 21

2 Administering the questionnaires ……… 21

3 Conducting classroom observations ……… ……… 22

IV 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

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

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

Such were the distinctions that the confusion between the two terms is cleared away In the light of this differentiation between intercultural communication and

cultural communication, this current study would be seen belonging to the

cross-cultural field of research for it aims to measure and compare two samples of two

different cultures However, these two samples are placed in the setting of

intercultural communication between American and Vietnamese

2 Intercultural Sensitivity

2.1 Definition of Intercultural Sensitivity

It can be clearly seen that the significance of intercultural sensitivity has especially appreciated in recent years for the marked increase in the number of definitions of this concept Bronfenbrener, et al (1958 cited in Chen, 1997, p.4), is considered as one of the earliest scholars whose studies concern intercultural sensitivity According to Bronfenbrener et al (1958 cited in Chen, 1997, p.4),

intercultural sensitivity and interpersonal sensitivity are similar, which both mean “the ability to distinguish how others differ in their behavior, perceptions or feelings”

Later, in an attempt to clarify the concept of sensitivity with regard to “empathy”, Barnlund & Namura indicated that in order to successfully maintain cross cultural

communication, people must face the challenge of understanding counterparts with “a sufficient margin of empathy” (1985 cited in Penbek, Yurdakul, and Cerit, 2009) In

term of the role filled in intercultural communication, Cui and Berg simply defined

intercultural sensitivity as “a valid predictive factor for intercultural effectiveness” (1991 cited in Shentu and Tjitra, 2010, p.4) while Chen (1997, p.5) considered “one of the most important abilities that helps the individuals to survive successfully in the culturally diverse society and enjoy these differences” as intercultural sensitivity More

specifically, in term of diplomacy, Vulpe, Kealey, Protheroe and MacDonald addressed

“intercultural sensitivity is an important criterion for expatriate selection and placement” (2001 cited in Shentu and Tjitra, 2010, p.4) These viewpoints were then

broaden and reinforced by Zhao (2002 cited in Penbek, Yurdakul, and Cerit, 2009)

who defined intercultural sensitivity is “a key capability for living and working together effectively with people from different cultures” Currently, in their effort to

differentiate intercultural sensitivity and intercultural competence, Hammar, Bennett &

Wiseman defined “intercultural sensitivity is the ability to discriminate and experience relevant cultural difference” which places the central focus on “the knowing” while

“intercultural competence is the ability to think and act in interculturally appropriate ways” in which the focus is shifted to “the doing” (Hammar, Bennet and Wiseman,

2003, p.422) Obviously, there does not exist a universal way of defining “intercultural sensitivity” as well as there are many more scholars have contributed substantially to the development of our current understanding of “intercultural sensitivity” Nevertheless, presented here the most popular, also the most often cited definitions In

this paper, as from now, the expression “intercultural sensitivity” is always referred to

Hammar, Bennet and Wiseman‟s definition on consideration of clarity and consistency

2.2 Components of Intercultural Sensitivity

In order to comprehend thoroughly the concept “intercultural sensitivity”, it is

of great importance to understand adequately its principal components

According to Chen (1997), intercultural sensitivity includes six basic

components, namely “self esteem (sense of self-value), self-monitoring, open-minded, empathy, interaction involvement and nonjudgmental” However, in the follow-up

research in 1998, Chen and Starosta (cited in Penbek, Yurdakul and Cerit, 2009) suggested that there were only four attributes of intercultural sensitivity as follows:

» Self-concept – an optimistic outlook that inspires confidence in intercultural

interactions

» Open-mindedness – one‟s willingness to express themselves openly when it is

appropriate and to accept other‟s explanations

» Nonjudgmental – holding no prejudices that will prevent one from listening

sincerely to others during intercultural interactions

» Social relaxation – the ability to overcome uncertain emotions during

intercultural communication

Another way of determining intercultural sensitivity‟s composition is offered by Giangreco, et al (2000) The authors assume that intercultural sensitivity includes the

» A willingness to learn about the traditions and characteristics of other cultures

In regard to intercultural competence in general and intercultural communication competence in particular, Shentu and Tjitra (2010) presented the very model of intercultural sensitivity with five major dimensions as follows:

Figure 1: Intercultural Competence Dimensions (Shentu and Tjitra, 2010, p.5)

As can be seen from the figure above, “intercultural sensitivity” is partially overlapped with “intercultural communication competence” and both of them together form “intercultural competence”

So far, there has seen no agreed-upon opinion on components of intercultural sensitivity but it‟s easy to note that “respect for differences” is the most important element to be interculturally sensitive since it appears on all of the models reviewed Therefore, this factor would be carefully examined in this current study

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

This third chapter justifies the methodology which is applied to conduct the current study Generally, the chapter covers four major parts: selection of subjects, research instruments, procedures of data collection, and procedures of data analysis

I Selection of subjects

The researcher employed the mixed purposeful sampling procedure that is the combination of convenient and chain sampling Since these sampling strategies are

used, the researcher fully acknowledges that the findings from the sample cannot

“generalize beyond the given population pool” (Mertens, 2005) However, it is the

close fit between the sampling strategy and the purpose of the study together with the resources available that count All these things considered, data were collected on a total of 100 high school students belonging to two groups: (1) American students who travel to Vietnam for a school year abroad (n = 7), (2) Vietnamese students from Xuan Dinh high school where they are provided with English classes taught by American teachers (n = 93) It is noteworthy that the size of the first set of sample is very small in comparison with the second one However, the researcher had little choice but to work with this disparity in sample sizes due to the fact that 7 is the total number of SYAV-

2012 students

Since the study only aims to analyze the connection of international experience and the level of students‟ intercultural sensitivity, the participants in both sets of sample are chosen at the same age in order to minimize the influence of this factor on the findings Also, the study is conducted in the setting of American – Vietnamese communication Therefore, all American students travelling to China, France, Italy, and Spain in SYA program as well as all Vietnamese XD high school students learning with Vietnamese, British and Australian teachers are not taken into account

The class and nationality based distribution of the sample is summarized as follows:

Table 1: Participants in the study

A total of 79 questionnaires were returned (with the response rate of 79%), 5 questionnaires from SYA students and 74 questionnaires from XD students

II Research instruments

With “triangulation” method, the research was divided into two phases; therefore, two different instruments were used to collect data for responding to the different research questions In the initial phase, the researcher aimed to offer a comparative description of the level and strength of American and Vietnamese participants‟ intercultural sensitivity Hence, survey questionnaires were fully employed In phase two, the researcher proposed to conduct classroom observations for gathering in-depth information helping answer the second research question regarding the connection between intercultural sensitivity and international experience

1 Phase one

1.1 Justification for the use of survey questionnaires

First and foremost, in this phase, survey questionnaires are chosen over the

other research instruments for its greater familiarity “in the sense that survey results are often cited in the popular media, such as newspapers, magazines, and television programs” (Mertens, 2005, p.167) What is more, survey questionnaires aid to obtain a

mass of factual data in response to close-ended questions, which can provide the researcher with a wealth of specific information (Gillham, 2005, p.166) In addition,

according to Milne, survey questionnaires are considered certainly “objective” (1999)

In consideration of the current phase‟s goals which are measuring and comparing, the standardized information gathered makes survey questionnaires a perfectly right choice

as a research instrument Besides, there was also time constraint since the researcher had got fairly limited time to access the two sets of sample to collect data Under such

circumstances, fascinating by the benefit that is “collect a huge amount of information

in less than an hour” (Dornyei, 2003 cited in Tran, 2009, p.35), the researcher has

determined survey questionnaires would be employed fully to amass data in the current phase

However, survey questionnaires also place the researcher at disadvantages, namely students might not want to reveal the information as they might think they would not benefit anything from responding (Milne, 1999) In order to overcome this disadvantage, the researcher has attempted to be straightforward that she cannot promise any financial benefit but only strictly confidential when treating their response (clearly stated on survey questionnaires) and report back research findings to those

who care Another disadvantageous point is “questionnaires are standardized” then “it

is not possible to explain any point in the questions that participants might misinterpret” (Milne, 1999) In an attempt to partially solve this problem, the

researcher has strongly considered piloting the questionnaires both English and Vietnamese versions on a small group of colleagues at ULIS, VNUH

All things considered, the researcher affirmed the initial decision on using survey questionnaires as research instrument and seriously aimed to carefully develop and administer the questionnaires so as to minimize the negative impacts

1.2 Questionnaire Development

A survey questionnaire has been constructed in order to measure intercultural sensitivity level of students and answer the first research question aimed The survey questionnaire is comprised of three main parts The first part takes account of

„intercultural background information‟ and „personal information‟ of the respondents

The former has 5 open-ended questions asked to collect data regarding the informants‟ previous intercultural experiences The latter is optional so that the respondents who wish to be anonymous would feel comfortable to reveal the reliable information and as for those who care to receive the findings from their responses, this part would help the researcher to contact directly with them

The second part includes 5 factors with 22 items exploring intercultural sensitivity of respondents adapted from Fritz, Mollenberg, and Chen‟s model (2000)

At this point, it is notable that the original intercultural sensitivity scale developed by Chen and Starosta (2000) is comprised of 2 more items, in other words, there are 24

items in total Nevertheless, the working paper “Measuring intercultural sensitivity in different cultural context” (Fritz, Mollenberg, and Chen 2000) retested the instrument and the results disqualify the two items and show that “five factors were reproduced on the whole” as follows:

Figure 2: Confirmatory factor analysis (measurement error not shown) (Fritz, Mollenberg, and Chen, 2000, p.18)

To be more specific, the detailed retesting results together with factor reliability and factor loading are shown in the appendix 1

In consideration of the validity of the data retested, the scale comprising 22 statements above was chosen over the original with 24 items

The last part of the survey questionnaire covers 16 items asking about respondents‟ self perception For Chen and Starosta (1998) indicated self perception as one of the four fundamental components of intercultural sensitivity, the researcher decided to make an adaptation from the self perception model delivered by Penbek, Yurkakul and Cerit (2009) for deeper view on the change in self perception (if any) over the time of American – Vietnamese intercultural experience as well as for seeking the answer to the second research question

Last but not least, having finished composing the English version (Appendix 2), the survey questionnaire is translated into Vietnamese (Appendix 3) so as to minimize the time Vietnamese respondents spending on it and to avoid any possible misunderstanding by Vietnamese participants

2 Phase two

2.1 Justification for the use of structured observation scheme

In an attempt to make up for the small and differential sample sizes, the researcher aimed to provide more in-depth information in order to formulate a valid answer to the second key research question The consideration of offering “contextual data” (Mackey and Gass, 2005, p.187) led the researcher to choose classroom observation scheme as the second research instrument Unlike questionnaires, classroom observation enables the researcher to gain “deeper and more multilayered understanding” of the students and their context where real learning occurs (Phung,

2010, p.20) What is more, a structured observation scheme in particular would allow the researcher to follow significant behaviors as closely as possible, and also help

systematize the observation (Nguyen, 2008 cited in Phung, 2010, p.36) All these points finally dictated the use of structured observation scheme in this second phase

2.2 Structured Observation Scheme Development

As there are many observation procedures available covering a different variety

of classroom phenomena, the research firstly undertook a careful investigation into these existing schemes Keeping in mind the goal of the observation section that is the use of foreign language in intercultural classes, the researcher found Nunan‟s classroom observation tally sheet (1989) mostly employable Nevertheless, all the items concerning teachers‟ behaviors were excluded from the scheme since they are beyond the scope of this current study

III Procedures of data collection

1 Obtaining permission

First of all, the researcher asked the “knowledgeable individuals” to recommend anyone that may have the information that is legit to the study The administrators of the two schools (SYAV 20011 – 2012 and XD high school) were then identified as key informants Therefore, the researcher has attempted to approach the two administrators

in advance so as to obtain the permission to observe the classes and deliver survey questionnaires to their students Unfortunately, the attempt to contact XD high school administrator was failed Then, in order to collect needed data, the researcher had to enlist the help of three teaching interns at the school

2 Administering the questionnaires

After the survey questionnaire is fully developed and thoroughly piloted, it was sent to the administrator and the teaching interns for not only professional courtesy but also feedback and comment before administering The delivery of the questionnaires to the first set of sample (American students) took 2 days in total although the actual process of doing the survey took place over a short period of around 10 minutes only It

was due to the fact that not all students were present when the researcher contacted them Concerning the second set of sample, the process of administering the questionnaires to Vietnamese students went smoothly in a morning

3 Conducting classroom observations

The classroom observation was preceded by the researcher‟s asking for permission of the class instructors and negotiating the role of the observer in the classroom as well as her seating arrangements Then, the process of observing initiated After the observational period, the observer fully expressed appreciation to all of the instructors, students and administrator

IV Procedures of data analysis

All the data from the survey questionnaire were inserted into the computer according to three main parts including intercultural background information, intercultural sensitivity scale, and self-perception of intercultural sensitivity Thanks to Microsoft Excel, sizes, means and standard deviations of the sample were calculated quickly and accurately After that, these results were presented with tables, graphs, and charts, which were then used as a basis to analyze comparatively

For the checklists employed in the classroom observations were fairly simple, the researcher just had to count and mark the frequency of observed behaviors and events Then, graphs and charts were produced to help clearly illustrate the findings

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the collected data were analyzed in detail according to the two research questions which they help to answer Then, some possible implication and application are put forward to discuss explicitly

I Findings

1 Research question 1

To what extent are the levels of intercultural sensitivity of American and Vietnamese high school students different?

1.1 International experience background

As the current study aims to measure and compare the level and strength of intercultural sensitivity in regard to students‟ international experience, it is a requisite for acknowledging participants‟ international experience background The findings emerged from the four initial questions of the survey questionnaire are as follows:

Figure 3: Participants’ experience of travelling abroad

Not to mention the school year abroad in Vietnam, all SYA students got extensive experience of travelling overseas before for different purposes in relation to education, voluntary work, and holiday activity while only more than 8% XD students did spend time abroad In addition, China is the only foreign country XD students listed in answering survey, whereas a variety of destinations, namely Saudi Arabia, the

UK, France, Sweden, etc is reached by SYA students

What is more, the USA is a multicultural community where students are provided with numerous international experiences within its national border According to the finding from question 5 in part 1 of the survey questionnaire, 100% SYA students have acquaintances with culturally-distinct people in their home country More specifically, the number of culturally-distinct social contacts and friends in home country of SYA students ranges widely from 10 persons to as many as 70%

In short, it can be interpreted that SYA students went through the richer international experience than their XD counterparts did Therefore, not until the second research question, the connection between intercultural sensitivity and international experience would be partially examined while answering this first research question of comparing American and Vietnamese student‟s level of intercultural sensitivity

1.2 Intercultural Sensitivity Scale

As briefly introduced in the aims of the study and thoroughly reviewed in chapter three, the level of intercultural sensitivity of American and Vietnamese high school students is measured and compared by examining five main factors, namely (1) interaction engagement, (2) respect for cultural differences, (3) interaction confidence, (4) interaction enjoyment, and (5) interaction attentiveness

1.2.1 Interaction engagement

The detailed results concerning the first dimension – interaction engagement are

as follows: