A Cross-cultural Communication Experience at a Higher Education Institution in Taiwan
Loretta Ya-Wen Teng
Central Taiwan University of Science and Technology,
Taiwan
Abstract
This paper describes an online
cross-cultural communication experience of a group of Taiwanese college
students. Overall, students reported
having more confidence in communication and gaining cross-cultural
communication skills after participating in this project. The acquisition of cross-cultural
communication skills was positively related to the motivation to succeed in the
project and the sense of community developed within the online collaborative
environment. Other positive correlations
were found between (1) motivation to succeed and the development of a sense of
community; (2) confidence in communication and a development of a sense of
community; (3) confidence in communication and the acquisition of
cross-cultural communication skills. Students’
confidence in communication was found to be positively related to students’
self-perceived English proficiency. Finally,
the acquisition of cross-cultural communication skills was highly related to the
acquisition of interpersonal communication skills through participating in the
final project. Future strategies will
be employed to motivate students in online collaboration and foster a sense of
community within the online environment while taking their language barrier
into consideration.
Keywords: cross cultural communication skills, online collaboration, motivation to succeed, confidence, sense of community, students English proficiency.
Introduction
The trend of globalization with the
increasingly popular internationalized activities signifies the need for
nurturing global citizens with effective intercultural communication
skills. Cohalm (2004) highlighted the
emerging dialogues among nations with the support of world leaders to
facilitate cross-cultural communications.
In advocating the need for internationalized activities, Mason (1994) cautioned
the danger of how the lack of inter-cultural understanding could induce conflicts. Zhao and
Edmondson (2005) advised against the unconsciousness beliefs in
ethnocentrism. They further stated that
effective intercultural communication could only be achieved when the world
devoted to a conscious recognition that no one culture possessed the only valid
belief system.
Intercultural
communication is not only a need, but a requirement for success in today’s
pluralistic society. The cost of being
inadequately equipped with such skill is insurmountably high. Being able to communicate cross-culturally
increases the success in international business, enables productive
interpersonal contacts and decreases mutual misunderstanding. Chen (2003) noted that the interdependence
of our global communities calls for more skillful interactions across nations
and linguistic boundaries. According to
Thomas and Inkson (2004), cultural intelligence is required in bridging the
cultural divide and cultivating cross-cultural relationships. These authors advised that acquiring
knowledge in intercultural interactions, being mindful to cultural difference
as well as learning how to behave and perform in various cultures added to the
repertoire of cross-cultural communication adequacies.
According to Levine and Adelman (1993), cross-cultural
or intercultural communication occurs between people from different
cultures. Williams (2003) defined
cross-cultural communication skills as the ability to effectively interact with
people of different cultures. Hinner
(1998) referred to the same concept as the ability to communicate verbally and
nonverbally with members of different cultures, and in a manner that communicative
messages were not given erroneous interpretations. While some researchers suggested that the familiarity of the
cultures in which the communication took place was a key component of many
existing cross-cultural training programs (Gudykunst, William & Young,
1984), others proposed to include several aspects which make up a culture in
the instruction of intercultural competence (Hinner, 1998). Some examples of these cultural aspects were
philosophies, traditions, social structure, language, and food. Williams (2003) provided indicators of the
acquisition of cross-cultural communication skills. These indicators include
flexibility (open-mindedness), cultural empathy, and personal strength (stability). Other cross-cultural communication skills
include being sensitive to cultural differences (Hansen & Fox, 1995), and
building intercultural understanding (Ewert, 2000). Heuberger and Gerber (1999) proposed that understanding the
systems and characteristics of a culture, recognizing that cultures can be
reflected in individuals, families, communities, and identifying systemic
biases were important in fostering the competency in cross-cultural
communication. Similarly, Barrera and
Corso (2002) pointed out that respect and reciprocity symbolized skilled
cross-cultural dialogues. According to
these researchers, respect referred to an awareness and acknowledgement of
boundaries between people. Reciprocal
interactions allowed an equal opportunity to contribute and make choices. When examining the cultural context of
consultation, Rogers (2000) indicated that understanding one’s own and others’
cultures was the most emphasized cross-cultural competency.
It is inevitable to note the role of technology in human communication when we discuss interculturalism. The world has shrunk tremendously since its launching the era of information technology. Through interactive technological tools such as the internet and e-mail, global communication is not a dream anymore. The entire world was described by Mason (1994) as our neighbor in the global economy. It is noticeable that one needs to possess qualifications such as the ability to work in other languages and cultures in order to become more employable (Mason, 1994). Oblinger (2004) noted that our students, the Net Generation, born in and after 1982, had urged educators to modify our traditional teaching strategies to meet their needs. She also said that higher education needed to prepare students with competencies in developing a deep understanding of the global communities and technical worlds. In lieu of traditional teaching and learning, the shift of educational paradigm to the utilization of technology has influenced all levels of education. Many of these educational novelties have centered on integrating technology to more collaborative or cooperative based curricula. Researchers from various fields have investigated how computer-mediated communication tools (CMS) have influenced the teaching processes and learner outcomes. Lim (2004) recommended strategies for engaging learners in online learning environments. Nicol and colleagues (2003) evaluated the social arena of online learning. Wallace (2003) and Chen (2003) studied the role of instructors in fostering online learning communities. Meyer (2003), in reviewing studies of the World Wide Web’s impact on learning, pointed out that today’s college students had greater abilities in online learning. In the 21st century, higher education has to answer the demands from the world of work and prepare college graduates for employability by training them to collaborate. Felder (2001) argued that students who learned through interactive technologies had a tendency to collaborate better than those who did not. Likewise, Chen (2003) said that collaboration is necessary for the life of the century, and creating Networked Learning Communities (NLC) is one way to achieve this goal.
The Cross-cultural Project
The spring 2005
“Collaboration across Borders” project between Central Taiwan University of Sciences
and Technology in Taiwan and Fresno City College in California, United States,
stemmed from the belief that if students were granted the opportunity to engage
in cross-cultural learning activities, they would be better prepared to
communicate and collaborate as global citizens. The Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC,
2004) recorded the fact that that there had been an expansion of cross-border
higher education initiatives in recent years.
In this decade, the distribution of cross-border higher education
courses through global computer network has been a fast growing phenomenon. Several studies explored how effective cross-border
projects could be formed. In examining
the value of online forums for group collaboration, Anderson and Kanuka (1997)
discovered that online activities enhanced the participants’ knowledge of
designated learning areas. Because of
this finding, these researchers recommended the use of online activities to
promote networking opportunities.
Similarly, in reviewing online collaborative behaviors, Kim and Bonk
(2002) concluded that computer conferencing induced deeper critical thinking.
Through this collaborative
project, the Taiwanese students’ cross-cultural experience is described in the
areas of:
1.
how the intercultural collaboration impacted students’ understanding
in conducting cross-cultural communication;
2.
how the development of an online learning community affected
students’ confidence level in
communication;
3.
how the intercultural collaboration impacted students’ motivation to
succeed in this project and,
4.
how students related themselves to the collaborative project.
The main focus of this study
was to investigate the relationships among students’ motivation to succeed in
this project, their confidence level in communication, the acquisition of
cross-cultural communication awareness and skills, as well as the development
of an online learning community. Other
areas explored included students’ online learning behaviors, collaborative
experience, the relationships among the outcomes of the final project, and the
acquisition of cross-cultural communication skills.
The Participants
The Speech and Communication
course, in which the project was embedded, was a year long course with a
two-dimensional focus on public speaking and communication. This course is required for the fifth-year
students in the five-year program division of the Applied Foreign Language
department at Central Taiwan University of Science and Technology. Students enrolled in the five-year
specialized programs after completing their junior high school education. During the initial offering of this course
in fall 2004, students were informed of the cross-cultural infusion in the
second semester of the course. There
were 46 students who participated in this project. Besides the 38 students who had successfully completed the public
speaking component in fall 2004, six new members joined this class in spring
2005. The 6 new members had successfully
completed the first semester of this course taught by another instructor in fall
2004. Because of the lack of
prerequisite enforcement of this institution, two students who failed the first
component were able to register for the second-semester. The Taiwanese participants had a high level
of homogeneity. Out of the 46 students,
14 were male and 32 were female. Most
of them were less than 22 years old, first-time college students, majoring in
English, and attending college full-time.
They also had taken courses as a cohort since their first year of
college. This course, speech and
communication, was a year-long course instructed in English. The students were required to communicate
and discuss in English both online and during their class time.
The Collaborative Method
The Internet Classroom
Assistant (ICA), provided by Nicenet, a voluntary, non-profit organization
based in the United States, offers free services to the internet
community. ICA features conferencing,
document sharing and private messaging for virtual communication. With the initial log-in information provided
by the instructors, the students registered to ICA to create their own
usernames and passwords. The students
were asked to join online discussions in various topic areas and collaborated in
completing a group project. In addition
to ICA, a joint web site was available to describe the details of the
cross-cultural collaboration, provide instructions on internet conferencing, lecture
notes, student progress reports and host photographs. The web site was used to reinforce the concepts introduced in
class. The progress reports were used
to keep the Taiwanese students updated with their performances. Throughout the semester, e-mail was adopted
as the major communication method between the instructors for discussions in
project management.
First, there were five
asynchronous discussions throughout the semester besides the first introductory
conferencing. The discussion topics
were: family communication, language,
non-verbal communication, dealing with conflicts and stereotypes. Students were asked to post inquiries and
respond to topic-related issues. At the
same time, students were required to survey their counterparts from the other country
for the information of cultural influences on communication. Secondly, students from each country were
evenly divided into five groups to complete a project focused on one of the
discussion topics. The group project
was to be completed based on the information gathered from lectures, group research,
online discussions, and the results from interviewing their foreign
counterparts online. These groups, five
from Taiwan and five from the U.S., were given the freedom to work on topics of
their interest, with one restriction that they had to be related to the field
of human communication.
After the students posted a
brief introductory message, the weekly discussions on the selected topics began
from the second week. Computer hours
were reserved for these activities during the class time but students could
continue with the discussions outside of the class. The guiding postings, or prompts from the instructors and
supplemental reading under the topics provided a general direction for the
discussions. This information was
simultaneously available in both the ICA and the joint web site.
The instructors adopted
different facilitative styles in co-supervising the online forums. The Taiwanese instructor gave specific
guidelines to structure the students’ online activities. For example, each student was asked to post
at least one message as a response to their textbook reading or a reaction to
contents covered in class. At the same
time, they were required to respond to other members’ postings. On the other hand, the U.S. instructor gave
the students latitude to explore the discussion forums with fewer structures, expecting
them to fulfill the course and project requirements as discussed in the
face-to-face sessions.
Data Collection
The data collection and
analysis of this project is a mixture of instructor observations, student
feedback, and surveys. While mid-term
and final surveys were given to both sides of the students, the instructors
constantly assessed students’ reactions to the online collaboration for
possible modifications during the project.
As a result of these on-going assessments, a few adjustments were made. Doing so was to allow what Chen (2003)
recommended to have flexibility with respect to learning content and
objectives. Five open-ended questions
were given to the Taiwanese group during the fourth week of the semester to
investigate their expectations for the project and difficulties encountered in the
process of project participation. The
students were surveyed again during the ninth week (mid-term) and at the end of
the semester. The mid-term survey
consisted of 48 Likert-scaled questions and 2 open-ended questions. A higher rating indicated a higher level of
agreement to a question. These
questions were designed to investigate students’:
1.
self-perception in their English proficiency,
2.
experience in navigating ICA, the management system for the online
discussions,
3.
confidence in communication through project participation,
4.
sense of community developed with students and the instructors,
5.
motivation for participating in the project, and
6.
acquisition of cross-cultural communication skills
The final survey, a
combination of 7 dichotomous, 14 Likert-scaled, and one open-ended question,
was administered at the end of the semester to determine the outcomes of the
final group project and how they related to several phenomena that had been
investigated previously during the mid-term period. The goal of the final group project was to investigate students’
team-work experience, and the acquisition of communication skills. The final survey was also used to examine the
frequencies of students’ online activities and their comfort level in sharing
opinions in an online setting as compared to that in a regular classroom.
Findings
Phase I
Students in Taiwan were
asked to submit a written feedback about their early experience in this project
during the fourth week of the semester.
They provided feedback to the following questions:
1.
What were your hopes for this project before participating?
2.
What do you like about this project so far?
3.
What has been difficult for you in participating in this project?
4.
What have you learned from this project in interpersonal communication?
Out of the 46 students, 43
of them completed the survey anonymously.
One of the students was a frequent absentee and had not participated in
most of the class activities. This
in-class assessment presented an overview of how the Taiwanese students related
themselves to this project. When asked
about their anticipation in collaborating with the U.S. students, ten students
expressed their desire to practice their English communication skills, six of
them said they wanted to make new friends, nine of them hoped to learn
communication skills, which included verbal and nonverbal communications, and
communicating with those from other cultures.
There were 13 of them who said that they had hoped to engage in cultural
exchanges through this project. Two
students pointed out that they had hoped to share study materials and learn
together, which indicated their desire for group work. There were four of them who indicated that
they had wanted to learn, but were not specific about their learning objectives. Two of them had hoped for this project to be
fun and interesting. The following
unedited statement showed how some students reacted to this cross-cultural
experience.
I hope that this project is interesting and
have fun, not serious.
One of the students was
apprehensive about communicating cross-culturally, but was relieved after
finding out that the communication was restricted to an online setting. The other one hoped that there had been more
discussions in class before participating in online forums.
With regards to the second
question, a majority of the students were pleased with the opportunity to
communicate with people of different cultures.
The theme of “friendship” emerged when they described their excitement
about being able to get to know people from the other side of the world. The following original statement showed a
student’s excitement in discovering a shared a hobby with someone in the
U.S.
I can visit some friends, and share some things about my life. I also met a special girl who like to read
comics.
Their desire for a learning
community was again demonstrated through statements like “I can exchange ideas
and share feelings,” “I can learn with students from the U.S.,” “I like more
discussions; I don’t want to do things alone.” Some of them were eager to apply
the skills acquired from class for their online conversations; others enjoyed
becoming more confident in communicating and delivering speeches as a result of
participating in this project.
When asked about the
difficulty in project participation, two barriers surfaced. One was the lack of time. Students were preoccupied with their
immediate goal to pass a college matriculation exam. According to eight of the students, the stress in studying for
the exam left them little time to handle any school work. The other barrier was their anxiety in their
command of English. Five of the
students stated that they were nervous about not having enough vocabulary,
having problem understanding the postings from the U.S. students, or composing
messages online. Some of their anxiety
with the English language was associated with their lack of understanding of
the American cultural connotations.
When a student described this situation, the word “clearly” was
underlined to emphasize this frustration:
I can’t understand their ideas, mind, and point very clearly.
Only one student mentioned
the problem of not having computer access.
Two other students perceived the time difference between the two
countries problematic when attempting to conduct effective group discussions.
Question four was asked to
identify students’ attitude toward this project after their first introductory
posting. Initially, the students’ reactions
to their group experience were positive.
Some original statements describing this phenomenon are listed below:
I know more about my classmates and his or her idea in another part.
Some of them will share their opinion for me. And I feel very exciting when I get the
messages from them.
Other descriptions which
indicated students’ interest in collaborative work include, “happy to be in the
group,” “team work,” and “sharing opinions and thoughts.” Some of them thought it was not as difficult
as they had speculated to communicate with those from other cultures. Most of them were delighted about sharing
ideas with their U.S. counterparts. One
student said, “getting to know a new guy, to communicate with a stranger is a
great feeling.” Another student
described the U.S. students as “passionate and excited” while some others
enjoyed learning about communication.
Interestingly, some of them observed that the U.S. students’ did not pay
attention to using proper English grammar when communicating online. Aside from these, one of the most insightful
sharing was when some students reflectively used this experience as an
opportunity to analyze their native culture.
Phase II
The Taiwanese students’
answers to the mid-term questionnaire gave an overview of the following major
constructs, which were defined by the following respective sets of questions:
1.
Motivation to succeed demonstrated by students’ attitude in project
participation
a.
I read the instructions before posting on the discussion board.
b.
I read the guiding messages from the instructors before posting for
discussions.
c.
I do not know what the guiding messages are.
d.
I read the messages from my fellow students before posting for
discussions.
e.
I try to complete the assigned reading prior to joining the discussions.
2.
Possible increase of confidence in communication through project
participation
a.
I feel more comfortable in sharing my opinions in this class than in
others.
b.
I have become more confident in communicating in English.
c.
I have become more confident in communicating with people from other
cultures.
3.
The development of a sense of community
a.
I feel welcomed by the students from the U.S.
b.
I feel that the students in the U.S. are interested in my opinions.
c.
I feel that the students in the U.S. are interested in learning about my
culture.
d.
I feel supported by my fellow students in the discussions.
e.
I feel supported by my instructors in the discussions.
4.
Cross-cultural communication awareness and skills
a.
The online discussions have helped me understand other cultures better.
b.
The online discussions have helped me understand my own culture better in
ways that I have never thought of before.
c.
I am interested in learning about other cultures through the discussions.
d.
I have learned about communicating with others from different cultures
through this project.
Based on previous research
findings, the cross-cultural communication skills that we chose to integrate in
the project activities include verbal and non-verbal skills, understanding
messages from others of different cultures, families, traditions, languages,
sensitivity to cultural differences, empathy and understanding of own
cultures.
Approximately 42% of the
students read the instructions in project participation before each
discussion. Particularly, only half of
the class (51%) read the instructors’ guiding messages and completed their
assigned reading before starting their own posting, even though more than half
of the class (58%) knew what the guiding messages were. A high percentage of the class (78%)
actually read other students’ messages prior to posting their own. However, only 25% said they enjoyed reading
the discussions.
There
were only a small number of students who felt that they were more comfortable
sharing opinions in this class than in others.
About 27% of them agreed to this question while 42% were indifferent and
31 % disagreed. However, more students
(63.2%) felt more comfortable doing so compared to last semester than those
(36.4%) who did not perceive any differences in their comfort level. At the same time, there were more students who
gained confidence in communicating in English than the number of those who did
not or remained neutral in responding to the question. Sixty-five percent reported having more
confidence, 29 percent did not reveal their opinion, and only 7% felt their
confidence level did not increase in communicating in English. Figure 1 shows how the students rated their
confidence level in English communication.
With regards to students’
confidence level in cross-cultural communication, only a small number (6.7%)
felt that this project had not assisted in improving their confidence in
cross-cultural communication. Fifty
three percent indicated that they had more confidence and 40% of them remained indifferent. It seems that Taiwanese students were not
sure if their U.S. counterparts were interested in their opinions. Only 29 percent of them sensed the interest
from the students in the U.S., and 56% of them were not certain about it. However, more students (59%) agreed that
their U.S. partners were interested in learning about the Taiwanese culture,
compared to a much smaller number (14%) who disagreed. Figure 2 presents this phenomenon.
The students who were unsure
if they were supported by their instructor and other students counted for 44%
and 42% respectively. The difference in
the frequencies between feeling supported and unsupported by other students was
not big. Figure 3 demonstrates
students’ perceptions on receiving the support from other students in this
project.
Almost 69% of the students
perceived gaining cross-cultural communication skills by participating in this
project. Sixty two percent of them
reported that they had developed a better understanding in other cultures while
55% said they had learned more about their own cultures from this experience. Figure 4 shows the survey result of students’
perception on gaining cross-cultural communication skills.
The Pearson correlation was performed to
determine the inter-correlation among the four constructs of (1) students
motivation to succeed in this project, (2) the increase of confidence level in
communication through this experience, (3) the development of a learning
community, and (4) the acquisition of cross-cultural communication skills. These four constructs were evaluated by
summating the scores of the respective sets of questions described
previously. The analysis suggested
statistically significant correlations between (a) students’ motivation to
succeed in this project and the acquisition of cross-cultural communication
skills, r (33) = .517, p < .001. The
effect size is large according to Cohen (1988); (b) the development of a sense
of community and the acquisition of cross-cultural communication skills, r (33)
= .630, p < .001. The effect size is
large according to Cohen (1988); (c) the acquisition of cross-cultural
communication skills and their increase of confidence level in communication
through this experience, r (33) = .427, p < .005. According to Cohen (1988), the effect size is medium-large; (d) a
sense of community and the motivation to succeed, r (33) = .336, p <
.005. The effect size is medium
according to Cohen (1988); and (e) the confidence in communication and a sense
of community, r (33) = .357, p < .005.
The effect size is medium according to Cohen (1988). Table 1 summarizes these findings.
The positive correlations suggested the
following:
·
The more
motivated students were in project participation, the better they acquired
cross-cultural communication skills and became more cross-culturally aware.
·
The more
students developed a sense of belonging to the learning environment, the more
likely they acquired cross-cultural communication skills and gained
cross-cultural awareness.
·
The more
confident students became in communication through this project, the more
likely they acquired cross-cultural communication skills.
·
The more
students felt belong to this online learning community, the more likely they were
motivated to succeed in this project.
·
The more
students felt belong to this learning community, the more confident they became
in communicating with others.
Table 1
Inter-correlations of Cross-cultural
communication skills, motivation to succeed, confidence in communication, and
sense of community
_________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|||||
|
_________________________________________________________________________
|
1. Cross-cultural communication skills |
--- |
|
|
|
|
2. Motivation to succeed in project |
.517** |
--- |
|
|
|
3. Confidence in communication |
.427* |
.102 |
--- |
|
|
4. Sense of community |
.630** |
.336* |
.357* |
--- |
_________________________________________________________________________
Note. Listwise N = 35
** p < .01, two tailed.
* p < .05, two tailed.
In trying to understand how students’ self-perceived
English proficiency was related to their acquisition of cross-cultural
communication skills and confidence in communicating with others, another
correlation statistical analysis was performed. There was a significant positive correlation between students’
self-perception about their competency in English with their confidence in
communication, r (40) = .542, p < .01.
The effect size is large, according to Cohen (1988). No statistical significance was found
between students’ self-perceived English proficiency with their acquisition of
cross-cultural communication skills. It
showed that the better the students considered their ability to read, write and
speak in English, the more confident they were in communicating with
others. However, their self-perception
about their English language skills was not related to their learning to
communicate cross-culturally. Figure 5
shows how Taiwanese students rated their overall ability in English. The variable “overall ability in English”
was summated from students’ ratings on their self-perception in English
reading, writing and speaking abilities.
Higher means indicated more positive responses to the survey
questions. Only a small number of the students
thought their ability in English communication was good or excellent, which was
represented by a rating scale of 4 or 5 as responses to the original
questions. A number of the students
showed no opinions to these questions.
The correlations among students’ self-perceived
English proficiency, their cross-cultural communication skills and their
confidence in communication are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2
Inter-correlations of students’
self-perceived English ability, cross-cultural communication skills, and
confidence in communication
|
Measure |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|||
|
1. English ability |
--- |
|
|
|
||
|
2. Confidence in communication |
.542** |
--- |
|
|
||
|
3. Cross-cultural communication skills |
.166 |
.230 |
--- |
|
||
Note. Listwise N = 42.
**p < .01, two tailed.
Phase III
Through the final
survey, 74.5% of the students agreed that this experience helped them organize
their thoughts. A majority of them,
represented with a high percentage of 80.9, reported that they had learned to
make group decisions through this experience.
Besides, 80.8% of them indicated that they had learned to deal with
differences among the group members. In
addition, 89.4% of the class agreed that they had learned about how to
communicate with others through the project.
Interestingly, 68% of the group revealed that they felt more comfortable
sharing their opinions online than in a regular classroom.
After performing the Pearson correlations on the outcomes of the
final project, several statistical significances were found. There were positive correlations between the
following concepts: (a) enjoying
working together for the final project and that the group work helped organize
individual thoughts, r (45) = .46, p < .01, with a medium-large effect,
according to Cohen (1988); (b) enjoying working together for the final project
and learning to communicate with others, r (45) = .49, p < .01, with a large
effect size, in accordance with Cohen (1988).
Other outcomes that have high positive correlations were: (c) learning to communicate and that the
group work helped organize one’s own thoughts, r (45) = .59, p < .01; (d)
enjoying working together and learning to make group decisions, r (45) = .57, p
< .01; and finally, between (e) gaining confidence in interpersonal
communication and learning to communicate with others, r (45) = .53, p <
.01. The effect sizes are large,
according to Cohen (1988).
In determining the correlations among the
outcomes of the final group project and the acquisition of cross-cultural
communication skills, motivation to succeed in the project, the confidence in
communication, the development of a sense of community, and students’
self-perceived English proficiency, a statistical significance was found
between the concepts of learning to communicate through the final project and
the acquisition of cross-cultural communication skills, r (45) = .57, p <
.01, the effect size is large, according to Cohen (1988). It seemed that the more the students felt
they were learning to communicate in the final group project, the better they were
in acquiring cross-cultural communication skills. The concept of feeling more comfortable in sharing online than in
class was significantly associated with learning to deal with the differences
among group members through the final project, r (45) = .56, p < .01, with a
large effect size, according to Cohen (1988).
When students were
surveyed on the most memorable experience from this cross-cultural project,
they gave mostly positive responses.
Their statements were coded into three categories: their perceptions about the U.S. students,
the content or skills learned from participating in this project, and the
interactions with their U.S. counterparts.
Those answers with similar contexts were categorized together. Many of them indicated that this project had
challenged their stereotypes about the U.S. cultures and people. For example, the Taiwanese students had
discovered more similarities than differences between the American students and
themselves. They also thought that the
U.S. students were more motivated, participative, and open in sharing their
opinions during the collaboration. From
this cross-cultural collaboration, the students learned about communication
skills through various cultural perspectives.
They also learned about proper etiquettes in conducting online communications
and working in groups. With regards to
interacting with the U.S. students, many of the Taiwanese students felt they
had made friends with them by sharing interests and opinions. However, they regretted for not having all
of the U.S. students’ photographs available on the project web site. The coding chart of the students’
cross-cultural experience is provided in Table 3.
Table 3
Taiwanese students’ perceptions about
the cross-cultural project
|
Item number |
What the students learned |
||
|
The U.S. students |
Content/Skills learned |
Interactions with the U.S.
students |
|
|
1 |
were interesting |
communicating
via the internet |
feeling free in interacting |
|
2 |
were kind/polite |
respecting other’s
opinions |
being able to
share |
|
3 |
were responsive |
American
cultures |
fun |
|
4 |
were
participative |
communication
skills |
asking and
answering questions |
|
5 |
asked good
questions |
being
open-minded |
learning about
each other |
|
6 |
were similar to
the Taiwanese students |
examining their
beliefs |
sharing
interests |
|
7 |
presented
different cultural perspectives |
perceptions from
those of different cultural backgrounds |
making friends |
|
8 |
communicated
well |
learning about their
own culture |
did not like
questions left unattended |
|
9 |
were open-minded |
how to deal with
conflicts |
regretting for
not seeing all of the U.S. students’ pictures posted on the joint website |
|
10 |
worked hard on
the project |
learning to
resolve conflicts with parents |
|
|
11 |
were eager to
learn |
challenging
stereotypes about Americans |
|
|
12 |
were patient |
courtesy in
online communication |
|
|
13 |
were thorough in
providing answers |
comparing
cultures |
|
|
14 |
were
inspirational |
English
expressions/slang |
|
|
15 |
gave lively
discussions |
working together
as a group |
|
|
16 |
wrote informally |
|
|
|
17 |
presented
individualized thoughts |
|
|
|
18 |
stood for what
they believed in |
|
|
|
19 |
were willing to
share |
|
|
|
20 |
motivational |
|
|
Discussion
The fact that only 42% of the students
actually read the instructions for online participation prior to their
discussions indicated that most of them were not clear on what was required for
a successful online collaboration.
Also, only 51% of them spent time to browse the instructors’ prompts as
required before posting, despite the fact that 57.8% of them knew where to
locate these messages. It showed that
they did not fully understand the expectations for the collaboration. One of the false assumptions about online
learning that Lim (2004) cautioned us to guard against was that learners had
the learning strategies. The fact that
these students failed to follow through the participatory requirements suggested
that they did not have the desired attitude for learning. It also showed that collaborations need to
be structured and organized (Felder, 2001).
Assuming that the students would understand the directions well with
announcements in class or e-mail messages afterwards was apparently not
sufficient.
The reason why most of the students did
not enjoy reading the messages on the discussion board might be related to
their language barrier. As Figure 1
shows, only a small number of students rated their English proficiency high
when asked about their self-perception on it.
Other researchers also found language barrier an inevitable disturbance
to a satisfying cross-cultural collaboration (Daniel et al, 1998 & Lebaron
et al, 2000). Having noticed this
problem while the project was in progress, the Taiwanese instructor constantly
provided positive feedback to the students after they had successfully
completed an online task. It was
reinforcing that 65% of the group felt more confident in communicating in
English after participating in this project.
Even though the students did not feel
more comfortable in sharing opinions in this class as they did in other classes,
a number of them felt more comfortable in expressing their thoughts than they
had been in the previous semester.
Their training in English public speaking from the previous semester
might have benefited them in achieving this.
One of the aims of this study was to help
students develop a sense of community.
Two of the indicators of the formation of a learning community in this
study were defined by students’ feeling supported by the instructors and their
fellow students. Particularly, those
who did not feel supported or those who were uncertain about whether or not
they were supported by their fellow students accounted for 58%. As some students pointed out, the physical
distance between the two groups and the time difference had somehow created a
division in stead of unity among them.
Daniel and colleagues (1998) experienced similar challenges which
affected the participants’ motivation in their multinational project. As this problem may be inherent with
asynchronous activities, discussion topics built around students’ interest may
be included besides the task-driven ones.
Increasing student interactions may be achieved by adopting more
structured participatory criteria for both groups. Some researchers suggested building more structures in the design
of online learning tasks to promote online interactions (Nicol et al.,
2003). In this study, the Taiwanese
instructor required more structures for the online interactions than the U.S.
instructor did. The two different facilitative
styles might have created a discrepancy in students’ interactive styles, frequencies
in participation, and outcomes.
There were more students who reacted
positively to the cross-cultural experience than those who did not. Overall, they felt that they had increased cross-cultural
awareness and acquired communication skills.
Since the development of a sense of community was positively related to
the acquisition of cross-cultural communication skills, a modification of the
project design to induce more satisfying interactions can perhaps increase
students’ level of success in learning about cross-cultural communication.
The positive association between
students’ acquisition of cross-cultural communication skills and their learning
about interpersonal communication through the group project concurred with what
was proposed by Osborne and colleagues (1996) that there was a demonstrated
link between interpersonal and cross-cultural communication. Similarly, Goldstein (1998) stressed the
importance of interpersonal skills for cross-cultural interactions.
The final project proved to be a success
in allowing the students to practice interpersonal communication skills as well
as learning to deal with differences among group members. The phenomenon that nearly 70% of students
felt more comfortable in sharing opinions online than in a regular classroom
setting was investigated for possible associations with other phenomena
discussed in this study. However, no
statistical significant relations were found between students’ feeling more
comfortable in expressing online and the variables investigated with the
mid-term and final surveys. Some
possible connections with this phenomenon can be further explored in a
replicated or follow-up study.
Challenges
One of the challenges that affected the
outcomes of this study was the difference in semester schedules. Students in Taiwan did not begin the
semester until the last week of February.
The first class meeting did not occur until the first week of
March. By that time, the students in
the U.S. had already met for over seven weeks into the semester. This had given the U.S. group more time to
become familiarized with the topics for discussions. The Taiwanese group, on the other hand, had to catch up to get
ready for the online collaboration starting right at the beginning of the
semester.
In the first discussion when the students
introduced themselves to one another, there was an obvious excitement and
anticipation for this cross-border collaboration on both sides. The excitement weaned off a little after the
first week when the students from the U.S. suddenly became on-task to interview
their Taiwanese counterparts as the deadline for their final assignment was
approaching. At this stage, the
Taiwanese group was still trying to acquaint themselves to the new course and
the project. Thus, they became
overwhelmed. In completing the final
project, the U.S. students divided themselves into five topic groups for online
discussions. Each group would choose
only one area to work on throughout the semester. On the other hand, the Taiwanese students were anticipated to
participate in the discussions of all five topics. At this point, the instructors realized that there was a
misunderstanding in each other’s intentions about these online forums. The Taiwanese instructor had planned to have
the students participate in all discussions on a weekly basis. The U.S. instructor had envisioned the
students working with their own groups on their topic area throughout the
semester. The lack of unity in structuring the format of the discussion had
created some confusion. The solution to
this problem was to readjust the goals.
First, the due date for the final project was postponed to allow the
U.S. students to participate in all of the discussions. Next, the topic-driven discussions were
organized on a weekly basis. Finally,
the U.S. students were asked to tone down their task-oriented discussions to
re-focus on the relationship building of the learning community.
The life situation of the Taiwanese students
influenced their project experience. This
group of students was focused on the preparation for a college matriculation
exam while this project was in progress.
In Taiwan, graduates of a five-year specialized program compete by
passing an exam to enter the next level of higher education. It was difficult to motivate these students
to study and participate with desirable attitudes while their minds were set on
their immediate goal. Under this circumstance,
they chose to participate minimally. For
example, most of the discussion messages would arrive on the due dates. This last-minute work indicated a lack in
involvement. According to the mid-term
survey, a majority of the Taiwanese students had computers and internet
connections at home. They also shared
that finding computers to use on campus had not been a problem. The less than satisfactory involvement in
this collaboration was clearly a motivational issue, not a problem of lacking
computer access. In spite of this, more
laboratory hours were reserved to allow more class time for collaborative work.
It also seemed that students were unfamiliar
with appropriate online communication etiquettes. For example, students felt frustrated when they did not hear from
other participants immediately. Some of
the Taiwanese students were confused by the U.S. students’ spelling and
grammatical errors in addition to their usage of colloquial terms. A “Netiquette” section was added to the
class web site to provide students with guidance in conducting appropriate online
communication.
One thing to be considered for the future
organizations of this type of projects is how cultural differences between the
students of different countries, between the students and instructors, and
possibly between the instructors may influence the project outcomes. For example, we observed that the Taiwanese
students preferred clear guidance which transpired to step-to-step instructions
on how to participate in the project.
To accommodate this need, the instructors divided each activity into
several units to allow the Taiwanese students to pace along. Compared to the American students, the
Taiwanese group seemed to want more assurance from the instructors on their
class performance and project participation.
It was observed that under the traditional didactic educational system
in Taiwan, an adjustment period was needed before the Taiwanese students could
start to feel comfortable in a more autonomous way of learning. An orientation course which introduces the
Taiwanese students to active learning would be helpful in preparing them for
participating in interactive projects.
Also, because the Taiwanese instructor is familiar, experienced and
identified with the commonly adopted American educational system, it was important
for this instructor to not overlook how the cultural values of the Taiwanese
students’ might have affected students’ behaviors in the participation of cross-cultural
projects.
The interface of ICA was not
intuitive. Not only that the navigation
of discussion was difficult, the function for threaded discussions was not
satisfactorily interactive. The ICA,
short of a function in tracking the posting activities and identifying incoming
messages, made the monitoring of online discussions extremely time
consuming. For a cross-national project
like this to thrive, we need to identify a better interactive communication
tool with technical assistance readily available.
Conclusion
According to the findings from this study, an attention should also be drawn to how students’ motivation level can be improved to increase their level of success in learning cross-cultural communication skills. In this study, motivation referred to primarily reviewing the messages posted by others, following the instructors’ prompts, and finishing the assigned reading prior to joining the discussions. A rubric can be incorporated to induce these desired outcomes. This concept was supported by Lim (2004), who suggested setting guidelines for participation.
Creating synergy is the goal for our next
collaboration. This will require the
instructors to agree on a unity in structuring online activities. Precisely, the contents, participative
guidelines, and schedules of the activities should be coordinated. We also need to challenge some Taiwanese
students’ misperception about these online discussions. Obviously, some of them associated the
discussions with conversational “chat rooms”, which were without an embedded
purpose. According to Lim (2004), establishing
goals for online activities was critical in ensuring effective discussion and satisfactory
learning outcomes. Also, to achieve a
better success in similar projects, a more accommodating institutional policy
for computer laboratory reservations would be helpful in addition to having
technical assistance available for the maintenance of the project.
A separate social colloquium can be
developed to facilitate a stronger sense of community. As Lim (2004) suggested, learners were more
likely to be engaged in the learning process when familiarity was
developed. Incorporating virtual tours
of local scenes and students’ life can also be used to enhance the cultural
exchange, with the availability and accessibility of multimedia tools.
To alleviate Taiwanese students’ anxiety
in communicating in English, we will generate strategies to foster
collaboration (Bannon, 1995). We
believe that improving the development of a learning community can reduce
Taiwanese students’ apprehension in communicating in English. A possible way to facilitate this can be
including forums which feature the cultures of Taiwan. Doing this may enable non-native English
speakers to take advantage of their familiarity with and knowledge of their own
cultures to initiate active discussions with their foreign counterparts. Likely, it may help elevate their confidence
in cross-cultural interactions.
Although the study limits to a small
sample, the lessons learned can perhaps offer insights to other researchers who
wish to conduct similar projects.
Despite the challenges that need to be resolved for future improvements,
the participants from Taiwan expressed a satisfaction in learning
cross-cultural communication skills and contents, which was one of the main
goals of this project. This project
also helped the Taiwanese students connect to their own cultures when they
interacted through culturally driven discussions. A future comparative study focusing on the attitudinal and
motivational aspects of cross-cultural differences would be worthwhile. The results of this study also yield
potential explorations of how interpersonal skills and cross-cultural
communication may influence each other, how the development of a sense of
community may interact with the acquisition of cross-cultural communication,
and what make some students feel more comfortable in sharing online than in a
traditional classroom setting.
Acknowledgement
This study was made possible with the
collaborative effort of P.A. Begley, the project collaborative instructor, and
the participation of her students from the spring 2005 Interpersonal
Communication class at Fresno City College in California, U.S.A.
References
Anderson, T.,
& Kanuka, H. (1997). On-Line Forums: New Platforms for Professional Development and Group
Collaboration. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 3 (3). Retrieved February 10, 2005, from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue3/anderson.html
Association of
Universities and Colleges of Canada.
(2004). Building Canada’s International Influence. Retrieved January 19, 2005, from
http://www.aucc.ca/publications/reports/2004/index_e.html
Bannon, L.J.
(1995). Issues in computer-supported
collaborative learning. In C. O’Malley
(Ed.), Computer supported collaborative
learning (pp.267-281). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Barrera, I., &
Corso, R. M. (2002). Cultural Competency as Skilled Dialogue. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22 (2), 103-114.
Chen, G. M.
(1998). Intercultural communication via
email debate. The Edge, 1 (4). Retrieved
January 25, 2005, from
http://www.interculturalrelations.com/v1i4Fall1998/f98chen.htm
Chen, T. (2003).
Recommendations for creating and maintaining effective networked
learning communities: A review of the
literature. International Journal of Instructional Media, 30(1), 35-44.
Cohalm, W.
(2004). The Global Net: Part II.
Information Today, 21(10),
41-42.
Cohen, J. (1998).
Statistical power and analysis for
the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).
Daniels, M.,
Petre, M., Almstrum, V., Asplund, L., Bjorkman, C., Erickson, C., et al. (1998).
RUNESTONE, an international
student collaboration project.
Paper presented at the Frontiers in the 1998 Education Clearing House
Conference, USA. Retrieved March 10,
2005, from http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie98/
Ewert, D. M. (2000).
Building Intercultural Understanding:
The Passenger in Row 22. Adult Learning, 11 (4), 30-32.
Felder, R. (2001).
Technology-based instruction and cooperative learning. The
Interface (IEEE-Education Society), August (2), 2-3.
Gudykunst, W. B.,
& Kim, Y. Y. (1984). Communicating with Strangers: An Approach to Intercultural Communication. Reading, MA and Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Hanson, J., &
Fox, W. (1995). Communicating Across Cultures. Training
& Development, 49 (1).
Heuberger, B.,
& Gerber, D. (1999). Strength through Cultural Diversity. College
Teaching, 47 (3), 107-114.
Hinner, M. B. (1998).
The Importance of Intercultural Communication in a Globalized
World. Retrieved August 22, 2005, from http://www.bwl.tu-freiberg.de/englisch/forschung/Global.pdf
Kim, K.-J., &
Bonk, C. J. (2002). Cross-cultural comparisons of online collaboration. Journal
of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8
(1). Retrieved February 11,
2005, from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol8/issue1/kimandbonk.html
Lebaron, J.,
Pulkkinen, J., & Scollin, P.
(2000). Promoting cross-border
communication in an international web-based graduate course. Interactive
Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning, 2(2). Retrieve March 9, 2005, from http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/2000/2/01/index.asp
Levine, D. R.,
& Adelman, M. B. (1993). Beyond Language: Cross-cultural Communication. White Plains, NY: Prentice-Hall
Inc.
Lim, C. P. (2004).
Engaging learners in online learning environments. Tech
Trends, 48 (4), 16-23.
Mason, R. (1994).
Distance education across national borders. In M. Thorpe & D. Grugeon (Eds.), Open Learning in the mainstream (pp297-308). Harlow, Essex: Longman Group Limited.
Meyer, K. A. (2003).
The web’s impact on student learning.
T H E Journal, 30 (10), 14-18.
Nicol, D., Minty,
I., & Sinclair, C. (2003). The social dimensions in online
learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 40 (3),
270-280.
Oblinger, D. (2004, March). Higher education and the
workforce: issues for reauthorization. Testimony before the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions, United States Senate.
Osborne G. et al. (1996).
Communication Traditions Homepage. Retrieved July 12, 2005,
from http://www.canberra.edu.au/communication/schcmdtr/commun/units/4013/Homepage.html
Rogers, M. R. (2000).
Examining the Cultural Context of Consultation. School
Psychology Review, 29 (3), 414-419.
Thomas. D. C.
& Inkson, K. (2004). Cultivating your cultural intelligence. Security
Management, August, 31-33.
Wallace, R.
M. (2003). Online learning in higher education: a review of research on interactions among teachers and students. Education,
Communication & Information, 3 (2), 241-280.
Williams, T. (February, 2003). Impact of Study Abroad on
Students’ Intercultural Communication Skills:
Adaptability and Sensitivity. Paper
presented at the 14th Conference Association of Academic Programs in
Latin America and the Caribbean, San Antonio, TX.
Zhao, J., &
Edmondson, N., Conscious recognition of the limitations of human knowledge as
the foundation of effective intercultural communication. Journal
of Intercultural Communication, 8.
Retrieved March 2, 2005, from http://www.immi.se/intercultural/.
About the author:
Loretta
Ya-Wen Teng received her Ph.D. in Human Resources Studies, with an emphasis
in Counseling and Career Development from Colorado State University in the
U.S.A. She has been involved in e-learning and interdisciplinary
teaching as a college counselor, teaching faculty, interdisciplinary program
director and director of student orientation in the U.S. and Taiwan.
She is currently an Assistant Professor at Central Taiwan University
of Science and Technology in Taiwan.
Loretta
Ya-Wen Teng
11,
Po-Tsu Lane, Beitun District, Taichung City 40601, Taiwan
Journal of Intercultural
Communication, ISSN 1404-1634, 2005, issue 10.
Editor: Prof. Jens Allwood
URL: http://www.immi.se/intercultural/.