Module I Paper

Hyejin Yoon

George Mason University

Fall, 2017

EDRS 822, Section 002: Advanced Applications of Qualitative Methods

1
 Positionality and Epistemology Commitment

When it comes to my epistemological positionality, the values that permeated in Korean

society, especially its education system, have been significant influences. In the twentieth

century, Korea experienced political and social upheaval that resulted in the overthrowing of the

monarchy and a period of Japanese colonialism, then the Korean War and the division of South

and North Korea, and finally, an ear of socioeconomic democratization. The time period when I

was educated by the public education system, the late 20th century, was relatively peaceful so

that the nation was able to focus on economic revival. During that time, the positivism was

dominant across Korean society; social phenomena were studied by dint of using concrete and

observable methods of natural sciences. The education structure was rooted in positivism.

Hence, people tried to observe students’ knowledge by creating a national standardized test,

assuming that the results from the test were reliable and objective.

In Korea, students are accustomed to taking multiple-choice tests. This is due to the fact

that students must be well prepared for the single set of multiple-choice tests that they take at the

very end of their final year of high school. It is a high stakes undertaking. Ticking a few wrong

boxes may mean that students start out the next stage of their education disadvantaged. They

will not be admitted to a top-tier university, which means they risk being excluded from the

upper class of Korean society. It is because the names of the schools that they graduated from

will tag along behind them, considered as “reliable and definitive” evidence to show people’s

capabilities. Hence, I had also been trained to select the only one or two correct answers among

five multiple choices over my school years. One of my high school teachers said that my

classmates and I had to be question-solving machines. There was always a right/correct answer.

Teachers made many efforts to transmit knowledge to students so that their students select the

2
one correct answer based on what they have learned. This knowledge was created by formal

authorities and found in texts. In that educational circumstance, I unconsciously absorbed the

modernist philosophy, following instructions and seeking correct answers, believing knowledge

was unbiased.

Prior to coming to the US for my study, I imagined myself in the future doing research

with numerical analysis. I would have liked to make a contribution to a teacher education area

by doing trustworthy studies grounded in reliable data. I assumed that only data generated

through quantitative methods were sufficiently objective and concrete that we could make

generalized findings. Also, the fact that people had wonderings about the credibility of

qualitative approaches led me to prefer a quantitate approach over qualitative one, since I was

concerned for the inequity in funding between them (Morse, 2006). However, the class 810,

Problem and Methods in Education Research, introduced qualitative methodologies as an

effective approach to study educational problems: quantitative data gives us a large general

surface picture, but qualitative narrative provides one that is more in depth and maybe richer in

meaning. Like what Lather (2006) said “The traditional criteria of evidence, interpretation and

theorizing that are brought to bear in assessing credible empirical work are made more

accountable to ‘the demand for complexity’ (McCall, 2005, p. 1786) via exploration of the

ambiguity, fragmentation, undecidabilities, fluidities, hyperrealities and incoherencies of a world

in process” (p. 789), I realized that it is not enough to understand the complexities of the status

quo only by approaching it in a quantitative manner. While through the class EDRS 812,

studying about qualitative methodologies, as new ways of knowing for me, I begin to have

interests on lifting up the voice of people that have not been heard rather than advancing

knowledge or testing theories. Through “contextual evidence” (Morse, 2006, p. 398), I expect

3
that I would be able to hear the tone of people’s voices and feel the emotion of their experience

that I would never get in all the rich details from using only quantitative research.

Reasons for Qualitative Research

“A teacher affects eternity; he can never tell where his influence stops”. The American

historian, Henry Adams, criticized 19th century educational theory and practice in his book, The

Education of Henry Adams. When I found this quotation, I could not help but agree. This

quotation spoke to me and my experience. In my life, I experienced two exactly opposite types

of teachers. Both experiences had a deep influence on me. My first-grade teacher was fabulous:

she was very nice to young students. One day, one of my classmates threw up during a class;

the teacher cleaned it calmly and soothed the girl who must have been embarrassed. From that

time, I started to say “My dream is being a teacher” to everyone. However, at eleven years of

age, I changed my dream to “being anyone except a teacher”, because I was disappointed at my

fifth grade’s teacher.

One beautiful day in 5th grade art class I was trying hard to draw a great work, but feeling

all fingers and thumbs. The teacher wandering the classroom stood beside me and stared, then

whispered, “You are hopeless.” Her hurtful words stayed with me for a long time, stunting my

creativity. This teacher’s insensitive remark led me to assume a hostile attitude toward all

teachers, resulting in a poor rapport between myself and teachers in my early school life.

However, during my process of self-discovery at university, I decided not to let one teacher’s

opinion shape my understanding of myself.

Because of the teachers, I became curious about what made one so “good” and

another one so “bad”. How can we help prospective teachers develop their professional life and

4
teaching style to be a ‘good’ teacher? The reason why I want to dedicate my life to develop

teachers’ education is that I want to give a priceless present‒a ‘good’ teacher‒to young students

and also to discover and offer pathways to beginning teachers so that they can become ‘good’

and perhaps ‘great’ teachers.

When I took EDUC 850 The Study of Teaching, I had wonderful opportunities to

reflect on what quality teaching is. Fenstermacher and Richardson (2005) analyzed the concept

of quality teaching. Their analysis proposed “any determination of quality in teaching must

account for both worthiness of the activity (good teaching) as well as the realization of intended

outcomes (successful teaching)” (p. 186). To make “good teaching” connected to “successful

teaching”, I believe that teachers, especially language teachers who will be future participants

for my research, should develop and practice their intercultural competence (IC). It is because

teachers who have ‘open-minded’ perspectives toward diverse cultures are prone to be open to

change (Dooley et al., 2006). In other words, they are willing to be flexible thinkers in

adjusting and modifying their teaching curriculum and methods, because they are respectful of

individuals from other cultures. How can we measure the IC development process? There are

various measuring instruments which have been used for empirical studies such as the

Intercultural Behavioral Assessment Indices (Ruben, 1976), the Multicultural Personality

Questionnaire (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2000), and the Intercultural Development

Inventory (Hammer, Bennett, & Wiseman, 2003). However, those instruments have limitations

on assessing the dynamic and internal attributes of the IC development process. Therefore, I

would like to explore Korean EL teachers’ IC development through listening to their

experiences and assumptions.

5
 Justification of Research Inquiry

The world’s regions and countries have close ties with each other in most areas of

human activity such as politics, economics, society, culture, and education (Popkewitz et al.,

2009; Satyanath, 2006; Suarez-Orozco et al., 2004). To successfully cooperate and communicate

with one another, language is considered essential, because it plays a crucial role for people to

exchange their perspectives, convictions and cultures (Seelye, 1993). As a global language,

English is no longer only for people who are native speakers, rather it is an international

language used for communication between people from various languages and cultures (Crystal,

1997; McArthur, 2003; Pennycook, 1994; Tam, 2004). However, one of the serious obstacles to

more successful use of English for non-native speakers is a lack of adequately perceiving

communication partners’ cultures, which can cause misunderstandings and conflicts. Therefore,

language teachers should encourage students to become active members of the international

community, and to do that it is necessary to integrate language and culture.

Globalization creates many challenges for teacher education, including the need for

training pre- and in-service language teachers to have intercultural competence (IC). To fulfill

new tasks in English education, the qualities of foreign language teaching professionals need to

be refreshed and refocused. Zhao (2010) argued that a new generation of teachers is required

which means that teachers should be “… able to act as global citizens, understand the global

system, and deliver a globally oriented education” (p.429). Also, Levy and Fox (2015) contend

that on top of content knowledge, teachers should show their expertise in culturally pertinent

pedagogical skills and have a language proficiency, understanding linguistic diversity and

theories of second language acquisition. That is, English teachers should comprehend the nature

of international language so that they can impart IC to students. Moreover, Kramsch (2004)

6
defined a language teacher as a ‘trans-cultural go-between’ who can lead more globally oriented

language education. In a similar meaning, language teachers are ‘intercultural mediators’ who

acquired knowledge of how to interact with people from other cultures (Byram, 1997).

As a result, foreign language professionals need to have pertinent knowledge, skills, and

attitudes (Bennet, 2009) on cultures so as to carry out the role of ‘trans-cultural go-betweens’ and

‘intercultural mediators’. Teacher education organizations should train pre- and in-service

language teachers to be equipped with high sensitivity on cultural disparities and to be competent

in communication with heterogeneous people (Byram & Fleming, 1998; Sercu, 2006). As

‘intercultural mediators’, language teachers have a responsibility to teach culture in class. By

virtue of culture education, students can experience “penetration that occurs between individuals

at the interpersonal level as people from different backgrounds come together to collaborate in

the pursuit of a common goal” (Cushner, 2015, p. 204). The trend of teaching culture in

language classes is reflected in the curriculum of English language teaching in Korea. In the

2009 revised the National Curriculum, English was defined as an ‘international language’ and a

part of a toolkit enabling effective communication among people with different cultural

backgrounds and languages. The modified English language education curriculum is meaningful

in that it highlights the necessity of cultural education in developing communication strategies,

which is distinguished from traditional aspects of education in Korea. Thus, as Korean education

reforms are implemented, it will be important to assess how the English language teachers in

Korea perceive and apply IC in their teaching practices.

Literature Review

In the literature review section, I introduced the most commonly used definition of IC in

order to prevent the confusion that spring from the various tries to define IC. Next, I presented

7
theories, dimension of culture learning, process and developmental models of IC, and IC in

language classrooms which I will employ in the process of exploring the participants’

comprehensions of IC. I also examined other studies carried out in other countries, European

countries, the USA, the UK, France, and China regarding language teachers’ knowledge,

attitudes and skills of IC.

Conceptualization of IC

The word ‘intercultural’ is combination of ‘inter’ and ‘cultural’. Due to the prefix ‘inter’

indicating ‘between’, the term ‘intercultural’ emphasizes relationships and interactions between

individuals of different cultures (Hill 2006; Pusch 2004). Believing that intercultural

competence was essential for people to acquire and promote to solve conflict sprang from

cultural disparities, over the last 30 years, many scholars used and defined the term intercultural

competence, but they could not reach a consensus on a single definition (Deardorff, 2006).

Lustig and Koester (2006) explain that intercultural competence requires knowledge, motivation,

skills in communication and germane behaviors. According to Byram (1997), intercultural

competence is comprised of five components, attitudes, knowledge, skills of interpreting and

relating, skills of discovery and interaction and critical awareness. However, in terms of the

commonalities between various definitions, a majority of theorists recognize that intercultural

competence is related to four dimensions, knowledge, attitudes, skills and behaviors (Perry et al.,

2011).

Dimension of Culture Learning

Paige (2005) introduced five dimensions of culture learning: knowing the self as a

cultural being, knowing culture per se, knowing culture specifically, and knowing culture

generally, and knowing how to use communication strategies in intercultural settings. The

8
learning content is the self as a cultural being; learners will be aware of how the cultures they

were born and raised contributes to their individual identities. Cultural self-awareness enables

learners to understand cultural influences and to compare and contrast between cultures as the

foundation of intercultural competence. To be effective cultural learners, they should know what

culture is. Paige’s (2005) definition is “Culture refers to values, beliefs, attitudes, preferences,

customs, learning styles, communication styles, history/historical interpretations,

achievements/accomplishments, technology, the arts, literature, etc.—the sum total of what a

particular group of people has created together, share, and transmit” (Paige, 2006, p. 43).

Another learning content is the specific elements of the host culture. Culture-specific learning

enables learners to be more proficient in specific cultural settings. In terms of cultural-general

learning, learners experience cultural commonalities and disparities. In the learning process,

individuals experience phenomena such as intercultural adjustment, adaptation, culture shock,

acculturation, and assimilation. Lastly, students learn about learning; they acquire strategies that

they can use in intercultural communicative situations. These five dimensions of culture learning

is a theoretical framework which serves as guidance for teaching and learning intercultural

competence in classrooms.

Process and Developmental Models of IC

While Paige (2005) presented the content of cultural learning, M. Bennett (1993)

conceptualized a developmental model of intercultural competence. The Developmental Model

of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) is used as a framework so as to understand cognitive

development, not attitudes and behavior, that learners come to experience in intercultural

situations. The assumption underlying the model of DMIS is that as the experiences of cultural

disparities become more sophisticated, one’s intercultural competence increases. In the DMIS

9
model, there are total six stages along the continuum of intercultural sensitivity. The first three

stages, denial, defense, and minimization, are ethnocentric. People who are dominated by

ethnocentrism consider their own cultures as a center, so they tend to interpret phenomena based

on their own cultures. The rest three stages, acceptance, adaptation, and integration, are

ethnorelative. People who are oriented to ethnorelativism are inclined to understand their own

culture as it relates to other cultures and their behaviors are context-bound.

Figure1. The Development Model of Intercultural Sensitivity. Adapted from Towards ethnorelativism: A
developmental model of intercultural sensitivity, by M. J. Bennett, (1993).

IC in Language Classrooms

Due to the applicability of DMIS’s core principles to not only cultural learning but also

language learning, the model can be beneficial for language teachers. When we see language

learning as a communication endeavor and as a humanistic enterprise, the development of an

intercultural mind from cultural learning of DMIS resonates with communicative proficiency-

related theories of language learning (Bennett et al., 2003). The model posits that in cultural

learning, people explore cultural self-awareness, and relate their first languages to a

second/foreign language. Moreover, the model focuses on how learners approach cultural

similarity and difference, centering cultural difference in the development of intercultural

10
awareness. The importance of similarity and difference exists in the language learning domain

as well.

The DMIS provides a guide for language teachers to match language proficiency levels to

developmental levels of intercultural sensitivity by collapsing the six stages of DMIS into three

stages; denial and defense into stage I, novice; minimization and acceptance into stage II,

intermediate; adaptation and integration into stage III, advanced. By dint of assessing the

learners’ stages of language and cultural learning, the teachers can adjust the level of cultural

complexity in curriculum and prepare relevant teaching and learning materials.

Competence Stage I Stage II Stage III

Stage Novice Intermediate Advanced
Novice

Language Level

College Intermediate
Language
Proficiency Language Level
Level
Advanced

Language Level

Developmental
Level of
Intercultural Denial/Defense Minimization/Acceptance Adaptation/Integration
Sensitivity
Ethnocentric Stages Ethnorelative Stages
Experience of Differences

Figure 2. Development of Intercultural sensitivity. Reprinted from Culture as the core, by Bennett, M. J.,
Bennett, M. J., & Allen, W. (2003).

Investigation into IC of Language Teachers

In European countries

11
 Sercu (2006) investigated foreign language (FL) teachers’ beliefs on the cultural aspect of

their FL teaching practices and the teaching of intercultural competence. The research began

with the perception that there was a precondition to transform teachers’ convictions on IC and

alter their teaching practice, and the research began by diagnosing what teachers knew about IC,

how they taught IC and how they reacted to IC in their present circumstances. The researcher

collected data from 424 teachers from 7 countries. The questionnaire contained questions

regarding participants’ convictions on IC and language and cultural teaching practices. Thanks to

Sercu’s (2006) efforts, people could perceive FL teachers’ self-concepts and IC teaching

practices and the relationships between them. Sercu (2006) examined whether FL teachers’

professional profiles were meeting the formal standards generated in the theoretical literature

regarding the ‘foreign language and intercultural competency teacher’. According to the

findings, FL teachers’ knowledge, skills, and attitude were still insufficient to satisfy the

standard.

In the USA, UK and France

Generally, integrating cultural elements into language learning and teaching is strongly

advocated in the theoretical and applied linguistic literature and in frameworks such as the

Council of Europe’s Common European framework of reference for languages. However,

Young and Sachdev (2010) noticed that there was little empirical research conducted with regard

to the extent to whether or how such an approach was operationalized. Hence the authors

investigated the beliefs and practice of in-service teachers in the USA, UK and France based on

the model of IC, Byram’s language-pedagogical model of IC. They implemented mix method

techniques such as diaries, focus groups and questionnaire so as to collect data. Given the

findings, an apparent disparity between experienced teachers’ beliefs and attitudes on IC, and

12
their classroom performance appeared to exist. That is, most participants reported their general

consensus about teaching cultures in schools and supported the idea that ‘good’ teacher and

learners are likely to reveal high intercultural competence. However, the participants proposed

that the problem was aggravated by a lack of support in testing, in textbooks, and in institutional

syllabi for ‘cultural learning’ and interculturality.

In China

In response to the current broad emphasis of globalization and internationalization, IC

development was emphasized for Chinese English teachers. Tian (2013) paid attention to

Chinese teachers of English in China and their intercultural competence, posing questions about

Chinese English teachers’ perception of IC in their teaching, the way they apply dimensions of

IC in their classrooms, and the connection between their beliefs on IC and their choices in

teaching culture. Tian collected data by using a mixed method. A total of 96 Chinese teachers of

English, and among them, a sample of 7-11 teachers was selected for class observations and one-

on-one interviews. The researcher found that the participants were inclined to focus on

developing students’ language skills based on textbook content; they presented a reluctant

attitude concerning the ambiguity of intercultural teaching. They also had a lack of interest in

guiding students to explore their cultural identity and cultural self-knowledge. In terms of

intercultural topics and activities that participants dealt with in classrooms, these were not a main

focus in most participating teachers’ classes, and the participants prepared extended factual

knowledge drawn from textbooks regarding culture, especially concerning English speaking

countries. The teachers acted as the knowledge provider in classrooms, so the classroom

interactions occurred to deliver the knowledge. Finally, Tian (2013) observed that Chinese

philosophy, institutional context, and personal background contributed to teachers’ beliefs and

13
practices with respect to IC. The lack of cultural knowledge and emphasis on teaching-to-the-

test, and curriculum requirements intervened in implementing the teachers’ beliefs.

Methodology

Research Questions

I will collect data by implementing qualitative research methodologies, interviews,

observations and examining the participants’ syllabi and teaching materials. The qualitative data

will be collected to be able to conduct a detailed contextual analysis to:

1) explore what the English language teachers know about teaching culture;

2) investigate how the English language teachers educate IC in their classrooms; and

3) examine how the English language teachers’ theories compare to their teaching performances

regarding IC. I will design my study to seek generic ideas about the connection between Korean

English language teachers’ knowledge and application of their IC through exploring their past

and present stories, and to discover new issues for future research.

Participants

The research participants will be under 12 English language (EL) teachers who are

teaching English to Korean students. They might have English as their second or foreign

language and work for K-6 schools. They will be in different ages, genders and they will have

different levels of teaching experiences. To find participants, I will employ the convenience and

snowball sampling by using personal connections; asking my friends who are EL teachers at

elementary schools for introductions to their friends who are EL teachers as well. Also, I will

invite participants by dint of sending recruitment e-mails to elementary schools.

14
Data Collection

Class observations and field memos

The data collected through class observations will be saved in the form of memos and

audio recordings. The classroom observation will take 45 minutes on average for each class; it

will be one time for each participant. While observing, I will record the conversations that will

occur between the teachers and the students to see their attitude and skills of IC. The recordings

will be transcribed, and analyzed.

While recording the classroom conversations, I will sit in the corner of the classrooms as

a passive observer, and create field memos that will be kept in a three-column grid. In the left

side column, I will record the time to match the audio-recording. In the middle column, I will

write down what will get the attentions of me, but the participants will take for granted in the

way they will act, by using a low inference vocabulary. For example, when I might hear a

teacher raise her voice, I write down “↑volume of her voice” and then in the right side column, I

will write the interpretive element like “as if angry”.

Teachers’ curriculum and teaching materials.

I will collect teachers’ syllabi and teaching materials; their lesson aims and detailed plans

such as classroom activities, and extra sources that teachers will prepare before classes. Through

analyzing these data, I will understand teachers’ capabilities and intentions to apply their

knowledge regarding IC to their classroom performance.

Interview and summary sheet.

I will conduct three timed interviews for each participant; one 30-minutes and two 10-

minutes interviews. The first interview will be conducted at the first stage of the data collection.

The purpose of the interview will be to probe personal and professional experiences concerning

15
cultural awareness and the level of IC. The interview questions in the interview protocol will be

designed to collect data and will be made up of three categories: participants’ schema on culture,

their location on the DMIS continuum, and intercultural competence including knowledge,

attitude, and skills. Investigating the participants’ syllabi and classroom materials will be

followed by a final interview. In the interview, I will explore the extent of applicability of IC

theories that the participants will have. Right after classroom observations, I would like to listen

to the teachers’ self-reflections about the classroom conversations for 10 minutes. All interview

data will be gathered by means of an audio recorder and in the form of memos. Following each

interview, there will be also the possibility to ask additional questions via phone or e-mail to

clarify the meaning of their answers.

Immediately after each interview, a summary sheet will be completed, including an

overview of the main points of the interview, initial thoughts, and follow-up questions that will

arise during the interviews.

Data Analysis

Coding

Carspecken (1996) introduced the most fundamental analytic techniques and suggested

that the analytic procedure that researchers made speculations regarding the meanings of

interaction recorded and repeated during an entire qualitative study. As Carspecken’s (1996)

procedure of data analysis, I will read through those several times to be familiar with them,

trying to understand the holistic meanings and getting an impression of the field. Then, taking

context into consideration, in some cases there will seem to be mixed messages. I will conduct

meaning fields by virtue of articulating the range of meanings from the view of the first person.

In order to reconstruct initial meaning, I will build up relatively low and high levels of inference.

16
Sometimes I will construct hermeneutic inferences by putting words describing on meaning of

participants’ tones, hesitations and the length of pauses.

After coding, I will divide the data into meaningful analytic units. Identifying

meaningful segments from transcriptions, I will conduct the process of marking segmented data

with theme names. All participants’ responses will be compared to find similarities and

differences.

Trustworthiness

In order to avoid a researcher’s bias which is a potential threat to the validity of data and

uncertainty, there are important and effective strategies that can help researchers establish high

qualitative research trustworthiness. Koro-Ljungberg (2010) addressed how validity can be

established with researchers’ responsibility and in the process of decision-making, saying

“responsible” researchers could strive for ongoing and disruptive dialogues with study

participants and collaborative communities thus opening spaces for themselves and others to

challenge the authorities of oppressors, to allow margins to speak and to dislocate decolonizing

privilege (p. 608).” Therefore, among many approaches to construct trustworthiness, I will allow

the interpretations of two groups of people, my peers and the participants. To examine if my

theoretical interpretations fit the data, I will employ the peer-debriefing technique by discussing

the interpretations with my two peers. Also, to investigate if the degree that I accurately portray

the meanings given by the participants, I will obtain participants’ feedback. Triangulation will

be sought by using multiple sources of data; observations, interviews, and some documents such

as syllabi and materials.

Remaining Questions

17
Limitations

Although I will try to prepare carefully, there will be some unavoidable limitations. This

research will be conducted in order to investigate Korean EL teachers’ IC, which means the

participants will be Koreans who will have English as their foreign language. When I translate

participants’ narratives, I might confront some challenges caused by the differences of not only

languages but also cultures. Furthermore, it could be rigorous time-consuming work and these

may be more difficult for me to maintain a consistent passion and attitude, because I will

transcribe all audio-recordings from one classroom observation, and three different interviews

for each participant in English. Finally, due to the power relationship between the researcher and

participants which is often unavoidable in qualitative research, the participants’ responses could

be affected by my presence during data gathering.

Ethical considerations

According to Punch (2000), social researchers should consider ethical issues, as this type

of research is closely connected to people. Therefore, firstly I will obtain the approval of IRB to

insure that this study will adhere to ethical standards. Then, the informed consent form will be

provided. The participants will be informed that they will be free to withdraw from the study

whenever they want to without any penalty. Participants’ confidentiality and anonymity will be

guaranteed by not revealing the identity for the participants to anyone other than me and my

committee members.

18
 Reference

Bennet, J. M. (2009). Cultivating Intercultural Competence. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE

handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 121-140). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications.

Bennett, M. J. (1993). Towards ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural

sensitivity. In R. M. Piage (Ed.), Education for the intercultural experience (pp. 21-71).

Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Bennett, M. J., Bennett, M. J., & Allen, W. (2003). Developing intercultural competence in the

language classroom. In D. L. Lang & R. M. Paige (Eds.), Culture as the core:

Perspectives on culture in second language learning (pp. 237-270). Greenwich,

CT:Information Age Publishing.

Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural competence. Clevedon, UK:

Multilingual Matters.

Byram, M. & Fleming, M. (1998). Language learning in intercultural perspective: Approaches

through drama and ethnography. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Carspecken, P. F. (1996). Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and

practical guide. New York: Routledge.

Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Cushner, K. (2015). Development and assessment of intercultural competence. In Hayden, M.,

Levy, J., & Thompson, J. (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Research in International

Education (pp. 200-216). London: SAGE.

Deardoff, D. K. (2006). Assessing intercultural competence in study abroad students, In M.

Byram and A. Feng (Eds.) Living and studying abroad: Research and practice (pp. 232-

19
 256). Clevendon: Multilingual Matter.

Dooly, M. & Villanueva, M. (2006). Internationalisation as a key dimension to teacher education,

European Journal of Teacher Education, 29(2), 223-240.

Fenstermacher, G. D., & Richardson, V. (2005). On making determinations of quality in

teaching. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 186-213.

Hammer, M.R., Bennett, M.J. & Wiseman, R. (2003). The Intercultural Development Inventory:

A Measure of intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,

27, 421-443.

Hill, I. (2006). Student types, scholl types and their combined influence on the development of

intercultural understanding. Journal of Research in Intercultural Education, 5(1), 5-33.

Koro-Ljungberg, M. (2010). Validity, Responsibility, and Apora. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(8),

603-610.

Kramsch, C. (2004). The language teacher as go-between. UTBILDNING & DEMOKRATI,

13(3), 37-60.

Lather, P. (2006). Foucauldian scientificity: rethinking the nexus of qualitative research and

educational policy analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,

19(6), 783-791.

Levy, J. & Fox, R. (2015). Pre-service teacher preparation for international settings. In Hayden,

M., Levy, J., & Thompson, J. (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Research in International

Education (pp. 200-216). London: SAGE.

Lusting, M. W. and Koester, J. (2006). Intercultural competence: interpersonal communication

across cultures. Boston, MA: Pearson.

McArthur, T. (2003). Oxford guide to world English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

20
McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality, signs, 30(3), 1771-1800.

Morse, J. M. (2006). The Politics of Evidence. Qualitative Health Research, 16(3), 395-404.

Pennycook, A. (1994). The cultural politics of English as an international language. London:

Longman.

Perry, L. B., & Southwell, L. (2011). Developing intercultural understanding and skills: Models

and approaches. Intercultural Education, 22(6), 453-466. doi:

10.1080/14675986.2011.644948

Paige, R. M. (2005). Culture learning dimensions. In J. Bennett & R. M. Paige (Eds.), Workshop

manual: Training design for international and multicultural programs. Portland, OR:

Intercultural Communication Institute.

Piage, R. M. (2006). Dimensions of intercultural learning. In R. M. Paige, A. D. Cohen, B.

Kappler, J. C. Chi, & J. P. Lassegard (Eds.) Maximizing study abroad: A students’ guide

to strategies for language and culture learning and use (2nd ed., pp. 40-41).

Minneapolis: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, University in

Minnesota.

Popkewitz, T. S., Rizvi, F. (2009). Globalization and the study of education. Chicago: NSSE.

Punch, K. (2000) Developing Effective Research Proposals. London, California, New Delhi:

Sage.

Pusch, M. D. (2004). Intercultural training in historical perspective. In Landis, D., Bennett, J. M.,

& Bennett, M. J. (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (pp. 13-36). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Ruben, B. (1976). Assessing communication competency for intercultural adaptation. Group and

Organization Studies, 1(3), 334-354.

21
Satyanath, S. (2006). Globalization, politics and financial turmoil: Asia’s banking crisis.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Seelye, H. (1993). Teaching culture: Strategies for intercultural communication (3rd ed.).

Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.

Sercu, L. (2006). The foreign langue and intercultural competence teacher: the acquisition of a

new professional identity. Intercultural Education, 17, 55-71.

Suarez-Orozco, M. M., & Qin-Hilliard, D. (2004). Globalization: culture and education in the

new Millennium. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Tam, K. (2004). English(es) in global and local perspectives. In K. Tam, & T. Weiss (Ed.),

English and globalization: Perspectives from Hong Kong and China (pp. 1-22). Hong

Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Tian, J. (2013). Beliefs and practices regarding intercultural competence among Chinese

teachers of English at a Chinese University. (Doctoral Dissertation). Available from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3589650)

Van der Zee, K. I., & Van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2000). The multicultural personality questionnaire:

A multidimensional instrument for multicultural effectiveness. European Journal of

Personality, 14, 291-309.

Young, T. J., & Sachdev, I. (2011). Intercultural communicative competence: exploring English

language teachers’ beliefs and practices. Language Awareness, 20(2), 81-98.

Zhao, Y. (2010). Preparing globally competent teachers: A new imperative for teacher education.

Journal of Teacher Education, 61, 422-431.

22