Raising Intercultural Awareness in preparation for periods of residence abroad

A review of current practice in UKHE

Simon Hall, St. Martin's College, Lancaster
Sylvie Toll, University of Central Lancashire
August 1999
Introduction

This study considers the activity of Intercultural Awareness Raising (IAR) in the preparation of UK HE languages students for a period of residence abroad.  It is informed by theory and research not only from the UK HE context, but also from other educational, sociological and business fields.  These sources of current thinking provide a framework for a set of aims and objectives for good IAR practice in preparation for residence abroad.  Having discussed and presented these aims and objectives, the study reviews the current state of IAR as practised in UK HE languages courses, identifying areas of strength and need for development.  Current practice in other contexts is similarly reviewed.  Given this background, the study highlights examples of good practice in IAR and considers possibilities for further development and improvement.

Part I
The Principles of Intercultural Preparation
Concepts of Culture and Intercultural Awareness

Jenks (1993) provides four interpretations of the concept of culture:

1.	Culture as a cerebral, or certainly a cognitive category: culture becomes intelligible as a general state of mind (e.g. ‘the cultured woman’).
2.	Culture as a more embodied and collective category: culture invokes a state of intellectual and/or moral development in society.  This is a position linking culture with the idea of civilisation.
3.	Culture as a descriptive and concrete category: culture viewed as the collective body of arts and intellectual work within any one society.  It includes a firmly established notion of culture as the realm of the produced and esoteric symbolism of a society.
4.	Culture as a social category: culture regarded as the whole way of life of a people: this is the pluralist and potentially democratic sense of the concept.

All four of the above interpretations apply to the teaching and learning of languages. (1) might summarise the general aim of the study of the arts and social sciences: the promotion of the learned, "well-read", world-knowledgeable individual.  (2) embodies the philosophy of an education system which aims to promote a learned and harmonious society.  On another level, the study of foreign languages at university generally incorporates some element of the study of other civilisations. This interpretation overlaps with (4), under which can be placed the study of historical, political, socio-linguistic, social and anthropological aspects of other language communities. The traditional study of foreign language literature, still a major element of most university languages degrees, promotes culture learning of the kind defined in (3).

There are clearly relationships and overlaps between each of Jenks's definitions, some of which are logically subsumed in others.   A civilisation (2) would be composed of cultured individuals (1). It would be characterised by its customs (4) and express its values through its politics, arts and literature (3). Furthermore, (2), (3) and (4) assume a top-down, "macro-cultural" perspective.  Taking (4), the notion of "sub-culture" (not in a pejorative sense) implies that many cultures exist under the umbrella of a "macro-culture".  Moreover, "macro-cultures" are generally spurious constructs: many of the ways of life of the natives of a small village in Haute Savoie are not the same as those of a similar sized village in Normandy, despite the two belonging to the French speaking community which inhabits the political and geographical confines of France.  Being an anti-hunt activist requires a very different set of principles from those of the hunters, despite the fact that all might well be British natives.   Distilling (4), culture in the sense expressed here can be divorced from the notion of a language group or a nation, and apply to much smaller social groups or "micro-communities" of people. 

Despite the difficulty of providing a clear model for the concept of culture, these four interpretations are nevertheless a useful frame of reference for the purposes of discussing IAR for the period of residence abroad.  Particularly relevant to the student's cultural experience of residence abroad are the notions expressed in (1) and (4). In the sense of (1), culture, as demonstrated in the phrase "the cultured woman", is a verb.   If "being cultured" is a state, a process of "culturing" has taken place in order to produce that state. Interpreting "cultured" as meaning "culturally learned", the verb "to culture" is interchangeable with "to learn culture".  The process of becoming cultured can therefore be an educational one.

In the context of preparing students for life in a foreign community, "culture learning" supposes that at least some cultural norms of the type expressed in (4) are likely to be different between L1land and L2land.  Furthermore, the experience of living abroad will physically separate students from their normal "micro-communities".  A student's success in achieving the linguistic objectives of residence abroad depends on contact with the native people of the community in which he/she will be resident.  It is therefore important for the student to be able to empathise with those people and to appreciate, adapt to and function within the norms of that community.  Schumann (1978) documented examples of poor development of the L2 due to failed acculturation to the host community. Likewise, teachers are able to recognise those students whose relatively poor gain in linguistic ability can be put down to non-integration into their host community.  Furthermore, a student's lack of awareness of L2land cultural norms and inappropriate strategies for coping with difference may result in affective and behavioural reactions of "culture shock" (Oberg 1960), homesickness, stereotyping of their host community and even xenophobia. Consequently, "educating culturally", in the sense of culture as summarised in (4), must focus on how the student's feelings, attitudes, actions and reactions can influence the process of adaptation to the cultural norms of the host community.

Intercultural awareness

Walravens (1999) reminds the participants at the third Leeds conference in December 1998 of the difficulty in reaching a consensus over the very definition of "cross-cultural capability".  Parry (1999) refers to a "new interdisciplinary discipline", perhaps illustrated by the variety of jargon applied to naming it.  The list includes: "cross-cultural capability", "cross-cultural skills", "cross-cultural competence", "cross-cultural awareness", "inter-cultural studies", "intercultural communication", "intercultural effectiveness", "intercultural awareness", "Intercultural Communicative Competence".   For the sake of this study and future nomenclature, we have chosen the term "Intercultural Awareness".

Firstly, let us consider a term common to the field of  Second Language Acquisition: ‘Interlanguage’.  At its simplest level, Selinker (1992) describes interlanguage as a "between language", a learner language which exhibits an increasing proximity to L2. The approximation of interlanguage to L2 is a dynamic, often fluctuating process, influenced by changes in knowledge about and how to use L2, as well as transfer of and hypotheses based on L1 structure applied to L2.  The learner's current state of interlanguage manifests itself in an ability to communicate in and understand the L2.
"Intercultural awareness" shares some similarity with interlanguage in that the resident abroad, like the interlanguage speaker, is influenced by both knowledge and experience of his/her host culture (C2) and of his/her native culture (C1).  The current state of intercultural awareness of residents abroad manifests itself in feelings, attitudes and behaviours which display how well they have adapted to life in C2.  If one were able to represent the development of intercultural awareness of a student resident abroad by a curve on a graph, it might be as depicted below:

Hypothetical Curve of Development of Intercultural Awareness of a Student Resident Abroad

This curve supposes that the student adapts successfully to life in C2.   The student is initially enthusiastic about arriving abroad, interested by and attempting to emulate what he/she perceives as the way of life.  Following the initial period may be a mild sensation of culture shock, where the student reverts to C1 attitudes and behaviours as more profound differences are experienced. Then comes a final stage where the student is able to come to terms with these differences and adjust behaviour to be appropriate to the C2.  Other curve theories of intercultural awareness - the U-curve and the W-curve - are presented by Lysgaard (1955) and Gullahorn & Gullahorn (1963). These plot emotional reactions to the intercultural experience.  The U-curve describes an initial feeling of excitement and enthusiasm on first contacts with the host culture, followed by a period of frustration and uneasiness (the bottom of the U), before finally feeling at ease and adapting. The W-curve extends the intercultural experience into the return home period, whereby the returnee undergoes another U-curve in re-adapting to C1.

Bennett's "Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity" (1993 - summarised in Hess 1997), presents a similar dynamic to that represented by the curves discussed above.  He identifies a six stage process:

1.	Ethnocentrism - a simple denial that the differences exist. The pure ethnocentric believes that the whole world is like him or her, but pure ethnocentrism is a rarely found state of being.
2.	Defensiveness - the perception that the differences one encounters are threatening. Barriers are raised and negative judgements made against those who are different.
3.	Minimization of the perceived differences - the perception that the differences are not very great or very important: 'we're all alike under the skin,' is the minimalist's rubric.
4.	Acceptance - the recognition that differences exist, that they are substantial and important, and that they can be positive and negative.
5.	Adaptation - the willingness to adopt and adjust one's behaviour to the patterns and styles of another culture.
6.	Adoption and integration - the merging of selected aspects of another culture into one's own cultural identity or patterns of thinking and behaving, leading to one's becoming a bi- or multicultural person."
     (from Hess 1997, pp5-6)

Bennett states that although the successful culture learner will develop along this continuum, it will not necessarily be a smooth process and will probably suffer regressions before further progress is made. Intercultural awareness therefore develops dynamically; changes must occur in an individual's knowledge, feelings, attitudes and behaviours relative to both C1 and C2 for the process to progress. 

Intercultural Awareness Raising
An interface of knowledge, feelings, attitudes and behaviours

In the light of the previous discussion, it is clear that Intercultural Awareness Raising (IAR) - the development of intercultural awareness through educational methods - needs to concern itself with knowledge, feelings, attitudes and behaviours. Cormeraie (1998), summarising Brislin (1990) and Smith and Bond (1993) states:

".... inter-cultural learning is by nature a cognitive, and also an affective and behavioural affair". 

Modern languages study at HE level has traditionally focused on the cognitive, aiming to develop intercultural awareness through the analysis of factual texts (written, audio and audiovisual), deemed by departments or tutors to contain information relevant to life in the target culture. The study of these texts, as well as of artistic works of literature and poetry, may open up discussion of a more experiential and affective nature, depending on the teaching methodologies employed by the tutors.  Very often, however, the cultural links are given explicitly in lectures and seminars or provided in critiques.  Once abroad, the safe distance afforded by text-based study of C2 from C1land is no longer available. Factual knowledge delivered through lectures and  seminars and provided in handbooks is often insufficient when put to the test by the day to day emotions of living in C2.

Coleman (1998) points out:

"In today's classrooms it has been noted repeatedly that students fail to assimilate even the most carefully structured and presented information provided in preparation for the year abroad.  To change deeply rooted attitudes and behaviour a deeper level of the personality than the cognitive, one involving feelings, must be brought into play."

IAR in preparation for the period of residence abroad should therefore aim to provide the student with a "working knowledge" of life in the target culture.  In other words, the student needs not only to know facts about C2, but also know how to cope with living in C2.  Such a working knowledge is more adequately described in the four savoirs composing Byram's and Zarate's (1997) model of intercultural competence:

Savoir apprendre 	Understanding otherness; using and creating opportunities for observation, analysis and interpretation.
Savoirs 	Cultural knowledge, including sociolinguistic competence; awareness of non-explicit reference points such as values, beliefs, meanings.
Savoir être 	Understanding how an identity and a culture are socially constructed; setting aside ethnocentric attitudes and perceptions; openness and interest towards others; inter-cultural mediation.
Savoir faire 	Integration of the other three into real L2land interactions.

From this model, it is clear that intercultural awareness is an interface between what Anderson (1983) calls declarative knowledge (knowledge that) and procedural knowledge (knowledge how to). For example, it is one thing knowing that the majority of Catalans speak Catalan in preference to Castilian Spanish and another knowing how to cope with different reactions you may receive from some Catalan natives if you start speaking to them in Castilian.  In other words, the former is factual knowledge, whereas the latter is affective and behavioural.  Therefore, as well as providing factual knowledge about the host culture, successful IAR in preparation for residence abroad requires opportunities for students to explore affective and behavioural issues inherent to the experience of living in C2.  Consideration of these issues should aim to equip students to develop positive strategies for managing successful adaptation to life abroad.

Implications of Personality Variables

It could be argued that no amount of preparation could ever ensure a successful PRA and that individual attitudes and personality are the key factors in success or failure. Motivation, a positive attitude, purposefulness and commitment are said to be key factors in the success of the Year Abroad.  There are numerous anecdotes to support this view.  Take, for instance, the case of two sisters who went abroad on consecutive years:  same background, same placement, same town, same accommodation. The first found it hard (her time-table consisted of almost 3 times the number of hours at her home institution) but very “challenging” and enjoyable. Her motivation and enthusiasm remained undiminished throughout her year abroad and her final year; she found a well-remunerated job before the end of her studies.  Her sister went abroad the following year and by November was so unhappy that she wanted to return to Britain. Nevertheless, she stayed until the end of the academic year.  She revealed during her informal de-briefing interview that the main reason for her following the same course of study as her sister was her sense of duty not to disappoint her parents. The importance of motivation, “instrumental” and “integrative” is again illustrated in a case study presented by Theuerkauf (1997).  Although Theuerkauf emphasises that “the students in the study cannot be seen as representative because of the extreme ways they approached the year abroad", she discusses how the most motivated of the four students - a blind student - benefitted the most from his year abroad in Germany. 

Hess (1997 pp18-26) considers a number of personality traits and types which have been associated with ability to adapt to C2. These include a number of bi-polar traits (such as "a trusting rather than a suspicious person", "a compassionate or empathetic person rather than an insensitive one") and the following psychological constructs:
breadth of affiliation - how the number and variety of social / peer groups one belongs to and identifies with indicates one's disposition to outsiders;
tolerance for ambiguity - the capacity to cope with unpredictable outcomes;
general receptivity - the capacity to revise views based on new experiences;
capacity for empathy - the ability to see things from another person's point of view.
Hess stresses that data confirming the validity of these personality variables is "tentative, somewhat contradictory and quite general".  We add that even if it were possible to validate these variables, conducting psychoanalysis and applying psychotherapy to each student depending on their identified deficits would be impractical and well beyond the skills, remit and authority of language departments whose students take up residence abroad as a requisite part of their study.  Despite the absence of valid personality descriptors, Hess suggests it makes common sense to assume that certain "attitudes and traits [....] discourage culture learning".

As educators we must believe in the ability of our students to learn and adapt.  There is considerable evidence to suggest that attitudes and behaviour are adaptable; if this were not true all criminals would re-offend, drug-rehabilitation programmes would never work and we would condemn computers to the scrap-heap on our first attempt at using them. It would be as impractical to devise tailor-made programmes for certain personality types as it would be impossible to accurately diagnose such traits in the first place.  Instead, preparation should encourage individuals to explore how their perception of their own character, attitudes and behaviours might influence their intercultural awareness.  Through this approach, the student is encouraged to recognise where he /she might need to develop strategies to enable successful adaptation to living in C2.

The role factor

Many university teachers feel that the benefit and success of a PRA are primarily a result of individual circumstances, for instance the type of placement. Coleman (1998) concludes:

“those students of French who study at a University abroad are less likely to find the French helpful, good humoured , tolerant and friendly than those on assistantships or work placements.  Assistants are more likely to find the French emotional and inefficient, while stagiaires are more likely to find them patient, tolerant and without arrogance".

In reality, the student's perception of the host culture is influenced greatly by the role they fulfil during their placement and the opportunities it affords for contact with C2 in a variety of contexts. The attribution of role, and the sense of purpose, fulfilment and variety afforded by it is therefore an important element of adaptation to C2.

Preparation for change

The experience of residence abroad is, of course, not merely a cultural adventure. Going to live abroad involves changes like moving to different accommodation, often surviving with just the essential belongings that can be fit into a rucksack, being separated from one's established social circles, family and friends.  In the cases of work-placements and English Language Assistantships in schools and colleges abroad, the student may be facing his/her first experience of such full-time work. Difficulties in dealing with these changes in circumstance can become confused with the cultural encounter.  For example, a student who has few strategies for finding new social circles when abroad may defensively and wrongly conclude that "the natives are unfriendly".   In this sense, intercultural awareness is affected by the ability to deal with change, which is primarily an individual, personal matter and not necessarily a question of going from one country to another.  It is also influenced by the student's ability to integrate into some of the social "micro-cultures" (e.g., sports clubs, choirs, student societies) common to C2, whereby such stereotypical conclusions as "the natives are unfriendly" should not occur. Given how these affective and behavioural factors can influence the perception of C2, IAR in preparation for the period of residence abroad also needs to focus on helping students develop strategies for dealing successfully with foreseeable changes in their personal circumstances, to identify and to realise the implications of their responsibilities and roles and to set realistic goals.

The Aims and Objectives of IAR in Preparation for the Period of Residence Abroad

In setting aims and objectives for IAR pre-residence abroad we are not yet concerned with practicalities like the duration of the preparation programme nor specific expertise required by those who run them.  These issues are discussed in Part II.  Due to the dynamism of the process of intercultural awareness development, neither is it easy to say where pre-residence abroad preparation begins and ends.  Discussion so far underlines that any learning at the preparation stage needs to draw upon the student's prior experience and current knowledge, feelings and attitudes in order to influence what takes place during, and possibly after, the residence stage.  Awareness raising activities / tasks should offer students insights into the processes involved in adapting to change and, ultimately, being "intercultural people".  Such activities, if well-designed, should help students to contextualise and learn from their prior and future experiences. 

Within the aims and objectives we propose, we have attempted to distil the essence of the various factors already discussed involved in intercultural awareness, recognising the interplay of cognitive knowledge and the affective and behavioural. The former are also informed by Kohl and Knight's (1994) intercultural awareness workshop objectives and those of Celia Roberts and Shirley Jordan's ethnographic training course described in Parker, G. & A. Rouxeville (eds.) (1995).  They have been further refined through discussion between partners of the Interculture Consortium.

Aims:
To aid the process of acculturation / adaptation to life abroad through activities which enable:

•	familiarisation with objective, factual information important to life in C2 (e.g., what you need to do to open a bank account; on which occasions you might be expected to kiss someone on both cheeks);
•	identification / recognition of cultural factors (e.g., own culture & background, stereotype) influencing "being intercultural";
•	realisation that intercultural awareness is a dynamic process;
•	identification / recognition of personal factors, attributes and skills affecting ability to adapt to life abroad;
•	development of attitudes & strategies which will help adaptation.

Objectives:
By undertaking IAR activities, students should be able to:

•	understand levels of meanings of "culture";
•	recognise the origins of their own cultural values, assumptions and attitudes;
•	identify differences in cultural background within own peer group, finding reasons for similarity and difference within this group;
•	understand that cultural background affects perception of others;
•	recognise and understand the implications of stereotyping and the nature of counterproductive stereotypes;
•	analyse their knowledge of and expectations about their host culture and start to restructure them;
•	begin to establish strategies for observing and adapting to living in another culture;
•	predict affective implications of changes of environment and role and establish strategies for coping with these changes.

By stating objectives in terms of what the student should gain from preparatory IAR, we propose that activities and tasks dealing with affective and behavioural issues need to be mnemonically effective, providing learning experiences which can be easily re-called as prompts for future actions.  This implies that each activity should be readily distinguishable from another - least helpful to students would be to deliver a series of sessions reminiscent of a standard academic lecture / seminar format, the content of which might be consigned to a folder of notes.  In contexts where relatively little time can be devoted to trying to cover the more affective and behavioural aims and objectives stated above, activities need to be memorable.

The aims and objectives for IAR presented above have several implications for delivery in the UK HE setting. The style required for treatment of the experiential, affective and strategic aspects is probably more akin to the realms of applied sociology and business studies than to established methodologies of language teaching in UK universities.  Secondly, established languages courses may not have much curricular space for the delivery of an extended programme of activities. However, the aims and objectives expressed above are best taken as a whole, as they are intended to address the various aspects of knowledge, attitudes and behaviours identified so far as important to the development of intercultural awareness. In a number of UK HE institutions the full set of aims and objectives are being addressed, whereas in others the interpretation of IAR reflects more prescriptive, cognitive practice.  Part II below presents a review illustrating the breadth of existing practice in the UK HE languages setting in IAR as preparation for residence abroad.

Part II
Patterns of Current Practice in IAR

IAR practice in UK HE institutions: an incoherent picture

A review of the different interpretations and formats of IAR currently practised in UK institutions is provided below, informed by recent publications and research exercises.  This review section is based primarily on evidence of practice in IAR reported in the Leeds Metropolitan University Cross-Cultural Capability Conference Proceedings (Gillick & Parry 1997, 1998 & 1999), at the Residence Abroad Matters workshops Student Residence Abroad: Preparation, Support and Guidance (1998) and recorded in responses to the 1997 questionnaire for the National Residence Abroad Database (NRAD).  Further information was obtained from the Central Bureau for Educational Visits and Exchanges (CBEVE) questionnaire (May 1999) to HE language departments.  Presentations by and discussions with colleagues from a number of universities and colleges, as well as materials donated, also provided valuable information.
The National Residence Abroad Database
The NRAD succinctly summarises the different formats of practice of UKHE institutions in preparing their students for the period of residence abroad. Of particular interest to us were the responses to a number of the NRAD questionnaire items focusing on intercultural, vocational, social and academic elements of preparation for the period of residence abroad.  Individual items and summaries of responses to items are provided below.

Item C2.3.1	"Do you provide intercultural preparation specifically for residence abroad?" 
		a total of 266 courses from 64 institutions responded "yes".
 
Item C2.3.2	"if 'yes' as....", 
•	106 of 266 courses used specifically designed course materials; 
•	177 ran targeted activities within a course element / module;
•	No clear numerical data emerged from the survey as to the number of  institutions offering specific course elements / modules in IAR, but UKHE modules known to us through the work of the project include courses established at Leicester University, Oxford Brookes University, Southampton University and Thames Valley University.   It may be assumed that other UKHE institutions are offering or are developing modules in the field.  A further survey in Mcbride and Seago (forthcoming) will amplify the information available   Otherwise, a summary of the ethnographic approach is provided in Parry and Gillick (1997) 

I1 & I2 “Has your institution or any of your colleagues produced:

- 	Paper based materials designed to help students with residence abroad (e.g., handouts, booklets)?
- 	Materials in other forms designed to help students (e.g., videos, audio tapes, CD-ROMs, software)?”

By March 1999, only 29 institutions had provided NRAD with examples of materials which were filed together with their completed questionnaires. Of these, most materials were of a didactic, factual nature. Of interest were Personal Skills Record dossiers (Careers Development dossiers, etc.) and a Logbook for Experiential Learning for their role in social and self-awareness raising. 

Unfortunately, there were no examples of materials designed for classroom-based learning which addressed the experiential, affective and behavioural aspects of intercultural awareness raising.

The NRAD database and materials provided only a very approximate picture of current practice in the field of IAR in UKHE institutions.  Responses to the NRAD questionnaire from institutions (and separate departments within them) show great variation in detail.  Some provided a good deal of material, and others none.  IAR is clearly interpreted differently by different authors, tutors, trainers and course-writers. This problem was illustrated particularly in responses to the NRAD questionnaire. Whilst the great majority of respondents appear to have interpreted intercultural awareness as cognitive knowledge of the language, sociolinguistics, literature and arts of C2, only a minority addressed the issue from a cognitive + affective + behavioural + strategic perspective.   Interestingly, even from universities who are known to be working seriously in the area of IAR, no materials were provided. This lack of specific IAR materials could be due to any of the following reasons:

-	different interpretations of questionnaire items;
-	varying interpretation of the meaning and scope of “intercultural preparation” (e.g., belief that intercultural awareness raising is inherent to the teaching of languages; belief that practical handbooks dealt with intercultural issues);
-	time constraints encountered by respondents;
-	institutional administrative constraints (e.g., one person responds for a wide number of courses while not necessarily being involved with period abroad preparation);
-	practicality of collating and sending a comprehensive range of course materials specifically incorporating IAR;
-	concerns about ownership of materials or copyright issues.

Nevertheless, the opportunity to consult the NRAD materials was informative to the extent that it illustrated disparity in practice in IAR as well as in the recognition of its importance.  Furthermore, it showed how little knowledge has been shared within the HE languages sector.

Responses to the CBEVE questionnaire
The problems associated with differing/ conflicting interpretations of IAR were again highlighted by the responses to the questionnaire sent out by the CBEVE in May 1999.  128 questionnaires were returned by a total of 64 HE institutions.  The CBEVE questionnaire sought to find out what kind of preparation HE institutions provided for students embarking on a year abroad as Assistants. However, administrative discrepancies in responses to the questionnaire were evident; for example, "no preparation" was stated by institutions who are known nationally to provide it.  It is probably the case that questionnaires were often completed by respondents who were not directly involved with the PPA.

The questionnaire focused on five aspects of preparation:

1.	advice on Teaching English as a Foreign Language;
2.	advice on initial administrative formalities in the foreign country;
3.	advice on the foreign education system;
4.	advice on life and culture in the foreign country;
5.	the opportunity to talk with previous participants of the programme.

The introductory question, "Does the University run a pre-departure course for students taking up assistantships?", led to differing interpretations of the word "course", even contradictory answers on the existence, length or frequency of preparatory sessions from institutions returning more than one questionnaire. Interpreting "course" in a broader sense , i.e, "preparation sessions", we can see that they vary in length and frequency, ranging from one half day to two or four days at varying points in the academic year.  Some institutions offer a series of four or six workshops. One institution for example runs a one semester course on "cultural briefing" but provides no further details.  Another provides a six week module.  One respondent mentions extensive preparation but without giving further information, whereas another states that their course is "three to thirteen hours" long" according to the language".   In seven cases, a talk or a half day course by the CBEVE constitutes the preparation for the period abroad. Two respondents quote the twenty-one hour intensive TEFL course offered by St Martin's College in Lancaster as the most useful preparation for future assistants.   One semester or one year TEFL courses are taken up by would-be assistants according to one third of respondents and TEFL teachers are relied upon to prepare students for their teaching abroad on a more ad hoc basis.

Two respondents consider their website to be the most useful aid to preparation. Several institutions rely on a "Year Abroad Office" to handle PPRA.  One respondent states "we place emphasis on incoming assistants".

Of most interest to The Interculture Project are responses to item 4 of the questionnaire.  All respondents who send students abroad as assistants state that they provide "advice on life and culture", although one third of these do not state how this is implemented.  None of the institutions mention "Intercultural Awareness Raising" - not surprisingly, perhaps, since the phrase is not used in the questionnaire.  A score of respondents see the content of language courses and lectures as the main source of advice on "life and culture" in the host country; ten respondents see their Year Abroad handbook as the most important vehicle for this type of advice.  Other media are "hints and tips from previous students" (sometimes in organised 'parenting schemes'), "advice on an ad hoc basis" and "e-mail discussion lists".  Personal safety, particularly for women, is perceived as an increasingly important element of "advice on life and culture" in the host country.

Conclusions from the NRAD and CBEVE questionnaires

The 1996 HEFCE report on Modern Languages in HE highlighted the haphazard support and guidance which HE institutions in England and Wales were giving their students in the area of PPA. The NRAD and CBEVE questionnaires show that many institutions are responding by producing Year Abroad handbooks, placing relevant information on web pages, organising workshops, formal and informal meetings with returnees or foreign students.  The issue of personal development is addressed through the media of logbooks, diaries, reports and de-briefing sessions. Many institutions run preparation courses ranging greatly in duration and intensity. Administrative procedures in the host country seem to constitute the main focus of the preparation.  Only a handful of HE institutions devote entire modules to PPRA.

The Leeds Conference Reports
The HE sector
The argument as to whether IAR is inherent to the teaching of Modern Languages must be placed in the wider context of the debate over the definition of "Intercultural" or "Cross-Cultural Competence" and the ways of implementing it. The 1996, 1997 and 1998 Leeds conferences on "Cross-Cultural Capability" constitute the main fora for this debate in the UK.  Below, we propose a brief overview of the main issues brought up by this debate and which are of particular relevance to HE foreign language teachers, to whom Phipps refers as "Jacks and Jills of all trades" (1999).

In addition to the responses to the CBEVE and NRAD questionnaires, workshops undertaken as part of The Interculture Project and general discussions with colleagues in the HE field indicate that cultural awareness is often identified as cognitive knowledge about C2. This is either imparted in language / society / literature modules, or more interactively acquired in discussions with C2 students or British students returning from C2land.  Many tutors feel that it is something which can only really be acquired during the PRA;  Hall (1997) states that "some university teachers may be aware of the importance of intercultural communication, but think that foreign language students pick these skills up for themselves during a period of residence (usually a year) abroad".  Yet both Cormeraie (1995) and Coleman (1996) report that for a large number of students the Year Abroad leads to a reinforcement of national stereotypes and a less sympathetic view of the people in the host country.

In her proposals for assessing languages and cross-cultural capability, Zarate (1999) asserts the need for "a strategy for increasing the visibility of the intercultural debate in the field of Languages and for giving it innovative status". Zarate's view is that "there is more to be lost than gained from locating the intercultural debate outside the field of Modern Languages”.  Di Napoli and Polezzi (1999) point to the difficulty in determining the professional identity of the Modern Languages specialist with regards to the teaching of Cross-Cultural Competence and raise the question "who is going to implement such programmes?  Are the staff currently teaching in Modern Languages departments well-equipped to respond to these challenges?".  Phipps (1999) talks of shrinking resources and language teaching becoming a "functional part of business studies".  She warns of "academic bricolage" and rejects the merit and feasibility of language courses including ethnographic methods within the curriculum on the strength of a few training courses. Her overriding concern is that teachers of intercultural competence must be "critical disciplinarians". The role of Modern Language teacher and the responsibility for building "cross-cultural capability" into the curriculum is a recurrent element in the debate.

Cormeraie (1998) underlines a dangerous tendency in modern languages teaching to view the C2 from an ethnocentric perspective, stating categorically that: "Teaching about other cultures as a strategy for reducing prejudice does not work.  Nor does it address the issue of cultural bias which can be detected in those selected aspects of the other culture that teachers ethnocentrically choose to indict or advocate in their course reinforcing in so doing stereotypes and polarities".

Walravens (1999) reminds us of two "diametrically opposite evolutions", the first  being the "global village", growing through technological advances in communications, and the second being the importance placed on "regional identity" and the subsequent break up of the "nation state".   Kelly (1998) argues that "the target language focus of traditional language teaching is no longer appropriate" as it "falls short of the needs of the intercultural learner and will not satisfy the linguistic needs of tomorrow's society" and advocates the integration of intercultural communication into language teaching.   Separating the two disciplines would lead to the marginalisation of language teachers and reinforce the domination of English.

Citing the growth of internationalisation and globalisation, Coleman (1998) presents employability and transferable skills as key elements in the acquisition of cross-cultural capability within the context of the period abroad. "To the narrower definition of cross-cultural capability as intercultural communication, I prefer the notion of an ability to operate professionally in a foreign context, a definition which brings together skills and emotions, attitudes and employability".  Mughan (1998) raises the question "What matters most, French*, France or the French?" pointing out that the globalisation of business creates a "linguistically and culturally unpredictable and variable environment".  Therefore the long-held assumption, for instance, that doing business with the French takes place in France using the French "target" language is no longer realistic.  He exemplifies this by saying that "in the future a student of French will be as likely to find himself working with French people in the Berlin office of a Swiss company using English as a company language”. Berry (Leeds 1998) echoes Mughan's views and questions the importance of "native-like" language skills and asks "to what extent is the goal of native-like linguistic and bicultural communication competence a realistic goal for a language that will be used primarily as a foreign language in many different cultural landscapes".  Likewise, Byram (1999) reminds us that political events throughout Europe "have created a new purpose for FL education" which goes well beyond the economic purpose usually attributed to it by politicians and argues that "there is clearly a role for the foreign language profession in making the international dimension of citizenship even at a national level much more evident".   He proposes a definition for "savoir s'engager" as being "an ability to evaluate, critically, and on the basis of explicit criteria, perspectives, practices and products in one's own and other cultures and countries". Similarly, Jordan (1998), presenting a case-study based on the ethnographic course originally run at Thames Valley University, argues that ethnography is based around the kind of interactive contact which is the very "raison d'être" of residence abroad. "Capability in one's own culture", she says "is a necessary starting point for developing cross-cultural capability".

A comparison of PPRA in Education and Business

Parry (1999) reminds participants at the 1998 Leeds conference that it is from the field of business that the “initial impetus” for cross-cultural capability came and that it is in the field of business that the “longest-serving expertise” is likely to reside.  A number of the papers given at the Leeds conferences straddle the fields of Business and Education not surprisingly since Cultural / Intercultural training for the Period of Residence Abroad is a long standing practice engendered by the necessity to enhance business operations abroad.  Yet we can see from the published materials available that the diversity of IAR practice in the UKHE setting is matched by the variety of cross-cultural training programmes in the business world. 

Outwardly cognitive approaches, often reinforcing stereotypes, are just as much in evidence in the business world. Published manuals and handbooks provide their readers with such advice as "Germans are punctual", "the French like formality". These publications are intended to be used as psychological and socio-linguistic tools designed to maximise the potential of encounters and thereby create favourable environments for successful short or long term business transactions. Hall & Hall (1990) state: "compared to Germans, the French are eloquent and relish conversation. Conversations in the two countries are as different as night and day"; Morrison et al (1994) tell us “The French are strongly individualistic and have a centralised authority structure that makes quick decisions possible”.  Stereotypical assertions such as these raise the question: to what extent can stereotyping be useful and justifiable?  They are very likely to be unhelpful to students and hinder willingness to communicate rather than promote it.  Banks (1995) argues that it is more important for graduates in Public Relations to be critical thinkers, responsible, literate citizens than to be skilled in task requirements at the beginning of their profession. He urges the need for training practitioners in cultural sensitivity, internal adjustment, valuing diversity and intercultural communication. Gudykunst (1994) explains that biases are based on anxiety and negative expectations and urges the intercultural learner to focus on finding out as much as they can about strangers in order to form accurate impressions of them. He provides two questionnaires entitled "Assessing the Strength of Your Cultural Identity" and "Assessing Your Ethnocentrism", as a starting point for IAR workshops.  Although intended primarily for business training uses, these could also be applied to PPRA for students. 

Intercultural preparation programmes range from limited training sessions based on cognitive knowledge to intensive courses focusing on experiential learning and systematised training. Landis and Bhagat (1996) exemplify the diversity in the design of training courses by giving a table of training scenarios for the Foreign Teaching Assistant ranging between 4 to 180 hours in length (p.239). This range corresponds directly with the variety of types of PPRA for UK HE languages students. Landis and Bhagat also list consequences arising from lack of trainer knowledge and lack of intercultural training skills, reflected in Cormeraie (1998). 

Hofstede (1980) emphasises the importance of being able to assess one’s cultural environment in terms of human values and relationships. These fall into categories such as:
- power distance (distance between individuals at different levels of hierarchy)
- uncertainty avoidance (societies low in uncertainty avoidance tend to need fewer formal rules and are more tolerant to attitudes that differ from their own)
- individualism V collectivism (focus on the individual as opposed to focus on the group to which one belongs
- masculinity V femininity (material goals, money as opposed to concern for others and relationships)
For a brief summary analysis of Hofstede’s work (1980, 1991) see also Claes, M.T. (1997) and Mughan, T. (1998). 

One question of immediate concern to us in this part of our study is “to what extent” can business TAR training methodologies be applied to IAR for the PPRA of HE students? By virtue of the very nature of “Business” - its concern for the quantifiable , the necessity to trade effectively - the training of members of the business community in intercultural awareness necessarily operates on a pragmatic level and places emphasis on the acquisition of strategic psychological and linguistic tools to achieve specific outcomes. 

Woodhall (1998), who trains groups of existing and future managers, asks “whether it is possible to implement cross-cultural awareness satisfactorily in an undergraduate programme”, pointing out that the business practitioner and the undergraduate student live in two “different cultures”. Whereas with the former there is no problem of exchanging strengths based on mutual experience, the exchange with the latter tends to be one way - from teacher to student.  Furthermore, while students have physical constraints imposed upon them (rigid time-tabling and rooming, furniture) they do not experience changes in physical environment which might greatly affect the business person.  Woodhall argues that this gives them “little opportunity to develop behaviours and competences”.

Brislin’s (1994) set of critical incidents have been incorporated into IAR programmes for students’ PPRA and to great effect.  The incidents come under headings such as: Host customs; Interacting with Hosts; Settling in and making adjustments; Tourist Experiences; the Workplace; the Family; Education and Schooling; Returning Home. Critical incidents as a pedagogical tool for IAR are being incorporated in a growing number of PPRA programmes for students. Given that Brislin’s critical incidents portray home and social situations, they are of great relevance to students on any university course.  They can serve as a model which students can adopt in order to reflect on their own critical incidents.

Identified examples of current practice
Cognitive knowledge
Coverage of knowledge of the cognitive, declarative kind required for intercultural awareness raising has traditionally been strong in university level language teaching. Listed below are identified current formats of delivery for cognitive components of IAR.

•	Planned / unplanned content of a cultural nature in language classes
•	Classes with the Foreign Language Assistant
•	Language societies and clubs
•	Courses / units of study / assignments on: 
literature / the arts
history, geography, politics, society
•	Study of cultural phenomena through text & media (e.g. APC©APU materials from LARA)
•	Specific classes / tutorials / language exercises focusing on country-specific info. (e.g., opening a bank account)
•	Role Plays / Simulations focusing on transactional language
•	Handbooks & country specific guides containing helpful information (accommodation, travel, etc.)
•	Talks by returnee students / international students in residence (e.g. Central Lancashire's "International Day", John Moores' "Centrefair")
•	"Parenting Schemes" - organised twinning of returnee and outgoing students
•	Orientation days / weeks
•	Talks by host institution representatives
•	Virtual Visits via the World Wide Web
•	"RAPPORT" / NRAD web pages
•	Quizzes (e.g. Lancaster preparation week)

IAR of affective, behavioural & strategic nature.

Personal Development handbooks / portfolios emphasising transferable skills  and professional development.
•	Getting the Most from your Year Abroad (Southampton)
•	Making the Most of the Year Abroad: Creating a Personal and Career Development Dossier (Portsmouth)
•	Using Your Year Abroad (Reading)

Integrated courses: 
•	"Ealing Ethnographic Programme" (Thames Valley, Oxford Brookes)
•	"Cross-Cultural Training Workshop" (Sussex)
•	"Intercultural Communication" (Leicester)

Activities packs
•	"Making the Most of the Year Abroad" partnership between Peter Hawkins Associates, University of Leeds & University of Liverpool 

Learning in cross-cultural groupings:
•	Tandem learning (Hull University) (see Mozzon-McPherson 1998)
•	Pilot bilingual language course integrating systematic cross-cultural conflict management (Sussex)
•	Comparison of intercultural experiences project (St. Martin's)

Activities & tasks:
•	Individual elements of the Oxford Brookes Ethnography Module (e.g., Food values) Roberts, C. & S. Jordan 
•	Daily routine survey, Sociogram, Stereotypes by Coleman, J.(Portsmouth) (http://www.hum.port.ac.uk/slas/fdtl)
•	Critical incident analysis e.g. "Good-time girls" (Lancaster)

Experiential IAR activities from other contexts

Intercultural, Social & Self-awareness preparation: examples from Intercultural Press
[Intercultural Press, Inc., P.O. Box 700, Yarmouth, Maine, 04096 USA]

Intercultural Sourcebook: Cross-Cultural Training Methods Vol. 1 
Fowler, S.M. & M.G. Mumford (eds.) (1995)
Activity types include:
Role Plays
Contrast-culture activities
Simulation Games
Critical Incidents
Case Studies

Studying Abroad / Learning Abroad
Hess, J.D. (1997)
Activities include:
"Noting Differences"
"Interpreting Nonverbal Clues"
"Identifying American Value Orientations"
"Studying Influences on Values"

Experiential Activities for Intercultural Learning
Seelye, H.N. (ed.) (1996)
Sections:
"Knowing Yourself as a Cultural Person"
"Courting the Intercultural Perspective"
"Working Together"
"Analyzing Cross-Cultural Incidents"

Developing Intercultural Awareness: A Cross-Cultural Training Handbook
Kohls, L.R. & J.M. Knight (1994) (2nd edition)

Part III
Bridging the Gap

From the review presented in Part II of this study it is clear that several formats for IAR in preparation for residence abroad are practised in the UKHE sector. However, it has been noted that the majority of preparation is of a cognitive nature rather than affective, behavioural or strategic. Where the latter is practised, it only appears to address the aims and objectives presented in Part I in the complete format of a full study module (e.g. Roberts & Jordan 1999). Elsewhere, evidence suggests that delivery is patchy and somewhat incohesive.   Nevertheless, in both full and patchy contexts, examples of good IAR activities can be found.

Selected Examples of good practice
The UK HE MFL context

The "Sociogram" activity used at Portsmouth University (Coleman, J.A. 1999) is an example of an effective IAR activity currently used in the UK HE Modern Languages context. It requires students to map the notion of "micro-culture" onto that of "macro-culture" by producing and analysing their own sociograms. The lesson outline for the activity is presented in the indented text, accompanied by our own additional comments in square brackets:

Sociogram

Objective: to help students appreciate the relativity of culture and the fact that every country, every society, every individual, is multicultural. Residence abroad means extending our range of behaviours.

Approach: general discussion, led and guided by tutor, with class breaking into pairs / small groups for certain activities.

1. Discuss definitions of "culture" which students have prepared as homework. Write up on the whiteboard the key expressions. Probably three categories: Culture (capital C) e.g., music, theatre, literature; Material aspects (objects, products); Non-material aspects (traditions, customs, way of life).

[Alternatively, examples of different meanings of the word "culture" could be provided in context, (e.g., This year Glasgow is the European City of Culture; The 'siesta' isn't as much a part of Spanish culture as we're lead to believe) and students asked to produce suitable definitions / match the contextualised occurrences to dictionary definitions (or possibly those given by Jenks 1993).]

2. Possible agreed definition: totality of material and ideological phenomena attached to a given social group. Underline the categories. Underline also that we are referring to a social group, usually smaller than the country to which students will have referred.

[Definition (4) from Jenks could be discussed along with the notions of small cultures / social circles illustrated by ideals, symbols and behaviours students associate with the University soccer team, hippies, punks or life in a Hall of Residence.]

3. Take one student as example (chosen on basis of knowledge of class). Get her/him to describe all her/his social circles: parents, grand-parents, schoolfriends, university friends, flatmates, holiday job, term-time part-time job, church, sport, music, pubs, etc. Draw them on the board, at least a dozen circles, many of which overlap, e.g.

4. Each student draws their own sociogram. Conclusion: we all belong to multiple social groups, and thus to multiple cultures.

[Depending on the complexion of the group, partnered students could draw one another's sociograms, generating more discussion.]

5. Bring out that each social context has its own code of behaviour. Get some examples, e.g., swearing outlawed at grandparents', essential on building site; smoking not accepted with parents, accepted in pub; formal dress for church, fashionable dress for clubbing. Seek less superficial examples: e.g., more formal with church friends than flatmates; more open with schoolfriends than university friends; more deferential to parents than to grandparents; sometimes even different languages: Urdu with aunt and cousins, English with parents.

[Different codes of behaviour could be noted on relevant areas of the sociogram, creating a more concrete "picture" of cultural behaviour.

6. Conclusion: we all have multiple identities, multiple behaviours which we adopt as a matter of course to respect the conventions and values of our different social groups. values and behaviours are relative, dependent on the social context.

[At this stage, students could supply anecdotal accounts of mis-reading occasions / settings and behaving inappropriately.]

7. Take examples from earlier mini-survey, e.g., British students go to bed later than European counterparts. Is one behaviour, in the absolute, more valid than another? No, these are socially determined habits. So do not interpret difference as deficit.

[Mini-survey activity included in appendix. Alternatively, students could discuss the relevance of the activity so far to their period of residence abroad: on one level, the activity highlights the complexity and relativity of culture while on another it will raise awareness of changes the period of residence abroad will enforce on the student's personal and social life.]

8. Choices which will face our students abroad next year: in a French / Spanish / German / Japanese / Russian etc. milieu, either observe and adopt a new set of behaviours which fit the context, or resolutely retain British behaviours, even rebuilding a British context to contain them. The harder option is to be preferred: be open-minded; observe; imitate; do not reinforce own prejudices; remember that all behaviours and values are relative.

[Rather than ending the activity on this note, the messages from the whole sociogram exercise could be summarised more tangibly and creatively in the form of a group poster / presentation. Considering the final additional comment made after point 7 above, students could identify which of their existing social circles could be replicated while abroad in order to help integration, e.g., membership of a sports club, and start to explore strategies for managing these changes.]

The above activity would comfortably constitute a 1½ hour session. Choice of whether or not to use the target language would depend upon the linguistic level of the students (possible with 2nd year post-A-level, improbable with 2nd year post-ab-initio), and would require the tutor to predict occurrences of certain structural and lexical items. Furthermore, students would need to be very comfortable with using the target language in pairwork. An important consideration is whether the objectives will be more achievable by working in L1, given also that such an activity may be used in a preparation session for students of different languages. Either way, the visual mapping exercise and the opportunities for discussion and comparison of experience provide a potentially memorable learning experience.
An example from another context: SIETAR / Intercultural Press

"Barnga" (Thiagarajan and Steinwachs 1990) is a simulation activity developed for a variety of contexts of IAR programmes. It is available through Intercultural Press and the International Society for Intercultural Education, Training and Research (SIETAR) (see appendix to bibliography). Its description, provided by Intercultural Press (http://www.interculturalpress.com/) is as follows:

In Barnga participants experience the shock of realizing that despite many similarities, people of differing cultures perceive things differently or play by different rules. Players learn that they must understand and reconcile these differences if they want to function effectively in a cross-cultural group. 

Participants play a simple card game in small groups, where conflicts begin to occur as participants move from group to group. This simulates real cross-cultural encounters, where people initially believe they share the same understanding of the basic rules. In discovering that the rules are different, players undergo a mini culture shock similar to actual experience when entering a different culture. They then must struggle to understand and reconcile these differences to play the game effectively in their “cross-cultural” groups. Difficulties are magnified by the fact that players may not speak to each other but can communicate only through gestures or pictures. Participants are not forewarned that each is playing by different rules; in struggling to understand why other players don’t seem to be playing correctly, they gain insight into the dynamics of cross-cultural encounters. 

Some key features which contribute to the simulation’s effectiveness are: 

•	As few as nine players—or large groups—can play it. At least three and preferably four groups are needed, with three to six players in each group. 
•	The game and debriefing can take as little as forty-five minutes. 
•	Participant instructions are provided in French and Spanish as well as English. 
•	Barnga lends itself easily to effective experimentation. Several variations are suggested in the manual. 

Directions and master copies of handouts are included. Standard playing cards must be purchased for use in the simulation. 

The discussion guidesheet poses the following questions to the participants after they have played the card game:

THE GAME SIMULATES (REPRESENTS) REAL-LIFE SITUATIONS.

1.	What specific real-life situations does this game remind you of?

2.	Choose one of these real-life situations. What are the underlying causes of the problems or difficulties?

3.	What does the game suggest about what to do when you are in a similar situation in the real world? What did you do during the game which "worked" for you?

4.	Prepare to report your best idea to the whole group.

The simplicity of "Barnga", together with its straightforward debriefing guidelines, make this simulation game easily-applicable to preparation programmes for MFL students.  It requires little research on the part of the tutor, yet, if the dynamics of the activity are conducted well it raises awareness of the covert nature of some cultural differences.  Furthermore, it raises awareness of the necessity to adapt behaviours and adopt strategies to overcome differences.  Much of the effectiveness of the activity comes from its memorable format: a simple card game, the playing of which will stand out from more "seminar-like" activities.

Development and Dissemination of IAR activities for the UK HE MFL context

On the developmental front, The Interculture Project is devising activities based on critical incidents reported by students during and after residence abroad in focus groups, interviews and diaries.  These vignettes of students' experiences are extremely rich and varied in content, and most valuably are illustrative of real affective and behavioural issues involved in the intercultural experience of residence abroad. Take, for instance, the following extract reported by 'Jo' (pseudonym) while she was resident in France:

"If you are female, you have to be really careful what you wear.  If you come from Britain, you are used to being able to wear short skirts and vest tops without being hassled.  There's no way you can wear things like that here if you don't want blokes approaching you every 100 metres down the street.  I know a couple of people who have been grabbed in the street by strange blokes who have run off. French blokes won't hesitate in asking you out for a coffee after having said "hello" to you in the street, and when they realise you are foreign they are even worse. I never really realised how much I would miss British lads! French women don't really realise or understand - they only wear tops up to their necks and long skirts or trousers.  According to them, if you wear a low-cut top, you are encouraging men, and the only reason you might wear a low-cut top is that you want men to ogle you."

The general content and deictic expression presented in this vignette would provide good material for discussion as the extract stands: her use of 'you' is extremely categorical.  She tars all French males with the same brush.  French men and women are referred to collectively as 'they'.  Likewise, in saying "according to them" Jo presumes that all French women are of the same opinion. Moreover, although her perception of difference in dress conventions may be correct, Jo blames "French women" for not seeing things her way, as opposed to considering where she may need to adapt her own point of view.  More worryingly, there is a vein of nationalism hinted at in Jo's longing for "British lads".  By exploring the content of this vignette it becomes clear that it has a great deal of potential for the development of a good IAR activity.  One possible learning activity based upon it is described below.

"The eye of the beholder"

Aims: 	to consider how clothing conforms to social and cultural values;
to explore the behavioural nature and some affective consequences of integration and non-integration;
to consider the deictic expression of stereotype and nationalism.

Objectives:	Students should be able to:
recognise that superficial symbols can be expressions of values and beliefs;
recognise that behaviour affects integration;
recognise that personal encounters are not a valid basis on which to judge a national community.

Materials:	Magazine / photocopied pictures of clothing typical to different eras (Victorian, 1960s/70s/80s), social / professional roles, religions, cultures and sub-cultures (punks, hippies). [about 50+ photos per group of 4-6 students - in a previous session students could be asked to collect and bring in pictures]

Approach:	Group work and plenary activity

Time:		1½ hrs

1. Categorisation: Distribute each collection of photos to each group of 4-6 students. Ask the students to put together photos into categories of their own choice, noting at the end which categories they chose. 

2. Ask the students to repeat the above exercise, but with different categories this time, again noting the categories they use.

3. Repeat the exercise once more. [By doing the activity three times, students will no longer be able to use superficial categories (e.g., colours), and have to consider less superficial ones]

4. In turn, ask a student representative from each group to write up their categories on the board, explaining briefly any that seem obscure.

5. Predictably categories such as "ethnic clothing", "uniforms", "cult clothing", "sexy clothing", "sports clothing" which have social / cultural significance will appear. Circle any categories like these. 

6. Give each group the following to discuss: 

What kind of clothes would be appropriate for you to wear ...? And why?
to work as a mechanic?
to do judo?
for a job interview with a bank?
for a funeral?
in a village in Niger in Central Africa?

Clearly, the clothing items associated with some these categories are obvious. The reasons for an overall or a judo kit are mainly practical, although in the case of judo and other sports, clothing is often rule-determined. Clothing for a job interview, or a funeral will probably be explained as "expectations", to which the question "why?" can be asked to elicit discussion on professionally and socially determined values and behaviours. Clothing in Niger covers the ankles and hides their form, as they are considered erotic.

7. Return to the categories noted in stage 5. Allocate each group of students no more than six categories to discuss. Provide them with the following questions:

What do you think accounts for the style of the clothing in this category? / Who or what decides the clothing should be as it is and why?
What does the clothing say about the values / beliefs of the person / culture wearing it?

Here draw attention to aesthetics / customs / religion / identity / conformity as being social constructions.

8. Pair work: What influences the decisions you personally make about the clothes you choose to wear? Quick gather and note brief feedback.

9. Students read Jo's extract. Ask them to consider why Jo is feeling as she does, and what she should do / have done to avoid feeling as she does.

10. Analyse the deictics of Jo's language, considering the significance of her uses of "you", "I", "them" and "they".

11. Students are asked to rate, on a ten point scale from "false" to "absolutely true", the validity of the comments Jo makes about "French blokes", "British lads" and "French women", discussing why. Ask students if they have any anecdotal evidence which might disprove Jo.

12. Students work in groups to "tidy up" Jo's extract to make it into a valid piece of advice for students going abroad. To do this it must:
read finally as a piece which reflects tolerance and a desire to understand the difference in dress code; 
properly contextualise incidents reported and remove counterproductive, invalid stereotyping. 
Firstly students identify invalid, judgmental elements in each sentence. Following this, the task is to reconstruct each sentence in turn according to the two criteria given above. The transcription can be done on a whole class basis, or written individually for written feedback from the tutor.

13. What is the relevance of the title "The eye of the beholder"? What if it were to be called "The I of the beholder"?

Concluding comments

This study, which has been carried out at an interim stage in the development of The Interculture Project, lays no claim to completeness.  Its principal conclusion is that pedagogical practices in the development of IAR within UKHE are extremely diverse.  Despite the growing interest in the area of IAR and the increasing range of publications in the field and despite the various attempts to survey the present state of practice within the UK, it has so far been extremely difficult to provide a detailed picture of what goes on in different institutions.  Suggested reasons for this are provided above and are fairly clear.  Written descriptions are unlikely to offer a coherent explanation of activities on the ground and even if they are forthcoming, they are likely to be coloured by the perspective of the individuals who supply them.  Itemised responses to questionnaires are susceptible to very different interpretations.  The process of investigation is cumulative however, and as more publications emerge,  more is known and understood about good practice, the readiness to experiment becomes more widespread and an appreciation of what is feasible in different institutions becomes established.  The pool of institutional knowledge currently available will be further enhanced by the AFLS publication in July 2000 of McBride and Seago’s Target Language – Target Culture.   This sub-project is one small part of an ongoing process within the framework of a project whose ultimate aim is to provide a comprehensive sample of activities which work.  The examples provided in Part II above are just a few of these.  The Interculture Project is developing a much wider collection including a bibliography and a data-base of students’ accounts of their intercultural experiences.  These will be actively disseminated through the conference and workshops which are part of the HEFCE/FDTL initiative and will be available for consultation on the project’s website.   It is our hope that, taken as a whole, these faciltities will extend the development of intercultural preparation from the utilitarian into the affective and experiential spheres. 

Bibliography

Anderson, J.R. (1983) The Architecture of Cognition Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Banks, S.P. 1995 Multicultural Public Relations: a social interpretive approach Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications
Bennett, M.J. (1993) "Towards Ethnorelativism: A Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity" in Paige R.M. (ed.) (1993)
Berry, M. (1998) "Reflections on Learning from Students in a Multicultural Learning Environment" in Killick D. & M. Parry (eds) (1998)
Brislin, R.W. (1990) Cross-Cultural Psychology, Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Brislin, R.W. and T. Yoshida (1994) Intercultural Communication Training: An Introduction Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications
Byram, M. (1999) "Foreign Languages Education for Critical Cultural Awareness and Democratic Citizenship" in Killick D. & M. Parry (eds) (1999)
Byram, M. and G. Zarate (1997) "Defining and Assessing Intercultural Competence: some principles and proposals for the European context" Language Teaching 29, 14-18
Claes, M.T. (1997) "Cross-cultural Competence in Business: a cultura franca?" in Killick D. & M. Parry (eds) (1997)
Coleman, J.A. (1996) Studying languages: a survey of British and European students London: CILT
Coleman J.A. (1998) "Student Preparation for Residence Abroad: Two Stages in Acquiring Cross-Cultural Capability" in Killick & Parry (eds.) (1998)
Coleman, J.A. (1999) "Sociogram" one of a series of 4 lesson plans available from the Department of Area Studies, University of Portsmouth.
Cormeraie, S. (1995) "Cross cultural training: perception and personal growth", in : Parker, G. and A. Rouxeville (eds) (1995)
Cormeraie, S. (1998) "From Theoretical Insights to Best Practice for Successful Inter-Cultural Education: The Crucial Transmission" in Killick D. & M. Parry (eds) (1997)
Di Napoli, R. & L. Polezzi (1999) "Languages for Cross-cultural Capability: Promoting the Profession" in Killick D. & M. Parry (eds) (1999)
Fowler, S.M. & M.G. Mumford (eds.) (1995) Intercultural Sourcebook: Cross-Cultural Training Methods Vol.1 Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press
Gudykunst, W.B. (1994) Bridging Differences: Effective Intergroup Communication Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications
Gullahorn, J.T. & J.E. Gullahorn (1963) "Extension of the U-Curve Hypothesis" Journal of Social Sciences 19 (July 1963) pp33-47
Hall, C. (1997) "Intercultural Communication as a Component of University Modern Languages Course" in Killick D. & M. Parry (eds) (1997)
Hall, E.T. & M. Hall (1990) Understanding Cultural Differences Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press
Hess, J.D. (1997) Studying Abroad / Learning Abroad Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press
Hofstede, G. (1980) Culture’s consequences: international differences in work related values Beverley Hills: Sage Publications
Jenks, C. (1993) "Culture" London: Routledge
Jordan, S. (1998) "Starting with the self: capability in one's own culture" in Killiick and Parry (eds.) 1998
Kelly, M. (1998) "Towards an Intercultural Practice of Language Teaching" in Killick D. & M. Parry (eds) (1998)
Killick, D. & M. Parry (eds) (1997) Developing Cross-Cultural Capability Proceedings of the conference at Leeds Metropolitan University, December 1996 Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University
Killick, D. & M. Parry (eds) (1998) Cross-Cultural Capability: The why, the ways & the means: New theories & methodologies in language education Proceedings of the conference at Leeds Metropolitan University, December 1997 Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University
Killick, D. & M. Parry (eds) (1999) Languages for Cross-cultural Capability -  Promoting the Discipline: Marking Boundaries and Crossing Borders Proceedings of the conference at Leeds Metropolitan University, December 1998 Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University
Kim, Young Yun and W.B.Gudykunst (1988) Theories in Intercultural Communication Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Kohls, L.R. & J.M. Knight (1994) Developing Intercultural Awareness: A Cross-Cultural Training Handbook Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press
Landis, D. & R.S. Bhagat (eds.) (1996) Handbook of Intercultural Training Thousand Oaks: Sage
Lysgaard, S. (1955) "Adjustment in a Foreign Society: Norwegian Fulbright Grantees Visiting the United States" International Social Science Bulletin 7 pp45-51.
Morrison, T. ... (1994) Kiss, Bow and Shake Hands: How to do Business in 60 Countries Holbrook, MA: Adams Media Corporation
Mozzon-McPherson, M. (1998) "Electronically Italians: Effectiveness and Limitations in the Use of Internet to Language Learning and Cultural Understanding" in D.Killick & M.Parry (eds) (1998)
Mughan, T. (1998) "The Role of Knowledge in Communication. Is Area Studies the most Appropriate Vehicle for French Courses in H.E?" in D.Killick & M.Parry (eds) (1998)
Oberg, K. (1960) "Culture Shock: The Problem of Adjustment to New Social Environments" Practical Anthropology 7 pp177-82
Paige, R.M. (ed.) (1993) Education for the Intercultural Experience Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press
Parker, G. and A. Rouxeville (eds) (1995) The year abroad: preparation, monitoring, evaluation London: CILT
Phipps, A. (1999) "Provisional Homes and Creative Practice: Languages, Cultural Studies and Anthropology" in Killick & Parry (eds.) (1999)
Roberts, C. and S. Jordan (26 February 1999) presentation of Ethnography Course Outline, given at the British Council, Spring Gardens, London. See also Jordan (1998)
Schumann, J.H. (1978) The Pidginization Process: A Model for Second Language Acquisition Rowley, MA: Newbury House
Seelye, H.N. (1996) Experiential Activities for Intercultural Learning Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press
Selinker, L. (1992) Rediscovering Interlanguage London: Longman
Smith, P.B. & M. Bond (1993) Social Psychology across Cultures Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf
Theuerkauf, B. (1997) "The Year Abroad Experience: Developing Cross-cultural Capability with Disability" in Killick & Parry (eds.) (1997)
Thiagarajan, S. and B. Steinwachs (1990) Barnga: A Simulation Game on Cultural Clashes Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press
Walravens, J. (1999) "Building Bridges: Towards an Interdisciplinary Model for Cross-Cultural Capability" in Killick & Parry (eds.) 1999
Woodhall, M. (1998) "Preparing for Difference" in Killick D. & M. Parry (eds) (1998)
Zarate, G. (1999) "Languages and Cross-cultural Capability: Proposals for Assessment" in Killick & Parry (eds.) 1999