Tải bản đầy đủ

Intercultural competence of ELF teachers at university of economic and technical industries when teaching the course book “new headway, pre intermediate, third edition”

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
************************

LƯƠNG THỊ THANH THẢO

INTERCULTURAL COMPETENCE OF EFL TEACHERS AT
UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMIC AND TECHNICAL INDUSTRIES WHEN
TEACHING THE COURSE BOOK “ NEW HEADWAY, PREINTERMEDIATE, THIRD EDITION”

Năng lực liên văn hóa của giáo viên Tiếng Anh Trường Đại học
Kinh Tế Kỹ Thuật Công Nghiệp trong việc giảng dạy giáo trình
“ New Headway, Pre-intermediate, Third edition”

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60140111

HANOI – 2016



VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
************************

LƯƠNG THỊ THANH THẢO

INTERCULTURAL COMPETENCE OF EFL TEACHERS AT
UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMIC AND TECHNICAL INDUSTRIES WHEN
TEACHING THE COURSE BOOK “ NEW HEADWAY, PREINTERMEDIATE, THIRD EDITION”

Năng lực liên văn hóa của giáo viên Tiếng Anh Trường Đại học
Kinh Tế Kỹ Thuật Công Nghiệp trong việc giảng dạy giáo trình
“ New Headway, Pre-intermediate, Third edition”

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60140111
Supervisor: Prof. Nguyen Quang

HANOI – 2016


DECLARATION
I, Lương Thị Thanh Thảo, hereby certify that the thesis “Intercultural
Competence of EFL teachers at University of Economic and Technical Industries
whenteaching the course book “New Headway, Pre-intermediate, Third Edition”
” is submitted for the partial fulfillment of the Degree of Master of Arts at the
Faculty of Post Graduate Studies – University of Languages and International
Studies – Vietnam National University, Hanoi. I also declare that this thesis is result
of my own research and efforts and that it has not been submitted for any other
purposes.
Hanoi, 2016
Signature

Lương Thị Thanh Thảo


i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to express my indebtedness and sincere gratitude to my
supervisor Prof. Assoc. Nguyen Quang for his invaluable guidance and great
support without which this thesis would not have been completed.
Besides, I am heartily thankful to all the lecturers and teachers of the Faculty of
Post Graduate Studies – University of Languages and International Studies –
Vietnam National University, Hanoi for their valuable and interesting lectures and
assistance during my study at the university.
Many thanks would go to all the teachers of English at University of Economic
and Technical Industries whose active participation and cooperation helped me to
fulfill this study.
Last but not least, I send my special thanks to my family and my friends who
provided abundant assistance and encouragement while this work was in progress.

ii


ABSTRACT
This study examines the intercultural competence of ELF teachers at
University of Economic and Technical Industries, their self-report in teaching
practice and the reflection of their intercultural competence on their teaching. This
study adopts a mixed methods research design. Quantitative data are collected
through a survey questionnaire from seventeen EFL teachers at University of
Economic and Technical Industries. Among them, four teachers participate in the
follow-up interviews. The findings of this study suggest that participating teachers’
perceive cultural teaching objectives reflect various aspects of an intercultural
perspective toward culture teaching. They are aware of the importance of
intercultural competence in teaching however they have not applied frequently in
teaching practice yet. English language teachers concentrated on the factual
knowledge and skills parts of teaching the language most of the time, which could
be categorized within the pedagogy of information and the pedagogy of preparation
respectively; either when they were presenting culture; when they were representing
their teaching objectives; when they perceived the teaching of the ICC; or when
they were using activities in their classrooms. Less concentration was paid to actual
teaching of culture, which could be categorized within the pedagogy of encounter;
despite their realization of the importance of it to their students and their openness
to other cultures.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ....................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................. iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................ iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................ vii
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................ viii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ ix
LIST OF APPENDIXES...........................................................................................x
PART A: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................1
1. Rationale of the study ..........................................................................................1
2. Aims and objectives of the study ..........................................................................2
2.1. Aims of the study .......................................................................................... 2
2.2. Objectives of the study ................................................................................. 2
3. Scope of the study ................................................................................................3
4. Significance of the study ......................................................................................3
5. Research Methodology ........................................................................................3
5.1. Research Questions ....................................................................................... 3
5.2. Research methods ......................................................................................... 4
6. Design of the study ..............................................................................................4
PART B: DEVELOPMENT.....................................................................................5
Chapter 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................5
1.1. Language and culture correlation ................................................................. 5
1.2. Intercultural competence .............................................................................. 7
1.3. Byram’s perception of intercultural competence ........................................ 10

iv


1.4. Review of related studies ............................................................................ 12
Chapter 2: METHODOLOGY ...............................................................................14
2.1. Setting and participants............................................................................... 14
2.1.1. Setting ...................................................................................................... 14
2.1.2. Participants............................................................................................... 14
2.2. Data collection instrument .......................................................................... 14
2.2.1. Questionnaire ........................................................................................... 14
2.2.2. Interview .................................................................................................. 16
2.3. Data collection procedure ........................................................................... 16
2.4. Data analysis ............................................................................................... 17
2.4.1. Questionnaire Analysis ............................................................................ 17
2.4.2. Interviews Analysis ................................................................................. 17
Chapter 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ..........................................................19
3.1. From quantitative data ................................................................................ 19
3.1.1. Teachers’ perceptions of culture and intercultural competence .............. 19
3.1.2. EFL teachers self-report their intercultural competence in teaching
practice ............................................................................................................... 23
3.1.3. Teachers’ IC reflected in their practice of teaching ................................ 28
3.2. From qualitative data .................................................................................. 30
3.2.1. Teachers’ perceptions of culture and intercultural competence .............. 30
3.2.2. Teaching objectives ................................................................................. 34
3.2.3. How teachers perceive the teaching of intercultural competence in their
classrooms .......................................................................................................... 36
3.2.4. Teacher’s intercultural competence reflected in their self-report
pedagogical practice .......................................................................................... 38
PART C: CONCLUSION.......................................................................................40
1. Summary of the Research and Main Findings ..................................................40
2. Limitations of the study .....................................................................................43

v


3. Suggestions for further studies. .........................................................................44
REFERNCES...........................................................................................................45
APPENDIX A: ........................................................................................................... I
APPENDIX B: .......................................................................................................... X

vi


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CC

Communicative competence

CEFR
EFL

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages
English as a foreign language

ELT

English language teaching

FLT

Foreign language teaching

IC

Intercultural competence

ICC

Intercultural communicative competence

ILTLP

Intercultural Language Teaching and Learning in Practice

SD

Standard Deviation

UNETI

University of Economic and Technical Industries

vii


LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 3.1: Definition of Culture from the Respondents’ Point of

19

View
Table 3.2: Definition of Culture from the Respondents’ Point of

20

View
Table 3.3: Teachers’ beliefs about cultural teaching objectives

22

Table 3.4: Frequency of Dealing with Particular Cultural Aspects

23

Table 3.5: Responses about having the chance to Create a

24

Multicultural Environment in the Language Classroom
Table 3.6: Frequency of applying intercultural competence teaching

26

Table 3.7: Means for items showing a positive attitude to teaching

29

about culture
Table 3.8: Means for items showing a negative attitude to teaching
about culture

viii

30


LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Figure 1 : Byram’s model of intercultural communicative competence

ix

11


LIST OF APPENDIXES
Page
Appendix A: Survey questionnaire

I

Appendix B: Interview Question Sheet

X

x


PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the study
As a result of globalization, the growing popularity of English as foreign
language learning (EFL) has been put an emphasis on both linguistic proficiency and
competence. Due to the worldwide trend of globalization, the opportunities to
communicate and interact in English have increased and English is considered as the
gateway that makes communication possible across cultures. In order to achieve the
goal of successful communication, English language teaching has been viewed as
imperative way to reach the goal. However, being influent in the target language does
not guarantee that the transmitting messages will be successful. It can result in
misinterpretation and miscommunication. Therefore, foreign language education
should integrate diverse worldwide culture and relate to learners’ cultural background.
In other words, cultural knowledge and linguistic knowledge play an equal role in
communication. According to Byram (1997) and Smith et al (2003, p.89-126)) “in
order to enhance English language learners’ intercultural communicative competence,
understanding other background is the foundation of making possible assumptions.”
Moreover, many scholars such as Byram and Morgan (1994), and Secru (2005) have
pointed out the important of intercultural competence (IC) in foreign language
education noting that teaching English as a foreign or second language is not merely
language teaching, but more importantly “the teaching of global culture.”
Since culture plays such an important role in English language teaching,
teachers should be considered as a major instructional tool to transmit knowledge and
consequently to convey cultural aspects to their students. In recent years, Vietnamese
EFL teachers and educators are beginning to understand the greater role of culture
plays in foreign language learning and beginning to address the need to integrate a
cultural dimension into classrooms (Nguyen Thi Mai Hoa, 2007, Nguyen Thanh Long,

1


2014). Despite the fact that the importance of culture teaching has gained attention
from Vietnamese EFL teachers and scholars, classroom teaching still falls behind
theoretical expectation: linguistic teaching still dominates mostly in universities in
Vietnam and culture teaching has not been very effective in terms of promoting
students’ acquisition of intercultural competence and preparing them for intercultural
communication. This makes teaching intercultural competence a significant and heavy
responsibility on language teachers’ professional development, which requires
additional objectives and focus for teacher education and training programs.
Additionally, it is initiated by my own interest in the topic which inspires me to
have a further insight into “Intercultural Competence of EFL teachers at University
of Economic and Technical Industries when teaching the course book “New
Headway, Pre-intermediate, Third edition”.
2. Aims and objectives of the study
2.1. Aims of the study
The aim of this study is to investigate intercultural competence of EFL teachers
at University of Economic and Technical Industries and their self-report in culture
teaching.
2.2. Objectives of the study
- To assess the intercultural competence of EFL teachers at University of
Economic and Technical Industries
-

To find out EFL teachers’ self-report in culture teaching practices

-

To find out how EFL teachers’ intercultural competence is reflected in their
self-reported pedagogical practice in classroom

2


3. Scope of the study
Within the framework of this minor thesis, the study only focuses on university
EFL teachers’ attitude of intercultural competence in teaching for non-English major
students.
4. Significance of the study
The researcher finds it necessary to explore how English language teachers
think about teaching culture in their classroom. The need of using English as a means
of communication with people from other countries is more and more increasing
because of the globalization,
Firstly, this study helps to provide teachers and educators with a framework to
train English language teachers to incorporate culture into the English language
teaching, and also provide an in-depth understanding of the theoretical background of
language and culture teaching.
Secondly, the study provides the insights into English language teachers’
intercultural competence and their application in practice.
5. Research Methodology
5.1. Research Questions
1,What are the perceptions of EFL teachers at UNETI about intercultural
competence?
2, How do EFL teachers self-report their intercultural competence in teaching
practice?
3, How is teachers’ intercultural competence reflected in their self-reported
pedagogical practice in classroom?

3


5.2. Research methods
The study adopts a mixed methodology combining both quantitative and
qualitative methods for data collection and data analysis. Seventeen teachers are
investigated so as to compare and contrast their understanding and attitudes towards
intercultural competence. Two collection instruments are employed including
questionnaire, and semi-structured interview.
6. Design of the study
The thesis consists of three parts, namely Introduction, Development and
Conclusion.
Part A, Introduction, presents the rationale, the aims, the scope, the method and
the design of the study.
Part B, Development, consists of three chapters. Chapter 1, Literature Review,
reviews the key constructs and related works. Chapter 2, Methodology, introduces the
participants, the data collection instruments and data analysis procedure. Chapter 3,
Findings and Discussions, deals with the results and the discussions concluded from
the data analysis.
Part C is Conclusion of the study. In this part, the major findings, some
recommendations, limitations of the research as well as suggestions for further study
are presented.
The appendixes are the last part of the study following the reference.

4


PART B: DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. Language and culture correlation
To accomplish a productive discussion of the relationship between culture and
language, both terms should be defined. Language is generally accepted as a system of
arbitrary vocal symbols used for human communication. According to Sapir (1921, p8)
“Language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas,
emotions and desire by means of voluntarily produced symbols”. Thompson (2008)
defines language as a system of communication using sounds or symbols that enables
us to express our feelings, thoughts, ideas and experiences”. The definition of language
is also supported by Salzman (1993, p.15) as a part of human genetics endowment, and
language, which is one of the several systems of communication used by various
people.
Culture can also be interpreted as “the complex whole, which includes
knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities, and habits
acquired by humans as members of a society (Tylor, 1874). According to Hubernere
(1965, p.78) culture is divided into three categories the sociological or social sciences
dimension of culture, which includes the history, geography, economics, and political
development of a nation; the artistic dimension of culture, which consists of literature,
music, art, etc.; and the anthropological oriented dimension of culture, which covers
aspects such as the behavioral patterns of the people e.g. customs, daily life, standard
of living and religion. And there is a most widely accepted definition of culture: culture
is the total accumulation of beliefs, customs, values, behaviors, institutions and
communication patterns that are shared, learned and passed down through the
generation in an identifiable group of people. Also, another categorization places

5


culture as a “large or capital-C culture” and a “small-c culture” (Chastain, 1976,
p.338& Doyé, 1999, p.19).
Krech(1962)explained the major functions of language from the following
three aspects:
1.

Language is the primary vehicle of communication;

2.

Language reflects both the personality of the individual and the culture of

his history. In turn, it helps shape both personality and culture;
3.

Language makes possible the growth and transmission of culture, the

continuity of societies, and the effective functioning and control of social group.
It is often held that the function of language is to express thought and to
communicate information. Language also fulfills many other tasks such as greeting
people, conducting religious service, etc. It is obvious that language plays a paramount
role in developing, elaborating and transmitting culture, enabling us to store meanings
and experience to facilitate communication. The function of language is so important in
communication that it is even exaggerated by some scholars.
However, the definition alone cannot provide us with a clear understanding on
the relationship between language and culture. Therefore, we should take a dialectical
point of view on the relationship between language and culture. As is mentioned at the
beginning, language and culture are inextricably intertwined. This approach is
supported by Crozet & Liddicoat (2000) and other researchers and language educators
such as Risager (2005), Carr (2007). Kramsch (1991, p.217) argues that “language and
culture are inseparable and constitute a single universal or domain of experience”. On
the one hand, language is a part of human being. It reflects people’s attitudes, beliefs,
and worldviews. Language both expresses and embodies cultural reality. On the other
hand, language is a part of culture. It helps perpetuate the culture and it can influence
the culture to a certain extent. According to Saint-Jacques (2012, p.53), language can
be seen as a window into the culture of people speaking that language. Therefore, it is
6


difficult to communicate without understanding of culture in spite of mastering
thousands of words. There is a need to know about the people and the country of the
target language. Several authors (Seelye, 1974; Lafayette, 1975; Starkey, 1996;
McKay, 2000) have stressed the importance of culture in teaching and learning a
foreign language. The relationship between language and culture in second language
learning and teaching is also discussed widely by many authors, for example, Byram,
Morgan et al (1994) and Higgs (1990).
To sum up, language and culture have an interdependent relationship. According
to Bennett & Allen (2003, p.237) “the person who learns language without learning
culture risks becoming a fluent fool”. Therefore, there is a need for the teacher to be
aware of the cultural differences to help their students get rid of inappropriate
behaviors when engaging with native speakers.
1.2. Intercultural competence
Language education has experienced from a focus of “linguistics competence”
to communicative competence” and then to “intercultural competence”. Chomsky
(1965) has investigated the acquisition of “linguistic competence”. Students are
expected to develop the understanding of a language correctly only by learning its
linguistics

system

which

includes

grammatical

structures,

vocabulary

and

pronunciation. At that time the socio-cultural context is less of significance in language
acquisition. As the pragmatic reform appears at the second half of the 20nd century
which emphasizes on the performance of speech acts, language teachers realize that it
is not enough for students to communicate effectively with only well-structured
sentences if they lack the knowledge of how to use these sentences in a real context.
The term “communicative competence” is investigated in different ways by
many scholars. It is first introduced by Hymes (1972) with several systems of rules
underlying communicative behaviors. Then Van Ek (1986) who originally applies CC

7


to FLT also presents six partial or super-ordinate abilities in his research. This
competence usually consists of four elements: grammatical competence, sociolinguistic
competence, discourse competence, and strategic competence (Savignon, 1983 &
Alptekin, 2002). However, CC has been criticized by scholars because of focusing on
speech acts and discourse competence instead of cultural competence. Meanwhile the
culture of the target language often differs from the first language. As argued by Crozet
and Liddicoat (1999), communicative language teaching is not able to link between
language and culture so it does not enhance intercultural understanding. Therefore,
there is a need to entail a shift in the overall aim of FL instruction from CC to IC.
There

are

different

definitions

of

intercultural

competence.

The

conceptualization of intercultural competence mainly deals with the ability to
communicate and interact across culture of language learners. According to Byram
(1997) intercultural competence is defined as “the ability to communicate and interact
across culture boundaries”. As presented in her work, Deardoff (2004, p.194) proposes
that intercultural competence include “the ability to communicate effectively and
appropriately in intercultural situation based on one’s intercultural knowledge, skills
and attitudes”. This definition is also supported by Paige et al. (2003) who refer to
intercultural competence as the ability of a person to “interact and communicate
effectively with person from other cultures and in culturally diverse settings’.
In addition to the ability to communicate and interact, the sense of cultural
identity is another important feature in the notion of intercultural competence. Byram,
Gribkova & Starkey ( 2002, p.10) has shown that it is “ the ability to ensure a shared
understanding by people of different social identities, and the ability to interact with
people as complex human beings with multiple identities and their own individuality”.
Intercultural competence emphasizes learners’ mediation between different
cultures. Risager (1998, p.244) has shown that intercultural competence is the ability
that allows learners to “function as mediators between their home culture and the target

8


culture and to use the target language as contact language with people who use this
language as first language”. According to Byram& Zarate (1997) it helps learners to
look at themselves form an external perspective, then analyze and adapt their own
behaviors, values and beliefs. They can interpret and understand other perspectives as
well as decide what is taken for granted in their society as mediators between language
and culture. Therefore, they can “engage with complexity and multiple identities and
avoid stereotyping which accompanies the act of perceiving someone through a single
identity” (Byram et al., 2002, p.9). The “reflective capacity to deal with cultural
differences and to modify behavior when needed” was also taken into consideration by
Dellit (2005, p.17)
However, intercultural competence of language learners cannot be achieved
only through policies, materials, or even residence abroad as argued by Byram &
Zarate (1997). Therefore, teachers’ awareness and understanding of intercultural
competence are necessary to ensure students’ progress (Sercu, 2002). Teachers have
responsibilities to help learners realize the relationship between their own culture and
other cultures. Teachers can inspire their students’ interest and their curiosity about
“otherness”, and an awareness of themselves and their own culture from other people’s
perspectives.
To sum up, culture is seen as the core in the concept of intercultural competence
in language education. It is insufficient for language learners to study and work in
multicultural setting only by “linguistics competence” and “communicative
competence”. In consequence, there are a wide range of definitions of “intercultural
competence” due to its complexity. These definitions all focus on people’s capacity to
communicate effectively and appropriately in the intercultural situations and their
ability to mediate between languages and cultures. The next section describes the five
well-known models of intercultural competence.

9


1.3. Byram’s perception of intercultural competence
Byram (1997) offers a model of IC, which includes five “savoirs” acquired by
language learners. The elements of this model are attitudes, knowledge, skills of
interpreting and relating, skills of discovery and interaction, and critical cultural
awareness or political education, linked to the values a person acquires as a result of
belonging to several social groups in a society. These five savoirs are defined as
follows:
1. Savoirs (Knowledge): of social groups and their products and practices in
one's own and in one's interlocutor's country, and of the general processes of societal
and individual interaction
2. Savoir être (Attitudes): curiosity and openness, readiness to suspend disbelief
about other cultures and belief about one's own.
3. Savoir comprendre ( Skills of interpreting and relating): ability to interpret a
document or event from another culture, to explain it and relate it to documents from
one's own.
4. Savoir apprendre/ faire (Skills of discovery and interaction): ability to
acquire new knowledge of a culture and cultural practices and the ability to operate
knowledge, attitudes and skills under the constraints of real-time communication and
interaction.
5. Savoir s’engager (Critical cultural awareness/political education): 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.

10


Figure 1 Byram’s model of intercultural communicative competence
Figure 1 shows the relationship between five elements. Byram’s model (1997)
values key dimensions in relation to culture: cultural relativism, critical awareness,
empathy, curiosity, and cultural identity. It also presents the inter-relationship of
linguistic competence, sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence and
intercultural competence.

For Byram, intercultural competence involves an

individual’s activity to interact with people in other cultures using foreign language as
well as acts as a mediator between people of different culture.
Through the five saviors proposed by Byram (1997), language learners can
identify misunderstandings while interacting with people from other cultures, explain
their conflicting interpretations, define the need for further learning, and take action to
avoid such misunderstandings.

11


IC offers an invaluable opportunity to engage language learners in learning
about other cultures. It gives language teachers a chance to integrate the teaching of
language and culture.
1.4. Review of related studies
In Europe, Australia, and North America, the importance of intercultural
competence teaching has been widely recognized in second and foreign language
curricula and educational policies (Sercu, 2006; Liddicot, 2004;). For instance, in
Europe, the acquisition of intercultural competence has been addressed in the Council
of

Europe's

(2001)

Common

European

Framework

of

Reference

for

Languages:Learning, teaching, assessment. The framework provides a structure for
intercultural competence development based on Byram’s (1997) model. Moreover, it
provides a common basic for language syllabuses, curriculum guidelines, and
assessment. Knowledge and skills for language learners to reach the six levels of
communicative proficiency are identified in the CEFR. Culture as one of the main
aspects of the CEFR is put an emphasis to help language learners become plurilingual
and develop interculturally (Council of Europe, 2001)
In the United States, the National Standards in Foreign Langauge Education
Project is a framework for second language learning. Five national standards for
foreign language education which are referred to as the five Cs (Standards, 1996) have
been proposed, including communication, cultures, connections, comparisons, and
communities, Teachers are encouraged to adjust their current communicative
competence oriented teaching practices in order to help students to acquire intercultural
competence. Although many countries’ national curricula for language teaching have
been following the intercultural shift in theory, Garrido & Alvarez (2006); Sercu
(2006) argue that both cultural teaching in the broad sense and intercultural
competence teaching have not yet become a common practice in second and foreign
language classrooms.

12


Studies conducted by European researchers, regarding cultural teaching
practices, suggest that most language teachers’ current cultural teaching practices do
not yet have desired outcomes as specified in the theoretical literature ( Sercu, 2006;
Sercu, Mendez Garcia & Castro Prieto, 2005).
In Australia, the Intercultural Language Teaching and Learning in Practice
(ILTLP) (University of South Australia, 2007) was further developed in Australia. The
ILTLP helps teachers increase their knowledge of intercultural language teaching and
learning. Furthermore, it helps language teachers able to integrate them into classroom
practice and assessment.
Some researchers have investigated foreign language teachers’ perception of
ICC and its implementation in the language classroom. Sercu (2005) conducted a study
that surveyed teachers of English, German, and French and investigated to what extent
the teachers’ beliefs, levels of instruction, and teaching practices could be promoting
ICC as opposed to mere communicative competence. He finally found that the majority
of foreign language teachers who participated in the study had “not yet adopted
student-centered strategies for teaching intercultural competence” (p. 103) because of
lacking of preparation and of appropriate teaching materials and not having sufficient
time, resources, or training. Teacher’s beliefs and practices regarding ICC have been
investigated by other researchers such as Paige, Jorstad, Siaya, Klein, and Colby,
(2003); Sercu, (2005)
The lack of curricular support, suitable textbook materials, and ICC testing
raises concerns about the integration of intercultural competence into language
curricula were concluded in the researches of Duff & Uchida, (1997); Lazaratton,
(2003); Young et. al., (2009)
In Vietnam, Nguyen Thi Mai Hoa is one of the researchers who highlight the
importance of intercultural competence. Nguyen Thi Mai Hoa (2007) also considers
the lack of guidelines, insufficient time, class sizes and lack of intercultural capability
as the reasons of communication failure.
13


Tài liệu bạn tìm kiếm đã sẵn sàng tải về

Tải bản đầy đủ ngay

×