This article was downloaded by: [Mount Allison University 0Libraries]On: 06 October 2014, At: 07:12Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Intercultural EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ceji20

Developing intercultural competenceand global citizenship throughinternational experiences: academics’perceptionsFranziska Tredea, Wendy Bowlesa & Donna Bridgesa

a The Education For Practice Institute, Charles Sturt University,Locked Bag 450, Silverwater Sydney NSW 2128, AustraliaPublished online: 25 Aug 2013.

To cite this article: Franziska Trede, Wendy Bowles & Donna Bridges (2013) Developingintercultural competence and global citizenship through international experiences: academics’perceptions, Intercultural Education, 24:5, 442-455, DOI: 10.1080/14675986.2013.825578

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2013.825578

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Developing intercultural competence and global citizenshipthrough international experiences: academics’ perceptions

Franziska Trede*, Wendy Bowles and Donna Bridges

The Education For Practice Institute, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 450, SilverwaterSydney NSW 2128, Australia

International education is a key priority for Australian universities, governmentand employer groups. For students, an international professional experience isuniquely placed in providing opportunities for developing intercultural learning,intercultural competence and global citizenship. Employers see graduates withinternational experiences as interculturally competent, viewing them as proficientin analysing and responding appropriately to culturally significant values andperceptions. This research seeks to understand how students are prepared forinternational experiences and how intercultural learning is integrated into courseprogrammes. Academic staff responsible for international experiences wereinterviewed in one-on-one qualitative interviews about their practices and per-ceptions of preparing students for these experiences. Although all internationalprogrammes were procedurally well planned, we found that most participantsdid not include intercultural pedagogies into their programmes, nor did theypurposefully seek to develop intercultural competence and global citizenship intheir students. Professional development opportunities need to be created foracademics to rethink their pedagogical intent regarding international experiences.Immersion in culture is not, on its own, an assurance of intercultural learning.Providing international experiences without a pedagogical framework that helpsstudents to reflect on self and others can be a wasted opportunity and runs therisk of reinforcing stereotypical thinking and racist attitudes.

Keywords: intercultural learning; intercultural competence; pedagogy; globalcitizenship; professional experience

Introduction

There is a growing trend to internationalise university education and offer studentsinternational experiences as part of their university curriculum. Providing such expe-riences without a pedagogical framework that helps students to reflect on self andothers, and make meaning of their experiences can run the risk of reinforcing unre-flected beliefs and values about other countries, customs and norms. Well-developedpedagogical frameworks can enable students to develop their intercultural compe-tence and qualities for global citizenship. However, this requires academic educatorswho are skilled in developing intercultural competence and global citizenship. In thispaper, we explore academics’ perceptions and practices in preparing students forinternational experiences as part of Charles Sturt University’s professional entryprogrammes. In particular, we are curious about academics’ understandings of

*Corresponding author. Email: ftrede@csu.edu.au

© 2013 Taylor & Francis

Intercultural Education, 2013Vol. 24, No. 5, 442–455, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2013.825578

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

intercultural competence and global citizenship and their pedagogical intentions todevelop these in students.

Global citizenship

Global citizenship is a concept closely aligned to notions of interculturalcompetence. Israel, Miller, and Reed (2011, 309) argue that global citizenship ‘…involves a sense of self that is grounded in specific places (home communities andnations), while also being conscious of those commitments in the broader context ofglobal belonging and global collaboration’. In their view, global citizenship bringsthe global and local together; for example it involves ‘inclusive debates’ about howto protect the environment, respect human rights and respond to disasters in othercountries. Thus, ‘… global citizenship is a pluralistic, postmodern identity thatcannot be reduced to a single essence or single allegiance’ (Israel, Miller, and Reed2011, 313). We conceive global citizenship as a conceptual value frameworkunderpinned by social responsibility, global equality and human rights. Such aglobal citizenship framework aligns well with notions of intercultural competence.However, we are well aware that other value frameworks can underpin interculturalcompetence. This paper shares the understanding of the term ‘global citizenship’ asdiscussed by Israel, Miller, and Reed (2011) and eloquently articulated by Moraisand Ogen (2011, 449):

Thus, global citizenship is understood as a multidimensional construct that hinges onthe interrelated dimensions of social responsibility, global competence and global civicengagement.

Intercultural competence in student international experiences

The term ‘intercultural competence’ denotes dispositions and capabilities rather thanmeasurable skills. We concur with Perry and Southwell (2011, 453) who assert thatmost scholars understand intercultural competence as: ‘… the ability to effectivelyand appropriately interact in an intercultural situation or context’. The term ‘compe-tence’ can be misleading, if viewed from a narrow instrumental skills perspectivebecause it omits the socio-cultural context and dispositions that inform abilities toengage with intercultural and global situations (Chappell, Gonczi, and Hager 2000).For instance, it is possible for educationists to teach skills of interculturalcompetence for purposes of competitive gain, profit or exploitation rather thanglobal cooperation in support of sustainability, human rights and social justice.

While there is an abundance of research into the key elements of interculturalcompetence also known as ‘international competence’, ‘intercultural communica-tion’, ‘intercultural sensitivity’ and ‘cultural intelligence’ McRae and Ramji (2011)only a few papers locate their framework within a self-reflective and criticalperspective. A critical pedagogy perspective is a good fit to explore interculturalcompetence and global citizenship because it is based on critiquing knowledge,power and language and on questioning traditions and norms. Brookfield (2012) aleading critical pedagogue states that ‘the point of getting students to reflectcritically is to get them to recognise, and question, the assumptions that determinehow knowledge in that discipline is recognised as legitimate’. Such critical reflectionof what counts as fact and knowledge opens up opportunities for students to view

Intercultural Education 443

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

the world differently. Giroux (2005, 164) adds that critical reflection enablesstudents to become aware of how knowledge excludes other ways of thinking and it‘rejects distinctions between high and low culture’.

Trede and Hill (2012) identify critical self-awareness, respect for diverseinterpretations of practices and the use of inclusive dialogues as key principles ofcultural competence. Yashima (2010) discusses culture-general attributes such asself-efficacy, tolerance of ambiguity, critical thinking/creativity, non ethno-centricand openness which can be applied in specific cultural contexts where other attri-butes such as social, political and cultural knowledge, language ability and specificcommunication skills are needed. McRae and Ramji (2011, 347–348) categoriseintercultural competence into ‘active and passive skills’. The latter include skillssuch as general knowledge, language skills or political knowledge, and ‘activeskills’ which relate to more personal qualities such as empathy, resilience to stress,self-awareness and ‘intercultural sensitivity’.

Outcomes-based studies that explore international experiences commonlyconclude that these experiences have potential to enrich student interculturallearning, competence and global citizenship (e.g. Chieffo and Griffiths 2004;McLaughlin and Johnson 2006; Wals and Sriskandarajah 2010; Yashima 2010).Realising this potential, however, proves more difficult. While immersion in culturehas been shown to enhance cross-cultural learning which is critical for professionalswho will encounter an ‘increasingly globalised and culturally diverse work place’(Balandi et al. 2007), upon graduation, immersion alone is simply not enough(McAllister et al. 2006). Webber (2005, 475) calls for more research into interna-tional experiences and warns that simply increasing the amount of internationalplacements and ensuring immersion in them does not provide a guarantee of learn-ing intercultural competence. A lack of purposeful pedagogical planning and studentpreparation can see the international placement become a wasted opportunity. Todate, there has been a focus on measuring the success of internationalisation on thequantity of students who include an international component within their degreeprogramme (Deardorff 2004). This has been to the detriment of exploring thepedagogical aspects of intercultural learning and improving the educational qualityof international experiences. Intercultural pedagogy and with it the quality oflearning, reflecting upon and becoming interculturally competent appears to be aneglected aspect of international experiences.

Intercultural pedagogy has the potential to guide students’ attention to becomingaware of their own cultural values and heightening awareness of other cultures. LeRoux (2002) found that greater student awareness of self and others enhancesintercultural competence. This awareness is based on identifying assumptions andquestioning taken-for-granted behaviours and practices of the learners’ culture, aswell as the culture of others. Intercultural teaching and learning can raise ethical andmoral dilemmas and questions about values and identity.

The literature in the area of intercultural education (Fantini 2000; Coulby 2006;Sercu 2006) warns that exposing students to international experiences, withoutadequately preparing them or supporting them to make sense of their experience,can result in negative learning outcomes. The need to locate teaching and learningstrategies within a humanistic and critical framework cannot be understated due tothe danger that non-facilitated experiences can nurture or even strengthen stereotyp-ing and racist attitudes. Poor intercultural competence can lead to embarrassment,misunderstandings, unproductive work (Mohan et al. 2004), frustration, intercultural

444 F. Trede et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

conflict (Le Roux 2002) and reinforcing existing inequalities. Without critical selfreflection and adequate support students can retreat into taken for granted ways ofcoping that denigrate rather than appreciate and engage with difference.

In today’s globalised world, no matter what path students choose to take in their careerupon graduation, they will be living and working in a culturally diverse setting.(McRae and Ramji 2011, 347)

This quote highlights that the ability to live and work in a culturally diversesetting, in other words to develop intercultural competence, is becoming a survivalskill in today’s globalised world. It also implies a close interconnection betweenglobal citizenship and intercultural competence.

Context of internationalisation of higher education

In an increasingly globalised world and with the rise of the ‘knowledge society’,higher education has become an important international commodity. Viewed throughan economic lens, globalisation is ‘big business –’ making large profits for universi-ties and countries of the global north and also meeting important needs in the globalsouth (Altbach and Knight 2007). Australian universities are under increasing pres-sure to produce graduates who will be competitive in a globalised economy (Jones,Torezani, and Luca 2012). Vincent-Lancrin (2009) argues that whereas 20 years agointernationalisation of higher education reflected ‘political, geostrategic, cultural anddevelopment aid motivations’ (64), in latter times it is characterised by economicmotives (revenue-making) buoyed by globalisation. As Altbach and Knight (2007,291) point out however: ‘Globalization may be unalterable, but internationalizationinvolves many choices’. These authors argue that while international academicmobility can compound existing economic inequalities favouring the global north, athoughtful and careful approach to internationalisation of higher education can alsolead to important benefits for the public good – including people from the globalnorth and south.

The OECD (2004) identifies four approaches to internationalised or cross-borderhigher education, three of which: skilled migration, revenue raising and capacitybuilding, are economically driven and emerged strongly during the 1990s. AmongstOECD countries, Australia has been noticeably successful in the revenue-makingforms of internationalised or cross-border higher education. Since the early 2000s, ithas ranked in the top ten countries receiving foreign students and it is even closer tothe top of the list of countries establishing higher education programmes outsidetheir own borders, in foreign students’ home countries (OECD 2004; Meek 2005;Vincent-Lancrin 2009).

Of the four types of internationalised higher education identified by the OECD(2004), only one approach, the ‘mutual understanding approach’, is listed as notbeing driven by economic imperatives. This older form of international highereducation, sometimes referred to as ‘study-abroad’, ‘… encompasses political,cultural, academic and development aid goals’ (OECD 2004, 4). Australia does notappear in the list of countries ranking highly in this approach; instead Japan,Mexico, Korea, Spain and the European Union’s Erasmus programme dominate.

The ‘mutual understanding approach’ is however still a priority for the Australiangovernment and universities due to its potential to contribute to intercultural

Intercultural Education 445

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

exchanges, to create international links between institutions and people, and to layfoundations for international diplomacy. This level of internationalisation is seen as avital contribution to Australia’s ability to communicate, collaborate and contributeglobally (DEEWR 2009). International workplace learning placements and short-termmobility programmes are part of this approach to international higher education andoffer the opportunity to provide Australian students with an international experienceas part of their domestic study programme or course. Short-term mobilityprogrammes have been described as ‘a short burst of international experience relevantto your degree and … something that you could do in your break or as part of yoursubject’ (CSU Global 2010).

Internationalisation at Charles Sturt University

Charles Sturt University is a multi-campus inland Australian university. TheUniversity strategy identifies four means by which the university will work towards‘strengthening Australia’s participation in the international community’. Two ofthese are based in the revenue-raising approach: offshore (transnational) offerings ofcourses and expanding opportunities for international students to study courses inAustralia, while two draw from the mutual understanding approach: ‘includinginternational learning experiences within courses’, and ‘providing courses thatsupport collaboration in international education for social development’. One of theindicators of quality and success of the university’s course profile is identified as:‘increasing the proportion of students undertaking international experiences’(Charles Sturt University 2011). This university is in its early efforts to introduceinternational workplace learning placements and short-term mobility programmes aspart of its overall strategy. CSU Global provides basic travel information, travelwarnings and risk minimisation, coping with culture shock, developing appropriateexpectations for the experience and ambassadorship. This programme does notinclude an intercultural education component with a focus on interculturalcompetence and global citizenship.

Methodology

The research questions that guided our research design were: how do academicsprepare students for international experiences and how do they integrate understand-ings of intercultural competence into their course programmes? We sought to under-stand more deeply preparation practices for intercultural learning by engagingparticipants in a question and answer dialogue. This study adopted a philosophicalhermeneutics approach which is a good fit with dialogically exploring the percep-tions and practices of participants. Philosophical hermeneutics is the art and scienceof interpreting dialogues (Gadamer 1996). The focus is on shared understanding of achosen phenomenon. Shared understanding means that interpretations are notimposed but generated through explorative dialogues. In this study, the datacollection phase comprised dialogues between research participants and researchers.The data analysis phase comprised dialogues amongst the researchers.

Ethics clearance was obtained. We recruited participants for this project via theuniversity’s electronic newsletter and in collaboration with the university’s globalprogramme. We used a purposeful and snowball sampling technique (Minichiello,Aroni, and Hays 2008). It was not our aim to generalise about preparation practice

446 F. Trede et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

but to gain deeper understanding of perceptions that inform preparation practices.Twelve academics from three of the four faculties at Charles Sturt Universitycontacted us and volunteered to participate. Seven were from the Faculty of Science,three from the Faculty of Education and two from the Faculty of Arts. Single,one-on-one, semi-structured interviews lasted between 60 and 120 min and wereconducted face-to-face or via telephone due to interspersed campuses. Interviewswere audio taped, transcribed verbatim and de-identified. The aim of the interviewswas to reveal the participants’ pedagogical purpose and framework. Intervieweeswere asked to discuss their teaching and learning strategies and what pedagogicalframework, if any, informed their preparation of students for intercultural learningand global citizenship and the challenges they faced.

The data analysis consisted of three stages: description, interpretation andcritique. The 12 transcripts were divided up between the three authors. Each scrutin-ised their allocated transcripts for interviewees’ understanding of interculturalcompetence and global citizenship, and how it could be facilitated and learnt. Eachdeveloped codes that informed participants’ perceptions and practices, and generatedinitial descriptive themes (Guba and Lincoln 1981). In stage two, the three research-ers compared their codes and themes and developed a deeper interpretation of sharedthemes by clustering them (Miles and Huberman 1994). In the final stage, theauthors critiqued these themes by searching for contrast in practices and contradic-tions of perceptions or whether there was a good match. Analytical lenses thatguided stage one and two were informed from the literature review and includedsuch aspects as inclusiveness, raising cultural awareness, respect and tolerance fordifference and sensitising students to power issues. Key questions that guided thethird stage included: where are these participants self-critical, do they assign apedagogical purpose to their student preparation?

Findings

Our findings reveal that there was not one shared pedagogical approach to preparestudents for intercultural competence and global citizenship amongst the participantsin this study. Interviewees who had well-developed pedagogical approaches also hadan ability to articulate their understandings of intercultural competence and globalcitizenship, whereas others who felt that the international experience in itself wassufficient to enable students to develop intercultural competence had un-informedpositions towards intercultural competence and global citizenship. We discuss ourfindings as they emerged from our data analysis under the following themes:perceived purposes and benefits, courses approach, informal preparation, assessmentof intercultural preparation and perceptions of developing intercultural competenceand global citizenship.

Perceived purposes and benefits of international experiences

We extrapolated understandings of intercultural competence by scrutinising thepurposes that participants offered as a rationale for conducting international experi-ences. These purposes varied widely. Most participants believed in the intrinsicworth of the international experience for its own sake. Overwhelmingly, participantspointed to the opportunities that such experiences generated for students byproviding the following reasons for their involvement in such programmes:

Intercultural Education 447

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

� Providing unique learning experiences.� Reinforcing the values of the course (social justice).� Providing cross-cultural learning and exposure to culture.� Giving students’ confidence in an international and globalised world.� Providing clinical learning experiences not available in Australia.� Optimising connections and professional associations.� Meeting university targets.

Most participants did not explicitly mention the development of interculturalcompetence and global citizenship in their students; at best, they took it for granted.Experiential learning was adopted without planning and reflecting. The underlyingvalues of raising awareness of global inequality and human rights issues were onlydiscussed by a minority of our participants.

Ten of the twelve participants reported that attendance by students at thepre-departure workshops delivered by CSU global’s student mobility unit wasmandatory. In these workshops, students were prepared for immunisation and visarequirements focusing on procedural essentials without addressing cultural andglobal issues in the host countries. Eight interviewees did not offer additional socio-cultural preparations for their students, besides taking part in informal discussionsand ad hoc advice. Two interviewees felt that their course itself prepared studentsadequately for the cultural aspect of their international placement and that additionalpreparation was not necessary. It was beyond the scope of this study to reviewcourse curricula to establish their pedagogical intent.

A course approach to intercultural education

Three participants reported that their course offered subjects that embedded notionsof intercultural education. These courses were teacher education (from kindergartento year 12), social work and occupational therapy. The interviewee from the teachereducation course reasoned that the study for social justice and equity related well topreparing students for international experiences:

Interviewee 4: [There is a focus on] being amongst people that are from other cultures,bringing and unpacking all their prejudice and bias. So we spent a lot of time …because they’re going to work with a whole range of … people who will be from arange of backgrounds and cultures.

The interviewee from the social work course stated that students are exposed tointercultural literature throughout their studies:

Interviewee 11: The actual preparation begins about one year before the placementand students are asked to read cross cultural literature, particularly the cultural contextof the country where they are going … And students are also informed about theworking culture and how it is different from developed countries.

Students of the occupational therapy course are exposed to inequities andglobalisation as part of their course curriculum:

Interviewee 12: Things like universal human rights, again that underpins our whole …course, we talk about … human rights all the time … Globalisation, is certainly

448 F. Trede et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

addressed and it gets progressively addressed as students’ progress through the coursemore. So in fourth year, in fact, right at this point in time, the students are doing a con-temporary practice issue subject which concentrates on things like the bigger picture ofthe profession and anti oppressive practices and cultural sensitivity.

Each of these courses has accreditation standards which require them toaddress issues and professional practice relating to social justice, human rightsand intercultural competence. For example, to be accredited by the australianassociation of social workers (AASW), social work courses must include curricu-lum addressing social work ethics (which is based on notions of social justiceand human rights) as well as several ‘core content’ areas, one of which is ‘crosscultural practice’ (AASW 2007, 8). Cross-cultural practice involves teaching manyof the concepts and skills associated with global citizenship and interculturalcompetence discussed above.

Minimal and informal intercultural preparation

Eight interviewees reported minimal intercultural preparation. Students werereminded of their host country’s history and economic and developmental status.They were simply asked to be open-minded and appreciative. Some examples arebelow:

Interviewee 9: ‘We do talk to them about the country … informally we talk to themabout the country and how it’s structured and they’re all aware that it’s … gonethrough a lot of political instability … in the past and that there’s a lot of subsistence… and lower well-being. So they have a general understanding of all that and wedefinitely talk to them informally about that. We don’t sit them down and give themlectures at length about the country, we’d rather them see it for themselves …

Interviewee 6: I get an [experienced expert] to talk to them about their experiences sothat when we actually visit the place … they have an appreciation for what actuallyhappened there … we also cover some of the history. So we talk about colonialisation… And we go through the history a little bit so that they can appreciate the changethat’s occurred through various forms of government and socialism and capitalism and… the history of the war and that sort of thing …

Interviewee 7: In our pre-departure meeting, I prepared basic greetings and I passedthem out and asked them to memorise, we practised it on the aeroplane … Understand-ing the culture and being open minded. That’s what I emphasised when I had thepre-departure meeting with our students, I asked them to be open-minded and toappreciate all the differences in culture.

Amongst the preparatory activities there were some innovative strategiesalthough their pedagogical intent remained obscure. These included:

� Vietnam veterans come to speak with students.� Students who went previously talked to students.� One session subject of student-focused class discussion.

The pedagogical intentions behind these pre-departure activities were not furtherelaborated. The danger is that if these intentions are not explicit such activities couldbe a disservice to sensitising students for complex and diverse experiences abroad,

Intercultural Education 449

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

rather than raising their awareness and preparing them to be open to the upcomingexperience.

The diversity in preparation for international experience is evident from theseresponses. Whereas some courses have globalisation, social justice and multicultur-alism embedded others perceive international experiences as an add-on to a coursewithout explicit integration. Apart from the general travel preparation workshopsorganised by CSU Global, it appears to be a matter of chance and the attitude of theacademic whether and how students are prepared for international experiencesbefore they leave Australia.

Assessment of intercultural preparation within a subject

Only one interviewee reported that the subject incorporating the internationalexperience included two preparatory assessment tasks prior to departure andreflection tasks upon return. The assessment tasks required preparation of a literaturereview on a self-chosen topic that related to understanding the theories, the currentlevel of knowledge around development, the role of tourism in cultural change,economic change, the responses of local communities to that and the models forachieving good outcomes. This participant articulated the pedagogical purpose of hispreparation design as follows:

Interviewee 2: And so we talk about the ethics, the philosophy of it … you know theenvironment, society, culture, the economy, the tourist experience, they’re all so totallyinterlinked that you can’t exclude one.

Using mandatory pre-departure assessments indicate to students that interculturaland global preparation is important. Although it is valuable to, for example, write apre-departure assignment on the history of the host country, it is important, too, forstudents to include a critical appraisal of their chosen lens they used to explore thishistory. A colonial lens on developing countries may perpetuate the dominantdiscourse and strengthen a them and us sentimentality. A quantitative abstract lensthat describes, for example, facts of war and economic structures may omit thehuman experience and consequential suffering (Kazanjian 2011).

Perceptions of developing intercultural competence and global citizenship

Six interviewees did not articulate explicit intentions to develop students’intercultural competence and global citizenship. They had no elaborate concept ofan intercultural pedagogy. Interviewees 7 and 10 spoke about the value of appreciat-ing overseas experience and having confidence to work overseas, rather thandiscussing pedagogy of facilitating intercultural learning. Interviewee 9 felt thatstudents learn through unexpected, unplanned, accidental events. These intervieweesplaced little value on preparation. Interviewee 11 felt that it is up to students to makesense of their overseas experiences. Interviewee 5 did not think that interculturallearning would occur at all:

Interviewee 5: It is perceived that the placement is seen as a holiday and [Theexperience is] not an ‘enlightenment’ culturally … Making it international means it’sjust further away, but it’s not any different … because the practice of [x] is verycommon throughout the world, you know, you … do the same job [in Botswana] thatyou can do here.

450 F. Trede et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

This quote exemplifies a belief that disciplinary rather than professional practicewas the key focus of the international placement. Interviewee 6 emphasised theimportance of simply being there as a tool for intercultural learning. Preparation wasbelieved to be difficult to integrate into the course. Students have ‘enough on theirplates doing core subjects’. Furthermore, this interviewee believed that the interna-tional experience is the best way to be exposed to intercultural issues and to learnby seeing and living it. He believed that experience and dealing with the issues inthe country is richer and better than theory.

Interviewee 12, while emphasising the importance of learning interculturalcompetence and preparing students for global citizenship, believed that preparationis far less important than carefully structured experiential learning in theinternational context. While his students undergo a two day preparation session, it ismore about the actual professional practices they will be doing while overseas, thancultural preparation.

Interviewee 12: I’m not real sure of the value of doing it (preparation about culture,language, politics). This is a contention in our school with some staff who feel that ourlack of not doing these sort of things is if you like, not enhancing the student’s experi-ence. Whereas I prefer a much more experiential way of students doing it and whenthey’re talking with their interpreters or talking with their language teacher, or talkingwith people at the orphanage, they find out more about things that happen and getdifferent views.

This interviewee had a sophisticated and articulate pedagogy based on howstudents acquire intercultural competence through relational learning and activelyparticipating with people who are different, from within a different culture. Workingfrom a perspective of valuing human rights and learning to respect difference with-out having to accept all practices within a different culture, he structures experiencessuch as having interpreters of the same age working with students and getting toknow them, as well as language classes and tutorials while away as part of theintercultural experience.

Interviewee 12: So there’s that issue, um, we deal with stereotypes, I don’t outwardlydeal with stereotypes, but I challenge students when they start to complain about theway things are done and that sort of thing, but it’s not the stereotypes as such, it’s alack of understanding that, that this is not Australia and things are done differently inthis country at this time. And we’ll talk about that, the whole of idea of the languageand the communication and that, to me it’s really important that we have the interpret-ers and we have some language classes … and then the interpreters who are with usgive us another perspective, from their point of view and from a young Vietnameseperson’s point of view.

In contrast, there were three interviewees who expressed doubt that theexperience alone could develop intercultural competence. These respondents placedimportance on intentional preparation for and reflections after internationalexperiences as illustrated by this quote:

Interviewee 03: I don’t know if you can just send someone overseas and they comeback and you tick the box that they’re culturally competent and aware and theybecome global citizens … I think you could prepare people a little bit … makingpeople consider some of the cultural, contextual factors … I think it’s a real challengebecause it’s such a hard concept to define, it’s not like you can just write an essay and

Intercultural Education 451

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

all of a sudden you become competent in that area … Perhaps the debrief afterwardsand the reflection is something that is really perhaps, as important.

Interviewee 2 thought it was important to have an educational purpose and toexpose students to preparatory educational tasks. He felt that the preparation was atleast as important as the experience itself:

Interviewee 2: I would suggest to you that everybody that’s taking their studentsoverseas has to find some reason for doing that. It can’t be just because the universitywants them to. There’s gotta be some reason for it to contribute to the student’seducation and then their experience.

One interviewee expressed concern that a lack of adequate interculturalpreparation could foster intercultural competence:

Interviewee 8: I think they [students] needed more preparation than what they weregiven. CSU Global had given them a generic presentation on how to be an ambassadorfor CSU and international travel … and I had had two sessions with the students …trying to give them information about the country and culture but that was nowherenear enough. They should have had some academic component or some seriouscultural studies and intercultural communication studies prior to the trip … But theprogramme is not set up to prepare them, basically they apply, they get accepted, theypay, they go.

There was no shared understanding amongst these participants about what ispedagogically required to prepare students to optimise their international experiencesfor developing intercultural competence and global citizenship. Perceptions rangedfrom leaving it up to individual students to make sense of their experiences, to writ-ing pre- and post-reflection assignments and participating in collective debriefs. Thisdiversity in perceptions of intercultural competence and global citizenship points toa need to raise awareness and critically debate the potential of pedagogicalframeworks to enhance student learning from international experiences.

Conclusion and implications

Although all international programmes were procedurally well-planned, most partici-pants did not articulate a clear intercultural learning purpose in developing intercul-tural competence and global citizenship in their students. The notion of globalcitizenship appeared to be not well-understood. We can only conclude from thisstudy that the global citizenship discourse is superficial. We argue, by drawing oncritical pedagogues such as Freire (1972), Giroux (2005) and Brookfield (2012), thatan intercultural learning pedagogy is underpinned by intentions to sensitise studentsto difference and diversity, knowledge and practice, to enable them to understandinternational experiences from new perspectives and to transform their perceptionsand identity in this process. Building capacity to question is crucial to developingintercultural competence, global citizenship and a self-owned professional identity.Teachers who manage international experiences need to take up the role ofproblematising students’ pre-departure understanding of the host country. Encourag-ing students to explore their own cultural values and positions from whichthey understand their world is a starting point for developing global citizenship andintercultural competence. This process of critical awareness raising requires a

452 F. Trede et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

dialogical environment where all (students and teachers) can respectfully and safelymake critical sense of their experiences and learn from each other. The participantsin this study did not articulate this reciprocal and participatory aspect of their peda-gogical role.

From our findings, we conclude that there is a need for professional developmentand course reviews to strengthen the higher education imperative of internationalis-ing courses. Professional development can enable academics to become effectivefacilitators of intercultural competence. Opportunities need to be provided to courseteams to learn how to create collective spaces to rethink their pedagogical intentregarding international experiences as part of the wider course curriculum. Further,we recommend a list of ‘minimum requirements’ to consider when designinginternational experiences including the following:

� Develop explicit purposes for the international placement, with links to otherparts of the course and preparation for professional practice in order to providea more integrated approach to learning and teaching.

� Introduce strategies to draw on critical awareness raising and collective sense-making to help students to enhance their intercultural experience to developintercultural competence and global citizenship. This could include reflectiveexercises before and after the international experience, to develop awarenessof students’ own cultural lenses, and to debrief and integrate learning intoother parts of the students’ education for professional practice.

� Develop a systematic approach to cultural preparation including the socio-political-cultural and historic context in which the placement and professionalpractice occurs using multiple perspectives.

� Discuss with students what constitutes appropriate dress and behaviour in hostcountry and sensitise students to differences in values and practices.

These recommendations imply that appropriate and pedagogically rewardinginternational experiences also depend on adequate resources. Further research needsto be conducted to explore students’ perceived value and role of pre-departurepreparation for intercultural competence and global citizenship. In addition,researching the consequences for host countries could provide better understandingof the effectiveness of the ‘mutual understanding approach’ of internationalisation ofhigher education. International experiences provide an enormous potential to preparestudents for an intercultural globalised world of work. This potential is best realisedwith a purposeful pedagogy that enhances intercultural competence and active globalcitizenship in future graduates.

AcknowledgementsWe want to acknowledge and are grateful for funding by the Scholarship in Teaching grantof the Charles Sturt University. The authors thank all our participants who gave their time sofreely. We also thank our colleagues Dr Gates, Dr McEwen and Dr Swirski for their thought-ful feedback to earlier drafts.

Notes on contributorsFranziska Trede is associate professor and deputy director of The Education For PracticeInstitute where she leads the research programme. She researches about cultural competence,social inclusion, professional identity development and professionalism in higher education.

Intercultural Education 453

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Wendy Bowles is associate professor of social work and sub dean professional placement inthe school of humanities and social sciences. She researches about ethical practice, rural andglobal settings and fieldwork education.

Donna Bridges is lecturer of sociology in the school of humanities and social sciences atCSU. She researches about sociological issues that encompass gender, feminisms, women innon-traditional occupations and educating for professional practice.

ReferencesAASW. 2007. AASW Australian Social Work Education and Accreditation Standards.

Canberra: AASW. http://www.aasw.asn.au/document/item/100.Altbach, P. G., and J. Knight. 2007. “Internationalization of Higher Education: Motivations

and Realities.” Journal of Studies in International Education 11 (3–4): 290–305.doi:10.1177/1028315307303542.

Balandi, S., M. Lincoln, R. Sen, D. P. Wilkins, and D. Trembath. 2007. “Twelve Tips forEffective International Clinical Placements.” Medical Teacher 29: 872–877.

Brookfield, S. D. 2012. Teaching for Critical Thinking: Tools and Techniques to HelpStudents Question their Assumptions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Chappell, C., A. Gonczi, and P. Hager. 2000. “Competency-based Education.” InUnderstanding Adult Education and Training, edited by Griff Foley, 2nd ed., 191–205.Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.

Charles Sturt University. 2011. University Strategy 2011–2015. Accessed May 2012. http://www.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/124106/F1743-Update-2011-2015-CSU-Strategy_WEB.pdf.

Chieffo, L., and L. Griffiths. 2004. “Large-Scale Assessment of Student Attitudes After aShort Term Study Abroad Program.” Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of StudyAbroad 10: 65–177.

Coulby, D. 2006. “Intercultural Education: Theory and Practice.” Intercultural Education 17(3): 245–257.

CSU Global. 2010. Short Term Programs. Accessed May 2012. http://www.csu.edu.au/csuglobal/short-term-programs/overview.

Deardorff, D. K. 2004. “Internationalization: In Search of Intercultural Competence.”International Educator 13 (2): 13–15.

DEEWR. 2009. Budget Statement: Outcomes and Performance. Accessed June 20, 2012.http://www.deewr.gov.au/department/publications/documents/09200809pbsdeewroutcome6.doc.

Fantini, A. E. 2000. A Central Concern: Developing Intercultural Competencies. In Sit Occa-sional Papers Series, Addressing Intercultural Education, Training and Service: About ourInstitution, 25–33. Brattleboro, VT: World Learning School for International Training theExperiment. In International Living.

Freire, P. 1972. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Gadamer, H. G. 1996. Reason in the age of science. Translated by F. G. Lawrence.

Cambridge: The MIT Press.Giroux, H. A. 2005. Border Crossings: Cultural Workers and the Politics of Education. New

York: Routledge.Guba, E., and Y. Lincoln. 1981. Effective Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Israel, R., V. Miller, and S. Reed. 2011. “Global Citizenship Education.” In Ethnicity and

Race: Creating Educational Opportunities Around the Globe, edited by E. L. Brown andP. E. Gibbons, 309–321. North Carolina: Information Age.

Jones, N., S. Torezani, and J. Luca 2012. “A Peer-to-Peer Support Model forDeveloping Graduate Students’ Career and Employability Skills.” InterculturalEducation 23 (1): 51–62.

Kazanjian, C. J. 2011. “The Border Pedagogy Revisited.” Intercultural Education 22 (5):371–380.

McAllister, L., G. Whiteford, B. Hill, N. Thomas, and M. Fitzgerald. 2006. “Refection inIntercultural Learning: Examining the International Experience through a Critical IncidentApproach.” Reflective Practice 7 (3): 367–381.

454 F. Trede et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

McLaughlin, J. S., and D. K. Johnson. 2006. “Assessing the Field Course ExperientialLearning Model: Transforming Collegiate Short-Term Study Abroad Experiences intoRich Learning Environments.” Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study AbroadXIII: 65–85.

McRae, N., and K. Ramji. 2011. “Enhancing Cultural Intelligence through Cooperative andWork-Integrated Education.” In International Handbook for Cooperative and Work-Integrated Education, edited by R. K. Coll and K. E. Zegwaaard, 2nd ed., 347–353.Lowell, MA: WACE World Association for Cooperative Education.

Meek, V. L. 2005. Country Paper on Australia: Cross-Border Higher Education in Australia.In Implications of WTO/GATS on Higher Education in Asia and the Pacific,UNESCO Forum Occasional Paper Series Paper, No. 9, 45–8. Paris: United NationsEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). Accessed 20 May, 2012.http://repository.unimelb.edu.au/10187/8878.

Miles, M., and A. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Minichiello, V., R. Aroni, and T. Hays. 2008. In-depth Interviewing. 3rd ed. French’s Forest:

Pearson Education Australia.Mohan, T., H. McGregor, S. Saunders, and R. Archee. 2004. “Intercultural Communication

Competence in Business and the Professions.” In Communicating as Professionals, editedby T. Mohan, H. McGregor, S. Saunders, and R. Archee, 77–105. Southbank Victoria:Thomson.

Morais, D. B., and A. C. Ogen. 2011. “Initial Development and Validation of the GlobalCitizenship Scale.” Journal of Studies in International Education 15: 445–466.

OECD. August, 2004. Policy Brief Internationalisation of Higher Education. Organisationfor Economic Cooperation and Development. Accessed May 17, 2012. http://www.oec-d.org/education/educationeconomyandsociety/33734276.pdf.

Perry, L. B., and L. Southwell. 2011. “Developing Intercultural Understanding and Skills:Models and Approaches.” Intercultural Education 22 (6): 453–466.

Le Roux, J. 2002. “Effective Educators are Culturally Competent Communicators.”Intercultural Education 13 (1): 37–48.

Sercu, L. 2006. “The Foreign Language and Intercultural Competence Teacher: TheAcquisition of a New Professional Identity.” Intercultural Education 17 (1): 55–72.

Trede, F., and B. Hill. 2012. “Intercultural communication.” In Communicating in the healthsciences, edited by J. Higgs, R. Ajjawi, L. McAllister, F. Trede, and S. Loftus, 3rd ed.,Chapter 20, 195–205. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Vincent-Lancrin, S. 2009. “Cross-border Higher Education: Trends and Perspectives.” InHigher Education to 2030, Volume 2, Globalisation, 63–88. Paris: OECD Publishing.doi: 10.1787/9789264075375-4-en.

Wals, A. E. J., and N. Sriskandarajah. 2010. “Mediated Cross-Cultural Learning throughExchange in Higher Agricultural Education.” Journal of Agricultural Education andExtension 16 (1): 5–22.

Webber, R. 2005. “Integrating Work-Based and Academic Learning International and CrossCultural Settings.” Journal of Education and Work 18 (4): 473–487.

Yashima, T. 2010. “The Effects of International Volunteer Work Experience on InterculturalCompetence of Japanese Youth.” International Journal of Intercultural Relations 34 (3):268–282.

Intercultural Education 455

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mou

nt A

lliso

n U

nive

rsity

0L

ibra

ries

] at

07:

12 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014