Dimension

Evaluating language learners’ intercultural competence 81
questionnaire and a post-treatment questionnaire. Both pre-treatment and posttreatment
forms include the same 30 Likert-scale items that represent six questionnaire
items for each of the five IC goal areas. The 30 Likert-scale questionnaire items
are set up on a five-point scale with a spectrum of responses as follows: 1-strongly
disagree, 2-disagree, 3-don’t know, 4-agree, and 5-strongly agree, in response to firstperson
statements designed to capture the essence of Bryam’s five-goal model of IC
and effectively measure respondents’ self-evaluation of their IC in the five domains.
(See Appendix C and Appendix D.) To bolster the interpretation of quantitative results
with qualitative data, a section on participant background is included, based on
that used by Bateman (2002). Additionally, items included in the post-questionnaire
trigger participant feedback about the interview experience and elicit specific cultural
learning they have gleaned from class presentational reports on the interviews
as discussed in the Qualitative Data section below.
Qualitative data. The aforementioned quantitative data, in conjunction with
the qualitative data collected from the questionnaire instrument, generated findings
to answer the second research question: What is the nature of both quantitative and
qualitative questionnaire results and how might they inform the pedagogy of IC for FL
learners? As described in detail below, lesson plans, classroom activities and assignments,
student feedback cards, and field notes were analyzed qualitatively to buttress
the questionnaire findings and strengthen their interpretation with respect to understanding
how they inform the pedagogy of IC for FL learners.
During the course of the module implementation for this investigation, field
notes were logged following class sessions to document instructor / researcher observation
of student actions and responsiveness to classroom activities. In addition,
student feedback cards were used following specific classroom activities, as well as
at the end of class sessions as exit slips, to elicit first-hand student thoughts and
reactions. In such cases, students were invited to respond in English. For example,
students were given two prompts following the initial teacher presentation on IC
where they were asked to write a brief definition of IC based on their personal understanding
of the concept as well as to note their general impressions or a specific
impression of the IC construct. Following presentation and discussion on the nature
of ethnographic interviewing, students completed feedback cards to note any new
concept that they encountered related to cross-cultural interviews and something
that personally struck them about the ethnographic approach to interviewing. Both
of these data sources – field notes and feedback cards – served to inform lesson
content and delivery during implementation of the module (responsive pedagogy).
At the culmination of each semester, following completion of the module, class
session PowerPoints (lesson plans) were reviewed in conjunction with the field notes
and feedback cards to further explore the ways in which the classroom activities
evoked student responsiveness toward perspective-taking. These multiple sources of
qualitative data were individually and collectively analyzed to identify patterns and
emergent themes to expand understanding of the pedagogy of IC (research question
two). Findings and interpretation drawn from these qualitative data were considered
in light of quantitative data results and documented change in student development
of IC, to bolster findings through triangulation.