Czerwionka, L., Artamonova, T. \u0026 Barbosa, M. (2015). Intercultural knowledge growth: Evidence...

$: Czerwionka, L., Artamonova, T. \u0026 Barbosa, M. (2015). Intercultural knowledge growth: Evidence from student interviews during a short-term study abroad. International Journal of$
International Journal of Intercultural Relations 49 (2015) 80–99

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

journa l homepage: www.e lsev ier .com/ locate / i j in t re l

Intercultural knowledge development: Evidence fromstudent interviews during short-term study abroad

Lori Czerwionkaa,¤∗, Tatiana Artamonovaa, Mara Barbosaa,b

a Purdue University, School of Languages and Cultures, 640 Oval Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47901, United Statesb Texas A&M University Corpus Christi, Department of Humanities, 6300 Ocean Drive, Corpus Christi, TX78412, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 28 July 2014Received in revised form 12 June 2015Accepted 24 June 2015

Keywords:Intercultural knowledge developmentIntercultural communicative competenceShort-termStudy abroadSpanishQualitativeInterview data

a b s t r a c t

The goal of this investigation was to examine intercultural knowledge development duringa short-term study abroad program focused on language and cultural learning. Interviewswith students were conducted at the beginning and end of the program, allowing for aqualitative approach to analysis, supported by quantitative measures. While previous inves-tigations have relied on qualitative data, this is the first analysis of intercultural knowledgedevelopment based on a qualitative, pre- and post-program design. Intercultural knowl-edge development was identified considering the change and growth in student knowledge.Results indicated that students experienced a change in the salience of intercultural knowl-edge themes over the period abroad, focusing on City life and Schedule differences moreat the beginning of the program than at the end. Such shift may be indicative of culturaladaptation during the program. Results also demonstrated intercultural knowledge growthover the period abroad, with the greatest growth being related to knowledge themes of BigC (e.g., culture and history), daily life, food and drink, and values and politics. These resultsled to a distinction between types of knowledge that traditionally have been included indefinitions of intercultural knowledge, an analysis of context as it intersects with knowl-edge development, and a theoretical consideration of the relationship between interculturalknowledge and intercultural communicative competence. Furthermore, practical consid-erations for cultivating intercultural knowledge during short-term study abroad programswere discussed.

Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction

Intercultural communicative competence (ICC) is “the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in inter-cultural situations based on one’s intercultural knowledge, skills, and attitudes” (Deardorff, 2006, p. 247–248). The

¤∗ Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: [email protected] (L. Czerwionka), [email protected] (T. Artamonova), [email protected] (M. Barbosa).

4 A siesta is the time to rest or nap in the afternoon following lunch. This word is maintained in Spanish because it holds a distinct meaning from anytranslation into English and because it is commonly used and understood by English speakers.

7 Subthemes with the same name as their theme resulted from comments by students indicating general knowledge of the theme. For example, ifstudents mentioned knowing about the political system in Spain but did not provide detailed information, the comment was counted within the subthemeof Values and Politics within the theme Values and Politics.

12 Sobremesa is the time spent at the table following a meal.13 Vosotros is a second person plural, informal pronoun, and it may be opposed to ustedes, which is the second person plural, formal pronoun. The use of

vosotros is a salient sociolinguistic variable in Spain.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.06.0120147-1767/Published by Elsevier Ltd.

L. Czerwionka et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 49 (2015) 80–99 81

development of ICC is important, especially given the current age of globalization, during which interactions with culturallydiverse people for personal and professional purposes are continuously more common. While the influences of classroominterventions and international experiences have been explored (Dwyer, 2004; Elola & Oskoz, 2008; Engle & Engle, 2004;Fantini & Tirmizi, 2006; Hoyt, 2012), the impact of short-term study abroad experiences has been understudied. Consideringthat 60% of U.S. students abroad participate in short-term programs (Institute of International Education’s Open doors report,2013), research about ICC development during short-term programs abroad is timely, both academically and practically.

To examine the impact of short-term study abroad on ICC, researchers must continue to examine the developmentof the building blocks of ICC, namely, intercultural knowledge, skills, and attitudes. The current investigation focuses onintercultural knowledge evidenced in qualitative, interview data. Qualitative data offer insight from the perspective of theparticipant and complement the understanding of ICC development, but most often they have represented a source of post-program or post-intervention data (Chieffo & Griffiths, 2004; Hoyt, 2012; Jackson, 2008, 2011). They have not often beenused to explore ICC development over a period abroad. Hence, the current investigation set forth to examine interculturalknowledge development, particularly knowledge change and growth, through an analysis of student interviews at thebeginning and end of a short-term study abroad program focused on language and cultural learning. To our knowledge, thisstudy represents the first analysis of intercultural knowledge from a pre- and post-program qualitative perspective.

2. Literature review

From a developmental and context-based perspective of ICC, it is expected that ICC shifts over time, ICC is ideally enhancedwith time and experiences in intercultural situations, and contextual variables impact development. Bennett’s (1993) Devel-opmental Intercultural Competence Model proposes development from ethnocentric stages to ethnorelative stages. For acontextualized approach, we also rely on Ting-Toomey’s (1999) integrative model of ICC, which includes the interactionbetween contextual variables present initially in intercultural situations, processes that change those variables over timelike the formation of new relationships, and the resulting variables having been impacted by the context. Variables mayrelate to the system as a whole, individuals, or interpersonal relationships (Ting-Toomey, 1999). The current effort is toprovide a specific analysis of intercultural knowledge development during short-term study abroad taking into account theeffect of time and contextual variables.

2.1. ICC components: A focus on knowledge

Intercultural knowledge, skills, and attitudes converge together as main components that contribute to ICC (Bennett,1993, 2008; Gertsen, 1990; Gudykunst, Ting-Toomey, & Wiseman, 1991). They are “inherent in intercultural competence”(Deardorff, 2009, p. 479). Although it has been questioned whether the unique components can be considered “separablestates and processes” (Spitzberg & Changnon, 2009, p. 35), another proposal suggests that various aspects within eachcomponent “can be developed into more specific measurable outcomes. . .depending on the context” (Deardorff, 2009, p.479).

Intercultural knowledge broadly encompasses knowledge of Big C culture, sociocultural data (e.g., class, sex, race, majorvalues), and small c culture (e.g., daily life, politeness conventions) (Lussier, 2007). More detailed descriptions include spe-cific knowledge of “history, language, non-verbal behaviour, world-views, ‘do’s and don’ts’, values, norms, habits, customs,taboos, symbols, behavioral patterns, traditions, sex roles etc.” (Stier, 2006, p. 6). Byram (1997), however, regards interculturalknowledge as “[k]nowledge of social groups and their products and practices in one’s own and in one’s interlocutor’s coun-try, and of the general processes of societal and individual interactions” (p. 51). Finally, intercultural knowledge has beendescribed as knowledge of both the host and home countries’ historical and sociopolitical situations, their day-to-day normsand ways of being, the ways in which both countries’ experiences compare, and knowledge of cross-cultural learning andadjustment trends (Fantini & Tirmizi, 2006). These definitions have several common elements, but jointly they expand onthe concept of intercultural knowledge as a whole to include historical and current information, processes and practicesrelated to social groups and individuals, along with comparative perspectives and knowledge of the cross-cultural learningprocess.

2.2. Intercultural knowledge and ICC

Based on the definition of ICC, intercultural knowledge assists in interacting effectively and appropriately with peopleof a given, diverse culture. Despite this definition, there has been little discussion of the details explaining the relation-ship between knowledge and ICC. Hullett and Witte (2001) indicated that knowledge of a host culture positively impactsadaptation for students abroad1, and Lussier (2007) claimed that intercultural knowledge is a basic component that isrequired for intercultural skills and attitudes. Related to ICC more broadly, having intercultural knowledge has been

1 Hullett and Witte (2001) examined sojourners in the United States and defined the measure of adaptation with an eight item questionnaire withquestions like: How comfortable do you feel living in the United States? How much have you adapted to American Culture? and How satisfied are you withyour English ability in daily communication with Americans?

82 L. Czerwionka et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 49 (2015) 80–99

proposed to “increase the intercultural communicator’s understanding of other and self in order to facilitate making accuratepredictions and attributions” (Wiseman, 2002, p. 218). “Cultural knowledge [. . .] provides an important kind of informationupon which the behavior of people from the other culture can be understood (i.e., accurately interpreted and predicted)”(Wiseman, Hammer, & Nishida, 1989, p. 351).

Whereas Wiseman (2002) and Wiseman et al. (1989) mention a relationship between knowledge and accurate predic-tions and interpretations, a more in depth theoretical proposal is needed. Based on a theory of interaction, Caffi and Janney(1994) proposed the existence of Anticipatory Schemata, which allow interlocutors to anticipate information about the imme-diate or future moments of a conversation. The contextual anticipatory schemata consist of expectations about how speakersinteract in specific environments, considering social, emotional, and cultural norms. Thus, with increased knowledge abouttopics relevant to the intercultural situation, interlocutors can more easily participate in conversation given their heightenedability to anticipate topics, perspectives, and behaviors. Wiseman’s (2002) mention of intercultural knowledge facilitatingperspective taking, similarly aligns with the notion of Anticipatory Schemata, supporting the utility of this theory for relat-ing intercultural knowledge and ICC. A final benefit of this proposal is that it is dyadic in nature (i.e., emphasizing ICC ininteraction), which departs from individual perspectives of ICC that have been criticized (Spitzberg & Changnon, 2009).

2.3. Intercultural knowledge during study abroad

Both quantitative and qualitative approaches to the study of intercultural knowledge during study abroad provide impor-tant insights into the development of intercultural knowledge. Whereas quantitative survey approaches rely on indirectmethods (e.g., multiple-choice questions), qualitative data in the form of open-ended questions and interviews presentmore direct methods of gauging knowledge, as students are expected to provide examples of their knowledge.

Based on qualitative data, Chieffo and Griffiths (2004) and Williams (2009) examined intercultural knowledge expressedby students in response to open-ended questions at the end of short-term study abroad programs in diverse countries.Elola and Oskoz (2008) assessed the outcomes of a classroom activity that involved students studying abroad in Spain andstudents studying at home, relying on qualitative responses in blogs and open-ended questions 2. In these three studies,students’ perspectives of knowledge were shared. Chieffo and Griffiths (2004) found that students mentioned 25 differentthemes and that the most common themes were knowledge and appreciation of another country or culture (13.4%), tolerance,patience, and understanding (8.9%), course-related knowledge (7.9%), home and host country differences (7.9%), and languageand communication issues (7.8%). Williams’ (2009) analysis led to the finding that students gained a “better understandingof their hosts, their habits, traits, values, or lifestyles” (p. 295), and specific topics mentioned included socialized medicine,economics, international issues, history, value of friendship and family in Spain, and a slower pace of life in Spain. For thestudy abroad group in Elola and Oskoz’s (2008) investigation, students’ responses mostly indicated knowledge related toimportant facts about living in the other country and about the country, state, and people and how to engage in conversation withpeople from my culture and explain to them the differences and similarities between countries. Through analysis of the studyabroad and at home groups, Elola and Oskoz (2008) identified knowledge resulting from the blog activity for both groups,but also confirmed the educational advantages of study abroad.

Collectively, the three qualitative examinations described above served as a starting point to understand the types ofknowledge expressed by students following a study abroad program. Yet, the prior investigations lacked detailed descriptionof the knowledge areas addressed by students, and more importantly, the data represented end states of students’ knowledge,disallowing an interpretation of knowledge development over the program.

In response to this issue, a recent examination of ICC combined quantitative and qualitative methods to examine pre- andpost-program ICC (i.e., development) with a focus on intercultural knowledge (Czerwionka, Artamonova, & Barbosa, 2014).Based on a quantitative survey of intercultural knowledge, attitude, and skills (modified version of Fantini & Tirmizi, 2006,Appendix G), students who participated in a summer study abroad program demonstrated a significant increase in inter-cultural knowledge. A qualitative analysis of pre- and post-program interviews with the two students who had the greatestquantitative gains also contributed to the analysis. The findings confirmed the knowledge areas found in prior research(Chieffo & Griffiths, 2004; Elola & Oskoz, 2008; Williams, 2009) (Appendix A), and also distinguished which knowledge areaswere present at the beginning of the program and which were newly mentioned at the end of the program, indicating areasof knowledge growth (Table 1, reported in Czerwionka et al., 2014). The knowledge growth related to factual informationand experiences not part of the daily activities. The interview data also indicated that students increased their depth ofknowledge related to day-to-day experiences 3.

While contributing a new approach to the study of intercultural knowledge development during study abroad by ana-lyzing pre- and post-program interview data to support pre- and post-program survey data, the findings relied on theexamination of interviews with only two students, albeit students who gained the most knowledge as indicated quanti-tatively. Therefore, the current investigation aimed to understand intercultural knowledge development through pre- andpost-program interviews with 36 students in a short-term, study abroad program.

2 Examples of questions were: “After talking to my blog partners, I have learned that there are differences between people from the United States andpeople from Spain,” rate on a 1–5 scale, then explain (p. 475) and “In general terms, define what you learned about the culture of Spain” (p. 476).

3 For additional details and student comments, see Czerwionka et al. (2014).


Table 1Intercultural knowledge topics first mentioned in the pre or post-program Interviews, reported in Czerwionka et al. (2014).

Pre-program Post-program

Spanish food PoliticsSize of the homes Controversial topicsNightlife Cultural dancesSiestas4 Town festivals (Fiestas de pueblos)Public transportation Spanish artPersonal space Daily norms: The way people walk their dogsCity living: The number of people Communication norms: Spanish greetingsLaid-back people Educational norms: Daily class and examsFormal cultural norms: Eating at the table Regional cultures

2.4. Current goal and research questions

The goal of the current investigation was to advance the understanding of intercultural knowledge development duringshort-term study abroad as self-reported by students in pre- and post-program interviews. Development was examinedthrough the analysis of knowledge change and knowledge growth. Knowledge change was examined by comparing knowledgethemes salient to students at the beginning and end of the program. Knowledge growth was the new information that a studentexpressed at the end of the program. New information expressed at the end of the program could have been newly learnedor newly available information. In either case, new information mentioned in the post-program interview was consideredto be knowledge growth for the current effort. The analyses provided insight into intercultural knowledge developmentand the relationships between knowledge and context, as the beginning and end of the program represent unique contextsduring the study abroad experience. Three research questions guided the analyses of intercultural knowledge development:

1 What knowledge areas do students address in interviews?

2. In what ways do student interviews exhibit change in intercultural knowledge comparing the expressed knowledgethemes at the beginning and end of the program?

3. In what knowledge areas do students experience knowledge growth as evident when students newly mentionknowledge at the end of the program?

3. Methods

The design included semi-structured interviews with students who participated in a summer, short-term program inMadrid, Spain. Interviews took place at the beginning and end of the program.

3.1. Participants

Of the 36 students, 29 were female and 7 were male. All were U.S. students at a large, public university in the UnitedStates, and all spoke English as their native language. They were majors or minors in Spanish, and all were registered forthird and fourth year university-level Spanish courses during the summer program. On average, students had taken 8 yearsof Spanish classes during elementary, secondary, and university levels (SD = 2.8) 5.

3.2. Program description

The 6-week summer study abroad program took place in Madrid, Spain, and the first author directed the program.Students lived with host families with 1–4 students per home, participated in 1–2 weekly excursions to local places ofcultural or historic interest, and took two university level courses in Spanish at a local university with other students fromthe program. The courses offered were a third year Spanish language course taught by the first author, a fourth year Spanishart course with weekly visits to the Prado Museum in Madrid, and a fourth year Spanish culture course. Both of the fourthyear courses were taught by Spanish faculty at the local university. All but three students took the two fourth year courses.Each course met four times per week for two hours each, included various content-based exams, homework, and associatedresearch projects.

3.3. Instruments

The semi-structured interview consisted of pre-planned questions related to six general topics to guide interviewers andstudents (Appendix B). The interview progressed from introductory questions to more specific ones, following interview

5 Data from 3 students were missing.


question-ordering norms (Tagliamonte, 2006). Questions addressing cultural difference were a focus during the interview,since noticing and understanding cultural differences is fundamental to the development of ICC (Byram, 1997), whilequestions about students’ development and achievements were meant to explore students’ cross-cultural learning andadjustment trends. The interview topics were selected to align with definitions of intercultural knowledge.

All interviews were conducted in Spanish, as this study is part of a larger project addressing linguistic outcomes of studyabroad. Additionally, the use of the second language benefits students in their learning efforts by providing them with anauthentic opportunity for language use. Most importantly, the Czerwionka et al. (2014) investigation, which used this samedata set, found results comparable to previous investigations of students’ intercultural knowledge via their first language,thus demonstrating that interviews in Spanish did not hamper the students’ abilities to express intercultural knowledge. Insum, the use of the students’ second language in interviews has been shown to be a valid approach to investigate interculturalknowledge for this population of learners. Plus, analysis of ICC through a second language represents an innovative approachto the study of ICC, as developing “the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in intercultural situations”(Deardorff, 2006, p. 247–248), is not only necessary in the first language, but also imperative in the second language.

3.4. Procedure

Interviews were conducted at the beginning of the program, during the first four days (Interview 1) and at the end ofthe program, within the last three days (Interview 2). All interviews lasted between 25 and 40 minutes, and collectivelycontained approximately 160,000 student words. For comparative purposes, the 36 interviews at the beginning of theprogram collectively lasted 1028 minutes (M = 28.55, SD = 8.56) and interviews at the end of the program collectively lasted957 minutes (M = 26.58, SD = 7.26), revealing that Interview 1 was slightly longer than Interview 2 on average, but that therewas no significant difference in length (t(35) = 1.49, p = .15).

Due to the time consuming nature of interviewing 36 students in three or four days, three interviewers were hired, noneof whom were the authors. One interviewer was a native Spanish speaker from Madrid, and the other two were superiorlevel Spanish speakers who had learned a peninsular variety of Spanish. All interviewers had post-graduate education inSpanish, and they were faculty members or graduate students at the students’ home institution. While some participantswere familiar with the interviewers, none had been students in the interviewers’ courses or knew them well. All but fourstudents were interviewed by the same interviewer at the beginning and end of the program.

The interviewers participated in a training session on interviewing procedures provided by one of the researchers. Inthe training session, interviewers were informed about the structure of the interview guide. They learned about the goal tofocus on cultural comparisons and aspects of intercultural knowledge, and they were reminded to rephrase the questionsor ask follow-up questions to encourage students to express themselves more. The interviewers used the pre-plannedquestions in all interviews, changing topics in a smooth, conversational way. There was also flexibility in the interviewssince students were encouraged to talk about topics beyond the interview questions if they preferred, making the interviewssemi-structured (Eckert, 2000).

3.5. Approach to analysis

To analyze the data, interviews were transcribed, data were coded, and a measure of student mentions was calculated inresponse to the three research questions.

3.5.1. Transcription and data codingAll interviews were transcribed, and then each transcription was reviewed by a separate researcher to enhance the

descriptive validity. Researchers coded the data using intercultural knowledge themes following a grounded approach toqualitative, thematic analysis (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Glaser & Strauss, 1967). In this type of qualitative analysis, researchersidentify themes that emerge in the interviews, compare the themes identified by all researchers, reconsider the themes ascoding progresses, and create hierarchical organization of the themes where appropriate. This approach is described asiterative, because it is repeated to allow the themes and organization of the themes to best fit the data. Each researcher wasassigned one third of the data to code. Periodically, the researchers compared data and codes, and they reconsidered thecodes and hierarchical relationships of the codes. As a final step in the iterative process, the first author reviewed all codes.These steps were taken to enhance the descriptive validity of the data and interpretive validity of the categorization of data.In total, 953 comments by students were coded using 13 themes and 151 subthemes.

3.5.2. Calculation of student mentionsAfter coding the data, a measure of student mentions was calculated. Student mentions, for the current study, was the

number of students who mentioned a given subtheme in a given interview, indicating knowledge of that subtheme. Foreach subtheme in each interview set, the total possible student mentions was 36, signifying that all students mentioned thesubtheme during the interview. This measure, as opposed to a frequency count, avoided skewing the results when a studentrepeatedly mentioned the same subtheme at different points in the same interview. Of the initial 953 coded comments, 145were repetitions of the same subtheme by the same student in the same interview. Consequently, there were 808 studentmentions in Interview 1 and Interview 2 collectively.


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Big C

City lif

e

Climate

and L

ands

cape

Daily l

ife

Food a

nd D

rink

House

Intera

ction

s

People

Relatio

nship

s

Sched

ule

Talk

Trans

porta

tion

Values

and P

olitic

s

Stu

dent

men

tions

by

them

e

Fig. 1. Total student mentions of subthemes by theme in Interview 1 and 2 collectively. For all counts, see Appendix C.

In response to the first research question, student mentions within the knowledge themes from Interview 1 and Interview2 were summed together to provide an overarching understanding of the knowledge areas addressed in the interviews. Inresponse to the second research question about change in intercultural knowledge, a comparison of the student mentionsby theme in Interview 1 and Interview 2 was analyzed. Finally, in response to the third question, knowledge growth wasdefined as knowledge subthemes mentioned in Interview 2 that were not mentioned by the student in Interview 1. Forexample, if a student mentioned the comparison of house sizes in Spain and the United States in Interview 1 and thenmentioned the same subtheme and idea in Interview 2, the student mention in Interview 2 was not representative of newintercultural knowledge, and it was considered repeated knowledge. On the other hand, if a student mentioned the subthemeof house size for the first time in Interview 2, it was recorded as new knowledge. This analysis was done with respect to eachindividual student’s student mentions. The percentage of new knowledge expressed in Interview 2 by theme was calculatedconsidering all student data.

To support the quantitative results and return to the qualitative approach that is foundational to this article, researchersselected comments to illustrate the areas of knowledge change and growth in students’ own words. The comments werechosen bearing in mind the results of the prior steps of analysis. Taken jointly, this approach to analyzing interculturalknowledge development during short-term study abroad embeds quantified summaries within a qualitative, groundedapproach to interview data.

4. Results

In accordance with the three research questions, the results are presented in Sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3. Select studentcomments showing identified knowledge areas and data trends are shared in Section 4.4.

4.1. Knowledge areas: Themes and subthemes

The thematic coding resulted in two hierarchical levels of categories (i.e., themes and subthemes). Thirteen themesemerged, with the most common ones being People, Daily life, Interactions, Values and Politics, Schedule, and Big C (Fig. 1).

Within the 13 themes, there were 151 subthemes. The theme called Big C, as in Big Culture, related to subthemes suchas the arts, history, and civilization of Spain 6. The theme City life addressed observations about the city of Madrid relatingto the types of buildings, quantity of people, combination of historical references and modern life, and amount of noiseand activity in the city. Students commented on the Climate and Landscape, and also on aspects of Daily life, which includednotions of fashion, pets, and a comparably slower pace of life and increased level of smoking. Students addressed the quantity

6 The theme term Big C serves the current purpose, but its use is not meant to contribute to the discussion of the definition of culture or the types ofculture.


Table 2Counts of student mentions for the top 13 subthemes in interviews 1 and 2 collectively.

Subtheme (n) Theme

Nice (48) PeopleSize (30) HousePublic transportation (30) TransportationEating (29) SchedulePersonal space (22) InteractionsHistory (21) Big CSlow pace of life (21) Daily lifeBar/nightlife (19) Daily lifeRelaxed (17) PeopleSiesta (17) ScheduleOpen (16) PeopleValues and politics7 (16) Values and politicsArt (15) Big C

and type of food that they experienced in their Madrid homes and the approach to drinking alcohol that they observed, assome subthemes within Food and Drink. The House was another theme that emerged as students addressed the commonliving arrangement in apartment-style buildings, limited or absent lawns, differences in appliances, and the size of livingspaces. Another theme was Interactions, including students’ knowledge related to greetings and the more limited personalspace perceived when comparing Spanish to American interactions. Students also expressed knowledge of the People inSpain based on their experiences with them, providing a wide range of descriptions. Relationships were described in termsof relationships with family, friends, and strangers, and the Schedule differences were noted as students talked about theirknowledge of Spanish eating, nightlife, and siesta schedules. Similar to the theme of interactions, but more focused onlinguistic aspects of interactions, is the theme Talk. Transportation comments addressed public transportation or walking,often opposing these modes of transportation to the common U.S. norm of a personal car. The final theme was Values andPolitics, consisting of subthemes such as the economy, different laws (e.g., smoking, maternity leave), and knowledge ofvalue systems.

Regarding the number of subthemes within each theme, there was variation depending on the theme. Whereas withinthe theme of Climate and Landscape, there were only two subthemes (i.e., climate, landscape), within Values and Politicsthere were 33 different subthemes identified. Further representing the variation among subthemes, some subthemes likenice people, the size of homes, and public transportation were addressed often by students (Table 2). On the other hand, 45different subthemes were mentioned by one individual student. All themes and subthemes, along with the counts of studentmentions, are listed in Appendix C.

The themes and subthemes presented in Fig. 1, Table 2, and Appendix C respond to the first research question, regardingknowledge areas that students addressed in interviews.

4.2. Knowledge change

To analyze change in students’ knowledge over the program, each individual’s student mentions of subthemes wereclassified by separating those occurring in Interview 1 from those occurring in Interview 2. This approach accounted for theindividual students’ knowledge and also the variable of time. Fig. 2 presents the descriptive findings and draws attentionto two distinct patterns considering student mentions at the beginning and end of the program. The first pattern, that ofCity life and Schedule, revealed that students commented more often on subthemes within these themes at the beginningof the program compared to the end. City life and Schedule were knowledge areas that were more salient to students at thebeginning of the program compared to the end.

The second pattern, observed in all themes except City life and Schedule, indicated that that students commented mostoften on these themes at the end of the program. Considering that both interviews contained the same questions, offeringthe same opportunity for students to share their knowledge, the differences in the knowledge shared by the students at thetwo interview times are tentatively attributed to a shift in knowledge areas over the short-term program. These data suggestthat students were more attuned to knowledge about City life and Schedule at the beginning of the program, while they weremore attuned to the other knowledge themes at the end of the program. These differences highlight the intersection ofknowledge salience with the local and temporal context.

4.3. Knowledge growth

In addition to analyzing student mentions in Interview 1 and Interview 2, the data analysis determined whether theknowledge subthemes mentioned in Interview 2 were new ideas or whether they were repetitions of the same idea men-tioned by the same student in Interview 1. Given that the interview topics and length of the interviews were the same at thebeginning and end of the program, new mentions in Interview 2 were considered to be evidence of knowledge growth, asdefined in Section 2.4. Fig. 3 demonstrates that students experienced knowledge growth related to each of the 13 themes.


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

City lif

e

Sched

ule

Big C

Climate

and L

ands

cape

Daily l

ife

Food a

nd D

rink

House

Intera

ction

s

People

Relatio

nship

s Ta

lk

Trans

porta

tion

Values

and P

olitic

s

Stu

dent

men

tions

by

them

e

More salient in More salient in Interview 1 Interview 2

Interview 1

Interview 2

Fig. 2. Sums of student mentions of subthemes by theme in Interview 1 and Interview 2.

72%

58%

83%

75%

83%

82% 52%

68%

68%

76% 74% 48%

93%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

City lif

e

Sched

ule

Big C

Climate

and L

ands

cape

Daily l

ife

Food a

nd D

rink

House

Intera

ction

s

People

Relatio

nship

s Ta

lk

Trans

porta

tion

Values

and P

olitic

s

Stu

dent

men

tions

by

them

e in

Inte

rvie

w 2

New knowledge

Repeated knowledge

Fig. 3. Percentage of total student mentions in Interview 2 representing new knowledge.

The growth related to each theme is evident in the dark grey bars, showing the percentage of student mentions by theme thatwere new in Interview 2. For example, considering the Big C theme, of 41 student mentions of Big C subthemes in Interview2, 7 mentions were addressed by the same student in Interview 1 and Interview 2, and 34 comments about Big C subthemeswere stated by students only at the end of the program. These 34 mentions were not addressed by the same student duringInterview 1. Thus, of the 41 student mentions about Big C subthemes, 83% of them identified new information and growthas defined in this investigation.

Appendix D lists all subthemes about which at least one student indicated new knowledge at the end of the program.Certain subthemes were areas of growth for many students, such as art and Madrid sites within Big C, the observed slowpace of life in the Daily life theme, and general knowledge about Values and Politics. Many other subthemes were areas ofgrowth for individual students, such as knowledge about specific laws within the theme of Values and Politics, many diverseobservations about People, and details related to City life like the blend of historical and modern characteristics. While the


growth in knowledge for an individual student does not represent the group as a whole, that growth is important for theindividual and is therefore included in this section on knowledge growth.

4.4. Student comments to demonstrate change and growth8

The results in Sections 4.2 and 4.3 demonstrated that the salience of knowledge shifted over the time abroad and thatknowledge growth was experienced by students. Concerning knowledge change, the initially salient knowledge areas relatedto City life and Schedule are represented by the following comments from Interview 1 (T1)9. Related to City life, students oftensaw Madrid through a comparison with other cities or towns (Comments 1–3). They also often commented on the perceivedcleanliness and safety situations (Comments 3–4), possible activities in the city (Comment 3), and the blend of historical andmodern aspects of the city. Besides expressing knowledge, they often evaluated whether they liked or disliked the notedaspects of the city.

Comment 1: Student 4F T1

‘I like it. It’s big. It’s a little similar to Seattle, because there are a lot of buildings and there are a lot of people and everyperson is very different’.


‘In my town everyone knows each other. And when we go to Walmart, we always see about five people that we know.But here, it’s bigger’.

Comment 3: Student 4M T1

‘It’s clean and safe and it’s fun. There are things to do and there aren’t things to do in my town. There are pretty plazasand parks...I think that it’s a safe city so I am not very nervous’.


‘I don’t like that I always have to be careful with my purse’.

Schedule was the other theme more salient at the beginning of the program. Similarly to the comments about City life,students often compared the schedule experience in Madrid to U.S. norms and evaluated the local schedule norms fromtheir own perspectives (Comments 5–6). Notably, students clearly indicated knowledge of their adjustment trends relatedto schedule, a knowledge type that was not present in relation to other themes addressed in the interviews.


‘I’m getting used to the eating schedule. You don’t eat a lot for breakfast, but you do eat a lot for lunch and a little bitmore for dinner. That I like. And in the United States every breakfast and dinner is very big but not lunch, and that’sdifferent and I don’t know if I like it or not’.


‘I don’t like the eating schedule. It’s different from the United States, but it’s an aspect of Spanish life. It’s not that Idon’t like it; It’s that I’m not used to it’.

Besides knowledge change, knowledge growth related to each of the 13 themes. The themes involving the most knowledgegrowth, in which over 80% of the student mentions in Interview 2 (T2) represented new knowledge, were Big C, Daily life,Food and Drink, and Values and Politics. The following comments about Big C addressed subthemes of Art and Madrid sites.These quotes are from Interview 2, stated by students who did not address these subthemes in Interview 1.


‘I learned the art of the Prado and the three very famous, Spanish artists, for example Velázquez, Goya, and Greco. Andthe Spanish culture and gastronomy especially of the south because my project for culture, the culture class is aboutthe south of Spain’.


‘The royal palace is super pretty and I want to go back. To the senate was really interesting and I like the Retiro. Very,very much. And I think that I would like to walk through the Sol or through Sol and the Plaza Mayor’10.

8 The comments in Section 4.4 were originally stated in Spanish by students. Comments in Spanish are listed in Appendix E.9 All comments have been modified to exclude pauses, fillers, and repetition of words to ease understanding of the written comments. Grammatical

errors made by the students are represented in the data.10 The Retiro, Sol, and the Plaza Mayor are main parks and plazas in Madrid.


Comments related to Daily life addressed subthemes like the slow pace of life, nightlife habits, smoking, and fashion,among others. The comments below represent students’ understanding of the slow pace of life that they observed duringtheir time in Madrid.


‘S: They live more um (snapping fingers) Not full. Not fast, but um

I: Slow?

S: Slow. Yes, yes, yes. They live slower. They aren’t in a hurry. Very tranquil and yes.

I: Where do you see the people being more tranquil? How do you know?

S: In the metro. No one in the—yes, no one is in a hurry. I walk (inaudible) the street is very tranquil’.


‘I like that everyday, days are slower. And this is something that seems to me and also when I wrote essay for theprofessor I learn that the equilibrium between work and personal life is better in Spain than in the U.S’.

Students learned about diverse types of Food and Drink such as morcilla ‘blood sausage’ (Comment 11), and they learnedabout differences between foods in Spain and the United States, such as the way milk is processed and stored (Comment12). The student who stated Comment 13 addressed various aspects of food like the tendency to eat more bread in Spain ascompared to his U.S. eating norms and the freshness of food. Finally, Comment 14 indicates knowledge about the meal thatis considered to be the largest and most important in Spain and the United States, in addition to a positive evaluation of theSpanish cultural norm related to meal size and the cultural concept of meals.


‘Yes and one eats many new foods like I don’t know the name but blood sausage’.


‘To me it’s not something that I don’t like but the the milk it has to, and it’s not. There’s a different process that is usedhere and you don’t have to plan in the refrigerator and when a cup of milk is [warm] and that cold milk. You have toput it in the refrigerator and wait a little. It’s ok’.


‘And my mom here usually buys things every day for the food that we’re going to eat that day. In the United States, Ihave a really big refrigerator with a lot of food from the past days and for the upcoming days and there’s a lot of foodalways, and here in Spain there’s a lot less space for that. And so mother buys bread every day because they eat breadwith every, every meal here in Spain. And she buys I don’t know the meat, the vegetables, on the day that she’s goingto cook. And I don’t know it’s, itvs something that I noticed that is very different’.


‘I like the bigger lunch and the smaller dinner because I am really hungry in the middle of the day and it’s very strangethat in the United States they eat a big meal at night and then go to sleep. And it’s very different because here theythink that it’s not necessary to have energy at the end of the day’.

Regarding Values and Politics, Comment 15 touched upon various subthemes, including the death penalty, economy,and healthcare system, among others. The other comments also included subthemes such as gay rights, legal agesfor driving and drinking alcohol, and maternity/paternity leave. Some comments broadly addressed subthemes whileothers offered more specific details related to the new knowledge.


‘In the United States we have the death penalty and that’s not the truth in Spain. And I know that Spain has a lot ofeconomic problems and other things, but the United States has problems also and in Madrid I think that they have ahealthcare system. It’s interesting because in the United States there is a lot of debate about the healthcare system,and the healthcare system in the United States is very expensive and it’s difficult to receive help if is—‘I don’t know.’It’s interesting because there are many differences, but I think that there are more human rights in Spain than in theUnited States. The United States, in the United States, I think that the companie-business people, the big companieshave a lot of power over the government’.


‘I’ve read a lot about the laws and the equality of homosexuals and also the law of or well the law about women andalso unemployment’.



‘During dinner and I like to talk because last night my parents’ son asked me about the driving age in the United States.And it’s very different the ages to drive and drink. But here it’s eighteen for both and in the United States it’s sixteenand then twenty one. Yes it’s very different’.


‘Also it’s interesting here the women after having children, they have at least six weeks off of work. And with the samesalary. And also the men have a period of time that they can stay at home with the baby. And in the United Statesthere isn’t for the men. Only for the women. And I think that it’s not such a long time’.

4.5. Summary of findings

The results portrayed knowledge areas identified by students in their interviews, summarized as 13 themes with 151hierarchical subthemes. Students most often commented on their knowledge related to People, Daily life, Interactions, Valuesand Politics, Schedule, and Big C. Within these, common subthemes were those listed above in Table 2. Regarding exhibitedchange in intercultural knowledge over the program, two patterns emerged indicating that while some themes were moresalient to students at the beginning of the program (i.e., City life, Schedule), most themes were more salient to students at theend of the program. Both patterns represent changes in intercultural knowledge over the program duration. Finally, knowl-edge growth related to all themes was found and a detailed account of growth with respect to all subthemes was presented(Section 4.3). In Section 4.4, student comments were shared to represent intercultural knowledge change and growth trendsthrough the students’ own words. The results, taken collectively, point to intercultural knowledge development over the6-week academic program abroad.

5. Discussion

Besides discussing the findings in terms of previous research and theoretical claims related to ICC and study abroad, theissue of how to cultivate intercultural knowledge development in study abroad environments must also be considered.

5.1. Intercultural knowledge themes and definitions

Intercultural knowledge was identified related to 13 themes (i.e., Big C, City life, Landscape and Climate, Daily life, Foodand Drink, House, Interactions, People, Relationships, Schedule, Talk, Transportation, and Values and Politics). These areas ofknowledge align with the student knowledge areas presented in previous literature (Czerwionka et al., 2014; Chieffo &Griffiths, 2004; Elola & Oskoz, 2008; Williams, 2009) (see Appendix A), yet the coded themes in this study go beyond thosein the previous literature by indicating the existence of knowledge about Landscape and Climate, more subthemes aboutRelationships, and additional detail about all subthemes.

Returning to the definitions of intercultural knowledge, the knowledge themes addressed by students align with Lussier’s(2007) description of knowledge as related to big C culture, sociocultural data, and small c culture. The themes also alignedwith many knowledge types mentioned in intercultural knowledge definitions (e.g., products and practices, societal andindividual interactions, historical and sociopolitical situations, day-to-day norms and ways of being, the ways in whichcountries’ experiences compare). Alignment between the data and theoretical notions of intercultural knowledge validatesthat the goal of this study to investigate intercultural knowledge was achieved.

While intercultural knowledge was demonstrated by students, certain knowledge types addressed in the definitionswere limited or absent in the current data. Knowledge of social groups (Byram, 1997) was a knowledge type addressed bystudents when they mentioned relationships and interactions with strangers, foreigners (referring to themselves), family,and friends, but other notions of social groups including race or social class, for example, were not mentioned. Whereasstudents often introduced the theme of People, they most often noticed people’s personalities or dispositions rather thanmentioning their social groups or the interactions among groups. Another limited type of knowledge was knowledge of cross-cultural learning and adjustment trends, mentioned in Fantini and Tirmizi’s (2006) definition. Students had the opportunityto reflect on these topics through interview questions like “What have you learned about yourself?” and “Why did you wantto participate in this program? Do you think you achieved these things?,” yet they did not address them except in the caseof the comments about Schedule. When addressing Schedule, some students stated that they had not yet adjusted to thenew schedule, indicating knowledge of potential and future adjustment. Looking back to the summary of prior qualitativeresearch on intercultural knowledge in contexts of study abroad (Appendix A), these areas of limited knowledge were alsolacking in prior research about intercultural knowledge.

Thus, it is proposed that knowledge of social groups and cross-cultural learning and adjustment trends may be qualita-tively different from the other knowledge types included in intercultural knowledge definitions (e.g., products and practices,societal and individual interactions, historical and sociopolitical situations, day-to-day norms and ways of being, the waysin which countries’ experiences compare). Regarding knowledge of social groups, it is possible that six weeks is not longenough for students to gain access to the social nuances of the host society. The students who participated in this study


demonstrated knowledge related to individual interactions and personalities and also societal-level trends related to tradi-tions and political values, but the intermediate level of social analysis (i.e., social groups) was absent. Perhaps the naturallearning curve related to social dynamics is to begin with the individual and broad society, and then progress to levels ofsocial analysis between those two. A second possibility would be that the students had not been exposed to the study of socialgroups in the home or host country, and thus did not have experience seeing or analyzing social groups. If this is the case,we identify an absence in knowledge that may align with current conceptions of epistemologies of ignorance (Malewski& Jaramillo, 2011), which are as important to identify as are areas of knowledge. No matter the reason, the current datasuggest that interpretation of social groups within a host community during study abroad is challenging for students andthe discussion of social groups at times lacks complexity, a finding also indicated by Talburt and Stewart (1999).

Similarly, the deficient evidence for knowledge of cross-cultural learning and adjustment trends could also be attributedto limited education, despite having pre-departure meetings that introduced these concepts. These results support effortsto provide ICC learning opportunities to students who study abroad (Vande Berg, Paige, & Lou, 2012). Alternatively, sincethe interviews occurred at the beginning and end of the program, perhaps more recurring data collections throughout theprogram would provide more evidence of learning and adjustment trend knowledge. A final consideration is that knowledgeof cross-cultural learning and adjustment trends may be qualitatively distinct from the other types of knowledge includedin definitions, in that it requires the ability to analyze one’s own perspectives, positions, and interactions as they shift overtime. This procedural-type analysis is not the focus when learning about cultural events or interactions through observationor classroom study. Thus, while various knowledge types are included within the definitions of intercultural knowledge,the current data point to knowledge of social groups and also cross-cultural learning and adjustment trends as distinctknowledge types from the others, potentially requiring a different type of analysis or learning process for students.

5.2. Context and intercultural knowledge development

Considering the broad framework of ICC as developmental and context-based (Bennett, 1993; Ting-Toomey, 1999), thecurrent findings support both theoretical perspectives. Changes and growth in intercultural knowledge over a six-weekperiod indicate students’ intercultural knowledge development. The specific changes and growth in intercultural knowledgecan be explained by the students’ temporally and contextually constrained situations, thus confirming the importance of acontext-based theory of intercultural knowledge development.

Three contexts are considered in this discussion: (1) the home context of rural areas in the U.S. Midwest, (2) the Interview1 context of students’ initial arrival to Madrid—the urban, capital city of Spain, and (3) the Interview 2 context of students’situations in Madrid following six weeks of exposure to the local, host lifestyles and participation in those lifestyles.

5.2.1. Knowledge change and adaptationThe influence of context in intercultural knowledge development is quite visible considering the data on knowledge

change. At the time of Interview 1, students had just shifted from a rural, Midwestern, American context to the urbansurroundings of Madrid, Spain. This contextual shift seems to explain students’ initial focus on City life and Schedule at thebeginning of the program. The contextual shift from a rural to urban setting seems to make subthemes of City life particularlysalient. Similarly, the shift in context from the United States to Spain seems to explain the initial salience of Schedule-relatedsubthemes. Comparing the schedules of the two cultures, in the United States lunch and dinner occur earlier than in Spain,dinner is considered to be the main meal in the United States while the main meal in Spain is the afternoon meal, and theevening activities begin later at night in Spain than in the United States. The change in context from the United States to Spainmeant that upon arrival in Spain, students were personally affected by the schedule differences. The new schedule promptedthem to reevaluate the timing for day-to-day activities, which at times resulted in them feeling hungry or tired. They hadto find appropriate times to study, socialize, and sleep according to their new Spanish surroundings. In the commentsin Interview 1, students expressed their evaluations of the Spanish norms, comparisons of the United States and Spanishcontexts, and addressed the fact that they had not yet adjusted to the Spanish norms.

Considering these same themes, City life and Schedule were less salient in Interview 2 compared to Interview 1. TheInterview 2 context included students who had six weeks of experience with the City life and Schedule norms in Madrid. Thefact that both themes were less salient at the end of the program may indicate that the students adjusted to these aspects oftheir cultural surroundings, and thus no longer felt the need to express their evaluations and knowledge of them as they hadin Interview 1. The contextual variables over time impacted the individuals within the system, a possible outcome withinTing-Toomey’s (1999) model of ICC. Considering potential changes to the whole system, there is no reason to believe basedon the data or current norms in Madrid that the City life or Schedule norms of Madrid changed over the six weeks. For thisreason, we attribute the shift to individual student changes. Considering that Hullett and Witte (2001) found that knowledgeis positively associated with cultural adaptation, it is proposed that over the six-week academic program abroad studentsadapted to the activities related to these sociocultural differences, which were knowledge areas noticed at the beginning ofthe program.

5.2.2. Knowledge growth and contextual aspects of the programAlso considering the Interview 1 and Interview 2 contexts, the knowledge growth may also be explained by contex-

tual variation. By the time students had reached the Interview 2 contexts, they as individuals had been impacted by their


experiences and interactions over the prior six weeks in Madrid, in host-family homes and a Spanish university. The knowl-edge growth may be attributed to different aspects of the experience abroad. It could be ascribed to the educationalopportunities in the classroom, weekly excursions, individual student research, interactions with host families or otherpeople in Spain, or student observations of the cultural world around them. It is assumed, based on knowledge of the coursecontent, that the students classroom experiences, which for most students included classes about Spanish culture and the artof the Prado, and weekly excursions influenced their increased knowledge of Big C (e.g., history, Madrid sites, art). Similarly,the Spanish culture course addressed many current topics that impact Spanish society and people, reminiscent of the topicsaddressed by students in the Values and Politics theme. Students indicated that they talked about Values and Politics withtheir host families as well, thereby limiting the view that all knowledge gained was directly associated with the courses andexcursions. With respect to the increased knowledge about Food and Drink and Daily life, it is likely that students gained thistype of knowledge through their experiences outside of the classroom as well, such as those in the home, grocery stores,and restaurants and through conversations or research related to the specific subthemes.

5.3. The impact of intercultural knowledge on ICC

Gains in intercultural knowledge, like the ones exhibited in the current research, theoretically help students to communi-cate effectively and appropriately in intercultural situations (Deardorf, 2006). Relying on the proposed connection betweenknowledge and correct predictions and interpretations (Wiseman, 2002; Wiseman et al., 1989), along with the proposedAnticipatory Schemata (Caffi & Janney, 1994), a few examples of how knowledge may enhance ICC are considered.

With students’ increased knowledge about various topics relevant to their Spanish surroundings, from maternity leave totortilla espanola11 to important places in the city and country, students may more easily participate in conversation given theirheightened anticipation of relevant topics and Spanish perspectives on those topics. Similarly, knowledge of controversialtopics such as the death penalty, a society’s history, or associated laws and values may allow students to predict others’reactions and feelings that may emerge in a conversation. This information can help one to navigate a polemic discussion insensitive ways. Knowledge about more mundane issues, likewise, may serve to enhance students’ contextual anticipatoryschemata. For example, students’ increased knowledge about Spanish greetings, family relationships, or city living may helpstudents to anticipate Spanish speakers’ ways of interacting in discourse situations and plan their own ways of interacting.

With the outcomes of this investigation, there are plenty of examples of how knowledge gained theoretically may helpstudents to anticipate Spanish topics, perspectives, and norms in discourse situations and thereby be prepared to commu-nicate more effectively with Spaniards. These examples suggest that intercultural knowledge development may enhanceone’s ICC via increased accuracy of contextual anticipatory schemata.

5.4. Cultivating intercultural knowledge

The results of this investigation highlight various ways to potentially cultivate intercultural knowledge during short-term study abroad. First, we found that immediately noticeable cultural differences that impacted students personally andto which students received daily exposure (e.g., City life, Schedule) were salient particularly at the beginning of the program.To cultivate this knowledge, students could explore these types of knowledge areas more systematically at the beginning of aprogram, thus potentially prompting faster adjustment or identifying other areas that are initially more salient to students.Since student comments about City life and Schedule highlighted students’ evaluations of the knowledge sets, programscould implement opportunities to explore students’ evaluations of knowledge. Second, this study suggested that the typeof educational program is important in intercultural knowledge development. Values and Politics and Big C themes werediscussed in the academic courses, and they were areas of growth for students. Social groups in addition to cross-culturallearning and adjustment trends were not the focus of courses, and these areas were limited or absent in the students’interviews. Thus, if a language and culture program’s goals include intercultural knowledge development, the courses shouldconsider inclusion of topics related to social groups and cross-cultural learning and adjustment trends, allowing students tobridge the gap between their individual and societal level analyses, engage with ideas of social difference, and also practiceauto-reflection of their learning and adjustment over the program. These suggestions mirror previous proposals to includegreater discussion of sociocultural differences during study abroad (Talburt & Stewart, 1999), intercultural competencetraining including analyses of learning and adjustment and the opportunity for reflection (Vande Berg, Paige, & Lou, 2012),and guided cultural comparison activities for language students (Koike & Lacorte, 2014).

As Deardorff (2009) suggested, “deep cultural knowledge entails a more holistic, contextual understanding of that culture,including historical, political, and social contexts” (p. 28). In view of the evidence of students’ development of historical,political, and social understandings related to the host culture as presented in this study, short-term study abroad in programslike the one under investigation seem to lead to the development of “deep cultural knowledge.” This particular programwas an immersion program that was rigorous in the language and culture exposure that students received in both academicenvironments and social settings. The current findings provide evidence in support of the benefits of language and culturestudy, particularly in a study abroad context. Thus, while we recognize the importance of cultural knowledge and ICC, we

11 Tortilla espanola is a common food that is made with egg, potato, and onion. It is similar to a quiche, but it does not have a crust.


also acknowledge and call attention to the broader merits of language and culture programs. To cultivate interculturalknowledge, programs abroad should attempt to provide rich opportunities for exposure to the language and culture, whileconsidering how to increase exposure to all types of intercultural knowledge.

5.5. Limitations and future research

While the current study provided an analysis of intercultural knowledge development over a short-term study abroadprogram, critical review of the methods prompts considerations for future research. First, when interviewing students intheir second language, students’ level of proficiency should align with the level required to complete the interview task.While a potential limitation, future research should consider the relevancy of studying ICC through the second languagesince students often engage in intercultural communication with the host community through that language. Secondly, inthis investigation, normal qualitative coding and analysis procedures were used to ensure the trustworthiness of the data.Conducting member checks may have further enhanced the trustworthiness of the data analysis and should be consideredfor future work. Furthermore, additional data sources may provide a broader understanding of intercultural knowledgedevelopment during short-term programs abroad, and data collected more periodically may also provide a greater opportu-nity for the analysis of development. Related to the current data, future work may delve deeper into the repeated subthemesin Interview 1 and Interview 2, as these mentions were not considered in the current work. Also, additional evaluation of thecurriculum and contexts abroad would allow for enhanced insight into the relationship between context and interculturalknowledge development.

There are still many questions to be asked and answered related to intercultural knowledge development. A pressingquestion emerging from this investigation is to what degree knowledge of social groups and cross- cultural learning andadjustment trends are qualitatively different from the other types of intercultural knowledge, both in terms of content andthe learning of such knowledge. Other questions to pursue relate to the factors that influence immediate noticing of culturaldifference, the emergence of knowledge themes over a period abroad, and students’ contextual anticipatory schemata.From a broader perspective, there is the need to not only examine the components of ICC separately, as was done in thisinvestigation focused on intercultural knowledge, but also to consider the interconnected nature of knowledge, attitude,and skills that contribute to ICC, as also suggested by Spitzberg and Changnon (2009).

6. Conclusion

The goal of this investigation was to examine intercultural knowledge development using a pre- and post-programqualitative design. Through analysis of student interviews at the beginning and end of a short-term study abroad program,three main results related to intercultural knowledge development were identified. The first was that students exhibitedknowledge related to most of the intercultural knowledge types included in the intercultural knowledge definitions, buttheir expressed knowledge related to each type was not uniform (i.e. limited knowledge of social groups and cross-culturallearning and adjustment trends). Secondly, students experienced changes in the salience of intercultural knowledge themesover the period abroad, and finally, students exhibited intercultural knowledge growth over the period abroad.

Considering the results along with the previous literature on intercultural knowledge and ICC, the discussion led to threetentative conclusions or suggestions. First, knowledge of social groups and cross-cultural learning and adjustment trendsmay be qualitatively distinct from the other types of intercultural knowledge, and consequently should be addressed inparticular ways in study abroad programs. Second, through discussion of the context-based understanding of interculturalknowledge development, it was suggested that programs explore immediately noticeable differences early on and thatprograms be rigorous in their opportunities for exposure to language, culture, and specific types of knowledge. Finally, therelationship between intercultural knowledge and ICC was exemplified, applying an interaction-based theory of AnticipatorySchemata.

In general, this study offered detailed information about students’ intercultural knowledge development, which may beuseful for students who will study abroad, program leaders, and researchers. Specifically, the many subthemes of interculturalknowledge presented, the suggestion that different types of intercultural knowledge may be qualitatively different from eachother, and the proposed explanation of the relationships among intercultural knowledge, contextual anticipatory schemata,and ICC may provoke future research and enhance the implementation of academic programs abroad.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Purdue University for supporting this research with a Purdue Research Initiative Grant. Addition-ally, we acknowledge the audience members of the Researching and Teaching Intercultural Competence and 8th InterculturalRhetoric and Discourse Conference 2014, where a version of this research was presented.


Appendix A. Student knowledge following study Abroad, Identified in student interviews by Czerwionka et al.(2014) and reported in previous literature.

Student knowledge following study Abroad, Identified in student interviews by Czerwionka et al. (2014) and reported inprevious literature.

Knowledge themes Previous literature

Arts Elola and Oskoz (2008)City living Elola and Oskoz (2008)Communication Elola and Oskoz (2008)Communication/language Chieffo and Griffiths (2004)Course knowledge Chieffo and Griffiths (2004)Cultural values Williams (2009)Culture Chieffo and Griffiths (2004)Differences Chieffo and Griffiths (2004)Habits/norms Williams (2009)History Williams (2009)International issues Williams (2009)Lifestyles Williams (2009)Living arrangements Elola and Oskoz (2008)Patience/understanding Chieffo and Griffiths (2004)People Williams (2009)People’s values Williams (2009)Politics Williams (2009)Spain-happiness in the moment Williams (2009)Spain-laid back Williams (2009)Transportation Elola and Oskoz (2008)

Appendix B. Interview guide.

Interview guide.

IntroductionHow are you? How’s the week? Where are you from? What’s your city or town like?¿Cómo estás? ¿Qué tal la semana? ¿De dónde eres? ¿Y cómo es tu pueblo/ciudad?University

Interview 1: What classes do you have this summer? What are they like?

¿Qué clases tienes este verano? ¿Cómo son?

Interview 2: What have you learned this summer? Of your classes, which has been the

easiest, the hardest?

¿Qué has aprendido en tus clases este verano? De las clases este verano ¿cuál ha sido la más fácil, la más difícil?

FamilyWhat’s your family like in the United States? What’s your family like in Madrid? How does your Madrid family compare

to your family in the United States?¿Cómo es tu familia en los Estados Unidos? ¿Cómo es tu familia en Madrid? ¿Cómo se compara la familia en Madrid con tu

familia en los Estados Unidos?Living arrangements and lifeHow does the house in Madrid compare to your house in the United States?¿Cómo se compara la casa en Madrid con tu casa en los Estados Unidos?Opinions and cultural comparisonsWhat do you think of Madrid?¿Qué opinas de Madrid?What things or aspects of life in the United States do you like and which don’t you like? What are elements of Spanish

life that you like and which don’t you like? How do the two places compare to one another?¿Qué cosas o aspectos de la vida te gustan y no te gustan de los Estados Unidos? ¿Qué son elementos de la vida espanola que

te gustan y no te gustan? ¿Cómo se comparan los dos lugares?PeopleOf the people that you’ve met, what do you think? With whom do you talk in Spanish? What have you noticed about

interactions between people? What is a Spanish person like in your opinión?¿Y de la gente que has conocido, qué opinas? ¿Con quién hablas el espanol? ¿Qué has notado de las interacciones entre las

personas? ¿Cómo es una persona espanola en tu opinión?


Adjustment and personality

Interview 1: In these six weeks, what do you hope to learn about yourself?

En estas 6 semanas ¿Qué has aprendido sobre ti mismo?

Interview 2: In these six weeks, what have you learned about yourself?

En estas 6 semanas ¿Qué has aprendido sobre ti mismo?

Feelings, achievements, and adviceHave you experienced something fun here in Madrid?Why did you want to participate in this program? Do you think that you achieved these things?What kind of advice would you give to someone who wants to come to Madrid next year?¿Te ha pasado algo divertido aquí en Madrid?¿Por qué querrías participar en este programa? ¿Sientes que has logrando esas cosas?¿Qué consejo le darías a alguien que quiere venir el próximo ano a Madrid?

Appendix C. Counts of student mentions by theme and subtheme.

12. Counts of student mentions by theme and subtheme.

Themes (n) Subthemes (n)

Big C (61) History (21) Major cities (4)Art (15) Bullfights (2)Madrid sites (12) Dances (2)Big C (4) Fiestas de pueblo (1)

City life (57) Safety (12) Lack of organization (1)Many people (8) Fast paces (1)City life (7) Limited space (1)Clean (6) Lots of light (1)Many activities (6) Noise (1)Historical and modern (3) City size (1)Buildings (2) Smaller buildings (1)Distances (2) Street signs (1)Green areas (2)

Climate/landscape (7) Landscape (4) Climate (3)Daily life (82) Slow pace of life (21) Social life (3)

Bar/nightlife (19) Daily life (2)Smoking (13) Exercise outside (2)Fashion (10) Music (2)Soccer (4) Pets (2)Small shops (3) TV (1)

Food and drink (43) Food (13) Meals (4)Description(fresh, healthy, laborious) (8)

Quantity (3)

Type of food (7) Tapas (3)Drinking (4) Restaurants (1)

House (50) Size (30) Close to others (2)Lawn (6) Layout of home (2)Apartment (5) Appliances (1)Air conditioning (3) Carpet (1)

Interactions (77) Personal space (22) Interrupting is acceptable (3)Greetings (14) Loud (3)Touch (10) Treatment of foreigner (3)PDA (9) Acceptable to talk with strangers (1)Animated (6) Cat calls (1)Quiet (5)

People (173) Nice (48) Physical features (3)Relaxed (17) Speak Spanish (3)Open (16) Funny (2)Helpful (13) Independent (2)Affectionate (9) Liberal (2)Proud (7) Reserved (2)Direct/opinionated (6) Different from Latin Americans (1)Enjoy life (6) Genuine (1)Diverse (5) Hard workers (1)Happy (4) Judgmental (1)People as their daily experiences (4) Patient (1)


Appendix C (Continued )

Themes (n) Subthemes (n)

Busy (3) Religious (1)Cultured (3) Studious (1)Intelligent (3) Welcoming (1)Passionate (3) World travelers (1)People (3)

Relationships (37) Aloof with strangers (10) Service encounters (4)Family time (10) Friend relationships (3)Family relationship (9) Mother’s role (1)

Schedule (71) Eating (29) Shop times (5)Siesta (17) Sobremesa12 (5)Nightlife (8) Schedule (2)Flexible time (5)

Talk (33) Talk fast (11) Say “sorry” less (4)Quantity of talk (10) Use of vosotros13 (1)Spanish (6)

Transportation (41) Public transportation (30) Walking (11)Values and politics (76) Values and politics (16) Death penalty (1)

Economy (8) Driving age (1)Healthcare (5) Formal (1)Size of country (5) Less excessive (1)Education (4) Limited english (1)Expensive (3) Marriage (1)Abortion (2) Maternity/paternity leave (1)Autonomous communities (2) More rights (1)Drinking age (2) Organization-value (1)Gay rights (2) Royal family (1)Multilingual (2) Sizes of families (1)Nudity on beach (2) Smoking laws (1)Politics (2) Use less electricity (1)Value older people (2) Value their rights (1)Believe in social change (1) Value tradition (1)Comparative culture (1) Women’s rights (1)Controversial topics (1)

Appendix D. Number of student mentions indicating knowledge growth by theme and subtheme.

Number of student mentions indicating knowledge growth by theme and subtheme.

Theme (n) Subtheme (n)

Big C (34) Art (10) Big C (2)Madrid sites (8) Bullfights (2)History (6) Dances (2)Major cities (3) Fiestas de pueblo (1)

City life (18) Many people (3) Historical and modern (1)Safety (3) Lack of organization (1)City life (2) Lots of light (1)Clean (2) Noise (1)Many activities (2) City size (1)Fast paced (1)

Climate/landscape (3) Climate (3)

Daily life (39) Slow pace of life (11) Fashion (2)Bar/nightlife (8) Pets (2)Smoking (3) Small shops (2)Soccer (3) Daily life (1)Social life (3) Music (1)Exercise outside (2) TV (1)

Food and Drink (22) Description (fresh, healthy, laborious) (5) Tapas (3)Type of food (4) Meals (1)Food (4) Quantity (1)Drinking (3) Restaurants (1)

House (14) Size (4) Air conditioning (1)Apartment (3) Appliances (1)Lawn (2) Close to others (1)Organization (2)


Appendix D (Continued )

Theme (n) Subtheme (n)

Interactions (27) Greetings (5) Acceptable to talk with strangers (1)PDA (5) Animated (1)Personal space (4) Cat calls (1)Touch (3) Interrupting is acceptable (1)Quiet (3) Treatment of foreigner (1)Loud (2)

People (62) Nice (12) Busy (1)Open (10) Cultured (1)Affectionate (5) Different from Latin Americans (1)Direct/opinionated (4) Diverse (1)Enjoy life (3) Funny (1)Helpful (3) Intelligent (1)People as their daily experiences (3) People (1)Proud (3) Religious (1)Happy (2) Reserved (1)Liberal (2) Speak Spanish (1)Physical features (2) Studious (1)Relaxed (2)

Relationships (16) Aloof with strangers (5) Family relationship (2)Family time (3) Service encounters (2)Friend relationship (3) Mother’s role (1)

Schedule (19) Eating (6) Sobremesa (2)Shop times (4) Flexible time (1)Siesta (3) Schedule (1)Nightlife (2)

Talk (14) Spanish (4) Say “sorry” less (2)Talk fast (4) Use of vosotros (1)Quantity of talk (3)

Transportation (11) Public transportation (9) Walking (2)Values and politics (54) Values and politics (12) Drinking age (1)

Economy (7) Driving age (1)Healthcare (4) Expensive (1)Abortion (2) Marriage (1)Autonomous communities (2) Maternity/paternity leave (1)Gay rights (2) More rights (1)Multilingual (2) Organization (1)Nudity on beach (2) Size of families (1)Politics (2) Smoking laws (1)Size of country (2) Use less electricity (1)Believe in social change (1) Value their rights (1)Comparative culture (1) Value tradition (1)Controversial topics (1) Women’s rights (1)Death penalty (1)

Appendix E. Comments in Section 4.4 in original Spanish, as stated by students.

Comments in Section 4.4 in original Spanish, as stated by students.


Me gusta. Es grande. Es un poco similar de Seattle, porque hay muchos edificios y hay muchas personas y cada persona esmuy diferente.


En mi pueblo todo la gentes se conocen. Y cuando vamos a Walmart, siempre a ver como cinco personas que se conocen.Pero aquí, es más grande.


Es limpia y segura y es divertido. Hay cosas para hacer y no hay cosas para hacer en mi pueblo. Hay plazas bonitas yparques. . ...Creo que es una ciudad segura entonces no soy muy nervioso.


No me gusta que tengo que siempre tener mucho cuidado con mi bolsa.



Estoy acostumbrándome al horario de comer. No comes mucho para el desayuno pero sí comes mucho para almuerzo y unpoco más para cenar. Eso me gusta. Y en los Estados Unidos cada desayuno y cena son muy grandes pero almuerzo no, yeso diferente y no sé si me gusta o no.


No me gusta el horario del comer. Es diferente de los Estados Unidos, pero es una aspecto de la vida espanola. No es que nome gusta; es que no estoy acostumbrada.


Yo aprendí el arte del Prado y las tres artistas muy grandes del Espana, por ejemplo Velázquez, Goya, y Greco. Y la culturay gastronomía de Espana especialmente el sur porque mi proyecto para la cultura, la clase de la cultura es sobre el sur deEspana.


El palacio real súper bonita y quiero regresar. Al senado fue muy interesante y me gusta mucho al Retiro. Muy, muy bien. Ypienso que querría caminar por el Sol or por Sol y el Plaza Mayor.


S: Ellos viva más um (snapping fingers) No lleno. No rápido, pero um

I: ¿Lento?

S: Lento. Sí, sí, sí. Viven más lento. No tienen prisa. Muy tranquilo y sí.

I: ¿Y dónde ves que la gente está tranquila? ¿cómo sabes?

S: En el metro. Nadie en el- sí, nadie tiene prisa. Camino (inaudible) la calle es tranquilo.


Me gusta que todos los días, días son más despacio. Y hay una cosa que parece que a mí y también cuando yo escribí ensayopara el profesor yo aprendo que el equilibrio entre trabajo y la vida personal es más mejor en Espana que en los EstadosUnidos.


Sí y come muchas comidas nuevas como no-no sé el nombre pero chorizo de sangre.


A mí no es un cosa que no me gusta pero la la leche tiene que, y no es. Hay un proceso diferente que se usa aquí y no tieneque planear en el refrigeradora y cuando una taza de leche está [caliente] y que leche fría. Tiene que ponerla en la frigedoray espera un poco. Está bien.


Y mi madre aquí usualmente compra las cosas cada día para la comida que vamos a comer esta día. En los Estados Unidostengo un referíjico muy grande con muchos comidos de los días pasados y los días práximos y hay mucho comida siempre,y aquí en Espana hay mucho menos espacio para eso. Y así madre compra el pan cada día porque se come pan cada, cadacomida aquí en Espana. Y compra no sé la carne, las verduras, el día que va a cocinar. Y no sé es, es algo que me di cuentaque es mucho diferente.


Me gusta el almuerzo más grande y la cena más pequena porque tengo mucho hambre en el medio de día y es muy extranoen los Estados Unidos comer un gran comida en el noche y después va a acostar. Y es muy diferente porque aquí ellos piensanque no necesario para tener energía en el fin de su día.


En los Estados Unidos tenemos la pena de muerte y no es la verdad en Espana. Y yo sé que Espana tiene problemas de laeconomía y otras cosas, pero los Estados Unidos tiene proble-or tienen problemas también y en Madrid pienso que tieneuna sistema de salud. Es interesante porque en los Estados Unidos hay muchos debatos de la sistema de salud, y la sistemade salud en los Estados Unidos es muy cara y es difícil recibir ayuda si es- I don’t know. Es interesante porque hay muchasdiferencias, pero pienso que hay más derechos humanos en Espana que en los Estados Unidos. Los Estados Unidos, en losEstados Unidos pienso que las empresa-empresarios, las companías grandes tienen mucho poder sobre el gobierno.



He leído mucho sobre las leyes y la igualdad de los homosexuales y también la ley de or pues la ley de las mujeres y tambiénel desempleo.


Durante los cenas y me gusta hablar porque anoche el hijo de mis padres preguntarme sobre los edades de manejar en losEstados Unidos. Y es muy diferente los edados para manejar y beber. Pero aquí es dieciocho por los dos y en los EstadosUnidos es dieciséis y después veintiuno. Sí es muy diferente.


También es interesante aquí las mujeres después de tener hijos, tienen al menos seis semanas sin trabajo. Y con el salario lomismo. Y también los hombres tienen un período de tiempo que pueden dejar en casa con el bebé. Y en los estados unidosno hay para los hombres. Solo para las mujeres. Y pienso que no es tan larga tiempo.

References

Bennett, J. M. (1993). Toward ethnorelativism: a developmental model of intercultural sensitivity. In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Education for the interculturalexperience (2nd ed., pp. 21–71). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural.

Bennett, J. M. (2008). Transformative training: designing programs for culture learning. In M. A. Moodian (Ed.), Contemporary leadership and interculturalcompetence: Understanding and utilizing cultural diversity to build successful organizations (pp. 95–110). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Bristol, PA: Multilingual Matters Ltd.Caffi, C., & Janney, R. (1994). Toward a pragmatics of emotive communication. Journal of Pragmatics, 22, 325–373.Chieffo, L., & Griffiths, L. (2004). Large scale assessment of student attitudes after a short-term study abroad program. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary

Journal of Study Abroad, 10, 165–177.Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Czerwionka, L., Artamonova, T., & Barbosa, M. (2014). Intercultural competence during short-term study abroad: a focus on knowledge. In B. Dupuy, & L.

Waugh (Eds.). Selected proceedings of the fourth international conference on the development and assessment of intercultural competence, 3, 46–77.Deardorff, D. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in

International Education, 10(3), 241–266.Deardorff, D. (2009). Implementing intercultural competence assessment. In D. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence (pp.

477–491). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Dwyer, M. M. (2004). More is better: the impact of study abroad program duration. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 10, 151–163.Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic variation as social practice. Oxford: Blackwell.Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2008). Blogging: fostering intercultural competence development in foreign language and study abroad contexts. Foreign Language

Annals, 41(3), 454–477.Engle, L., & Engle, J. (2004). Assessing language acquisition and intercultural sensitivity development in relation to study abroad program design.

Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 10, 219–236.Fantini, A., & Tirmizi, A. (2006). Exploring and assessing intercultural competence. World Learning Publications, Paper 1. Retrieved from:

http://digitalcollections.sit.edu/worldlearning publications/1Gertsen, M. (1990). Intercultural competence and expatriates. International Journal of Human Resources Management, 1, 341–362.Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.Gudykunst, W., Ting-Toomey, S., & Wiseman, R. (1991). Taming the beast: designing a course in intercultural communication. Communication Education,

40, 272–285.Hoyt, K. (2012). Fostering intercultural competence in undergraduate French students through ethnographic interviews. Proceedings of Intercultural

Competence Conference, 2, 34–50. Retrieved from http://cercll.arizona.edu/ media/development/conferences/2012 icc/hoyt fostering ic ic2012.pdfHullett, C. R., & Witte, K. (2001). Predicting intercultural adaptation and isolation: using the extended parallel process model to test anxiety/uncertainty

management theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 25, 125–139.Jackson, J. (2008). Globalization, internationalization, and short-term stays abroad. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 349–358.Jackson, J. (2011). Host language proficiency, intercultural sensitivity, and study abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 21,

167–188.Koike, D., & Lacorte, M. (2014). Toward intercultural competence: from questions to perspectives and practices of the target culture. Journal of Spanish

Language Teaching, 1(1), 15–30.Lussier, D. (2007). Theoretical bases of a conceptual framework with reference to intercultural communicative competence. Journal of Applied Linguistics,

4(3), 309–332.Malewski, E., & Jaramillo, N. (Eds.). (2011). Epistemologies of ignorance in education. In. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Spitzberg, B. H., & Changnon, G. (2009). Conceptualizing intercultural competence. In D. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of intercultural competence

(pp. 2–52). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Stier, J. (2006). Internationalisation, intercultural communication and intercultural competence. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 11, 1–12.Tagliamonte, S. A. (2006). Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Talburt, S., & Stewart, M. A. (1999). What’s the subject of study abroad: race, gender, and living culture. The Modern Language Journal, 83(2), 163–175.The Institute of International Education. Open doors report. Retrieved from: http://www.iie.org/opendoorsTing-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Vande Berg, M., Paige, M. R., & Lou, K. H. (Eds.). (2012). Student learning abroad: What our students are learning, what they’re not, and what we can do

about it. In. Sterling, VA: Stylus.Williams, T. R. (2009). The reflective model of intercultural competency: a multidimensional, qualitative approach to study abroad assessment. Frontiers:

The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 18, 289–306.Wiseman, R. (2002). Intercultural communication competence. In W. B. Gudykunst, & B. Mody (Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural

communication (pp. 207–224). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Wiseman, R., Hammer, M., & Nishida, H. (1989). Predictors of intercultural communication competence. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13,

349–370.

Czerwionka, L., Artamonova, T. \u0026 Barbosa, M. (2015). Intercultural knowledge growth: Evidence...

Documents

Transcript of Czerwionka, L., Artamonova, T. \u0026 Barbosa, M. (2015). Intercultural knowledge growth: Evidence...