Purpose of Study

1. Assessing The Impact of Cross-Cultural Interactions Between First-Year students in a Learning Community and International students Presenter Gita Maharaja, Ed.D Duquesne University 23rd International Conference on the First-Year Experience Session 11

2. Purpose of Study • Investigate the impact of cross-cultural interactions between freshmen in a Learning Community and E.S.L. students on cross-cultural sensitivity, cultural awareness and self-awareness over a semester-long period.

3. Significance of the study • Increasing need to prepare our students to be sensitive to and aware of cultural differences in our interconnected and interrelated world • Serve as model for other educators and administrators seeking to increase the effectiveness of interactions among their native and international student

4. Definitions Cross-Cultural Sensitivity:Ability to experience cultural differences Cultural Awareness : Ability to adjust to cross-cultural situations Self-Awareness: Ability to learn about oneself as a result of the cross-cultural interactions

5. Literature Review: On-Campus Cross-Cultural Experience • Global perspective – cultural pluralism, world-mindedness, support of internationalism, cosmopolitan world outlook (Sharma and Jung, 1986) • More accepting of diversity, desire to travel abroad and greater responsibility for foreign visitors (Stohl, 1986) • Personal Development (Wilson, 1993) • Interpersonal Relationship (Wilson, 1993)

6. Literature Review (cont.) • Cross-cultural Sensitivity is a skill that can be learned through cross-cultural training (Bennett, 1986, Cushner and Brislin, 1996) • Cultural Awareness and Self-Awareness can be developed through cross-cultural classroom experiences (Fantini, 1997, Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J. & Wiseman, R. 2003, Wilson, 1993)

7. Goals of Cross-cultural Interactions On-Campus • Help U.S. students to develop a more comprehensive understanding of their own culture and the culture of others. • Assist international students in adapting and integrating into the American culture and the culture of their host institution

8. Conceptual Framework • Concept of Cross-cultural Sensitivity based on intercultural experiences (Cushner, 1986) Five dimensions:-Cultural Integration - Behavioral - Intellectual Interaction - Attitude Towards Others - Empathy

9. Conceptual Framework (cont.) • Cultural Awareness and Self-Awareness based on cross-cultural adaptability skills (Fantini, 1997, Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J. & Wiseman, R. 2003, Wilson, 1993) Four Dimensions: -Self-confidence - Tolerance - Cultural empathy - Independence

10. Research Questions • Are there changes in students’ cross-cultural sensitivity through structured interactions occurring over a semester? • Are there changes in students’ cultural awareness through structured interactions occurring over a semester? • Are there changes in students’ self-awareness through structured interactions occurring over a semester?

11. Research Design • Method: Quantitative Study with a convenience sample; pre- and post-test design • Population: Freshmen in a Learning Community (27), English as a Second Language students (23) and upper classmen(6) • Instrument: Inventory of Cross-Cultural Sensitivity (Cushner, 1986) and Cross-Cultural Awareness questionnaire (piloted)

12. Cross-Cultural Interactions • On-line interactions via Wimba Voice tools • Conversation hours as part of regular course works • Face-to face interactions in and out of classroom • Intercultural activities with the community

13. Cross-Cultural Activities • Structured with specific directions - BafaBafa - Story Reading - Guest speaker - Critical Incidents - Barnga • Written and Oral reflections of cross-cultural experiences

14. Demographics Variable Total Percentage Gender Male 25 45 Female 31 31 Age Group 18-20 38 68 21-23 12 21 24+ 6 11 Classification E.S.L. Only 9 16 Freshman 36 64 Sophomore 1 2 Junior 2 4 Senior 5 9 Graduate 3 5

15. Demographics (cont.) Variables Total Percentage Nationality American 33 59 Non-American 23 41 First Language English 33 59 Other 23 41 Overseas Traveling Never 8 14 1-4 weeks 20 36 5-16 weeks 13 23 17-52 weeks 4 7 1+Years 11 20 Major Liberal Arts 38 68 Business 8 14 Other 10 18

16. Statistical Data Table I: Paired Samples t-Test Comparisons of Cultural Sensitivity at the beginning and end of the semester Scale Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Pre-test Post-test t(df=56) p ____________________________________________________ Cultural Integration 42.98(7.97) 46.29(8.07) -3.162 .003* Behavioral Scale 27.55(4.49) 29.14(4.32) -1.999 .051* Intellectual Interaction 33.01(4.59) 35.27(4.38) -2.857 .006* Attitude Towards Others 13.28(4.93) 10.80(4.47) 3.625 .001* Empathy 22.41(3.30) 22.73(3.92) -0.649 .519 _______________________________________________________________ Total Score 139.25(12.70) 144.23(12.90) -2.571 .013* *p<.05 (statistically significant difference)

17. Statistical Data (cont.) Table I: Paired Samples t-Test Comparisons of Cultural and Self-Awareness at the beginning and end of the semester Scale Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Pre-test Post-test t(df=56) p ____________________________________ Self-Confidence 34.36(3.57) 35.45(2.88) 2.075 .043* Tolerance 14.05(1.99) 15.59(2.32) -4.280 .001* Independence 21.79(3.50) 23.62(3.58) -3.454 .001* Cultural Empathy 14.60(2.07) 15.70(1.57) -4.312 .001* _________________________________________________________________ Total Score 84.78(8.59) 90.36(7.50) -4.697 .001* *p<.05 (statistically significant difference)

18. Data Analysis of Cultural Sensitivity • Statistically significant difference found in: - Cultural Integration - Behavioral Scale - Intellectual Interaction -Attitude Towards Others -Overall Cultural Sensitivity No Statistically significant change found in: - Empathy

19. Data Analysis of Cultural and Self-Awareness • Statistically significant difference between pre- and post-results in : - Self-Confidence - Tolerance - Independence - Cultural Empathy - Overall Cultural and Self-Awareness

20. Limitations • Purely quantitative approach • Carry-over effect of a pre- and post-test research design • Duration of the research (one semester) • Cross-Sectional Research – data collected reflected feelings at one point of time at beginning and end of semester

21. Recommendations • Mixed Method: Quantitative and qualitative for in-depth data • Explore other impacts of cross-cultural interactions between freshmen and E.S.L. students (friendship, compassion, and others) • Longitudinal studies • Comparison to a control group

22. Conclusion • Cross-cultural interactions did increase students’ cultural sensitivity, cultural awareness and self-awareness. • Efforts to create and implement cross-cultural activities for both E.S.L. and U.S. students are beneficial.

23. References • Bennett, M. J. (1993). Towards ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural sensitivity. In: R.M. Paige (Ed.), Educational Exchange for the intercultural experience, 21-71. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. • Cushner, K. (2003). Human Diversity in Action: Developing Multicultural competencies for the classroom (2nd Ed). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. • Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J. & Wiseman, R. (2003). Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27: 421-433.

24. References(Cont.) • Fantini, A.E. (1997). New ways in teaching culture. Bloomington, IL: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other languages (TESOL), Inc. • Sharma, M.P. & Jung, L.B. (1986). How cross-cultural participation affects the international attitudes of U.S. students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 377-387. • Stohl, C. (1986). The A.M.I.G.O. project. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 235-254.