A Chinese English Teacher’s Self-reflection on Intercultural Education

彭珺

【Abstract】In China， the importance of intercultural education is fully recognized by scholars and teachers for languages teaching. However， practitioners are overwhelmed by the contested definitions of intercultural competences. Moreover， English teachers are unconsciously falling into the ideological pitfall. Furthermore， the importance of the identities involved in teaching is ignored by English teachers.

【Key words】intercultural education; interculturality; intercultural competences; Chinese English teachers

Introduction

On the one hand， due to the link between languages and cultures， enhancing students intercultural communication competence is one of the main objectives of college English teaching in China （Ge & Wang， 2016）. Plenty of research has studied on how to improve students IC in English teaching （Hu & Gao， 1997; Wen， 1999; Sun， 2016; Ge & Wang， 2016）. Though many English teachers have recognized the importance of IC， it is still a mystery to most English teachers due to the contested definitions of IC.

1. contested IC definitions

The contested definitions of intercultural competences are the first dilemma that is faced by plenty of teaching practitioners. Though the concept of intercultural competence is the main element in various fields of research， the discussion between the concept of intercultural competence and intercultural communication competence （ICC） is continuously going. Some researchers point out that intercultural competence is the equivalence of intercultural communication competence （eg. Spitzberg， 1994）. Others claim that intercultural competence is a subdivision of intercultural communication competence （eg. Byram， 1997; Wen， 1999） while the others who have contradicted this view state that intercultural competence intercultural communication competence is one part of intercultural competence which is comprised by many factors （eg. Kotthoff & Spencer- Oatey， 2000）. The conceptualizations of IC or ICC enrich the understanding of intercultural communication as well as the research of intercultural competence.

Most scholars agree that IC has three dimensions： knowledge， attitudes， and skills， or， the alternative terms referred to the three dimensions （see， Alred & Byram， 2002; Chen and Starosta， 1998; Jia， 1997; Yang & Zhuang， 2007; Ge & Wang， 2016）. Knowledge generally refers to the traditions， values， religions， political systems and so on from the host cultures. Attitudes often relate to being global-minded （Yang & Zhuang， 2007）， to respect other cultures （Sun， 2016） and to alert ones own perspective to adequately understand and adapt to the demands of the host culture. Skills are specified to the communicative strategies which can lead to effective and appropriate communication （Dodd， 2006; Wang， 2016; Sun， 2016）. On the one hand， the simple categorization of IC into knowledge， attitudes， and skills dimensions can help researchers to assess the competences in an easy and ‘objective way.

However， on the other hand， some scholars also criticize the problematic way of conceptualizing the definitions of intercultural competence （eg. Dervin & Halh ， 2015）. Since culture is imagination by a group of people， always along with race， nationality， and ethnicity， it is a problematic way of categorizing people into cultural groups （Dervin & Halh， 2015， p. 96）. They also mention the fact that such a limited， modern （versus postmodern） and positivistic vision sets aside an important aspect of social interaction： power （2015）. Therefore， English teachers who are dedicated to improving learners intercultural competence should go beyond “the solid and culturalist， and acritical approaches （Dervin & Halh， 2015， p. 107）”.

2. Language ideology

The second dilemma of intercultural education in China is how language teachers deal with the language and ideology in language teaching. In the study of language， ideology is usually understood as reflection and expression of the interests or experience of a specific social position， or signifying practice， ideas or discourse related to the access to power or to its maintenance， which is proposed by Woolard （1998） （as cited in Ma?a?tta? & Pietika?inen， 2014）. As an English teacher for several years， I suddenly found out that it was very easy for English teachers unconsciously falling into the ideological pitfall which is influenced by the language we have taught. It is worthwhile to investigate language teachers attitude towards language， culture and how they deal with different ideologies presented in language when they are teaching. As Darvin and Norton （2015） states， examining how ideologies operate enables us to dissect not just the dynamics of power within communicative events， but also the structures of power that can prohibit the entry into specific spaces where these events occur （p. 43）.

According to Shi-Xu （2001， p. 287）， there is a tendency in research and practice to ignore the fact that “intercultural communication is situated in the context of imbalance between the East and the West， the North and the South， men and women （as cited in Dervin & Hahl， 2015）. The tendency can be noticed by one of the aims of intercultural education for English teaching in China. Most of the time， the Chinese English teachers practice the rules unconsciously from “the texts [which] are taken to identify the differences between modern western society and societies in other times and places， and thus to entail a more or less overt essentialization of the west”（p. 199）.