points of this study, in an attempt to map the participating music teacher educators’ understandings of cultural diversity and interculturality, as well as to evaluate the concept’s potential as a means for music teacher educators’
professional development. However, grasping the essence of the concept is not a straightforward process. Several attempts have been made to define the concept of intercultural competence in the research. However, scholars in the field have not reached a consensus as to what such a competence indicates (e.g. Bennett, 1993; Byram, 1997; Lustig & Koester, 2003). As Hammer (2015) points out in his part of the SAGE Encyclopedia of Intercultural Competence, there are various different terms that describe intercultural competence, such as intercultural sensitivity, cross-cultural effectiveness, intercultural skills, global competence, or cultural proficiency, to name a few (p. 483). As many terms as are used to describe the phenomenon, the definitions used by researchers to try to capture the essence of what the concept really means are equally multifaceted. According to Hammer, intercultural competence can be defined “as the capability to shift one’s cultural perspective and appropriately adapt behavior to cultural differences and commonalities” (p. 483). He argues that:
… intercultural competence involves (a) the cultivation of deep cultural self-awareness and understanding (i.e., how one’s own beliefs, values, perceptions, interpretations, judgments, and behaviors are influenced by one’s cultural community or communities) and (b) increased cultural other-understanding (i.e., comprehension of the different ways people from other cultural groups make sense of and respond to the presence of cultural differences). (p. 483)
The phenomenon of intercultural competence has been studied from different perspectives in many different fields of study. In the field of education, some studies on intercultural competence have focused on intercultural communication within the concept’s frame (e.g. Byram, 1997; Byram, Nichols & Stevens, 2001;
Lustig & Koester, 2003), whereas other studies have approached intercultural competence through examining “attitudes, knowledge, skills, and action, or the cognitive, affective, and behavioural dimensions” (Jokikokko, 2010, p. 25) related to the phenomenon (e.g. Deardorff, 2006, 2008; Jokikokko, 2010; Spitzberg &
Changnon, 2009; Taylor, 1994). This study adheres to the latter approach in its
attempt to explore the different aspects of intercultural competence as part of music teacher educators’ professional development in terms of cultural diversity and interculturality.
In an attempt to identify different aspects of intercultural competence from the research data, I used Deardorff’s (2006, 2008) process model of intercultural competence as a conceptual starting point. Initially, the model was created for the purpose of assessing the outcomes of the internationalization efforts at postsecondary institutions in the United States. These outcomes include the development of interculturally competent students. There were two parts to Deardorff’s study. In the first part, she asked 23 intercultural scholars a key question: ‘What is intercultural competence?’ The definitions the participants of the study offered included many aspects of the concept, but the definition that was most common among the experts was ‘the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in intercultural situations based on one’s intercultural knowledge, skills, and attitudes’ (Deardorff, 2008, p. 33). Other components common to many definitions included ‘adaptability – adjustment to new cultural environment’, worldviews’, ‘understanding others’ ‘cultural self-awareness and capacity for self-assessment’, ‘general openness toward intercultural learning and to people from other cultures’, ‘an ability to adapt to varying intercultural communication and learning styles’ and ‘skills to listen and observe’ (p. 34). In the second part of the study, Deardorff categorized the components identified by the experts and constructed a model based on the components (see Figure 1). The categories are: ‘attitudes’, ‘knowledge and comprehension’, and ‘skills’. Two categories were developed by Deardorff as outcomes of the process: an ‘informed frame of reference shift’, which is the internal outcome of the process; and ‘effective and appropriate communication and behaviour in an intercultural situation’, which is the external outcome. (2008, p. 35).
Attitudes:
Respect (valuing other cultures)
Openness (withholding judgement)
Curiosity & discovery (tolerating ambiguity)
External Outcome:
Effective and appropriate communication
& behavior in an intercultural situation
Process Orientation
Interaction
Individual
Knowledge &
Comprehension:
Cultural self- awareness, deep cultural knowledge, sociolinguistic awareness Skills: To listen, observe
& evaluate; To analyze, interpret & relate
Internal Outcome:
Informed frame of reference shift ( adaptability, flexibility, ethnorelative view, empathy)
Figure 1. The process model of intercultural competence (Deardorff, 2008, p. 36).
In discussing the model, Deardorff notes that “While the model clearly depicts through its circular design that attitudes lead to acquisition of knowledge and skills, which helps to reshape internal frames of reference that then influence external behaviors”, there are several possible ways that the process can proceed,
and “each part of the model can impact the others directly as well” (2008, p.
39). Deardorff also notes that “the nonlinear nature of the model” makes the process continuous, with no end-point, thus implying that an individual can never become fully interculturally competent and making the development a ‘lifelong journey’ (ibid.). In reflecting upon the limitations of the model, Deardorff cautions against the Western bias which is inherent in the model, due to the fact that all the participating scholars “represented a Western and mostly U.S.-centric view of intercultural competence, a view in which such competence resides largely within the individual” (2006, p. 245). Deardorff points out that the phenomenon of intercultural competence is complex, and that it is challenging to try to capture its development in a model in order to assess individuals’ intercultural learning. The purpose of using the process model of intercultural competence in this doctoral study is not to assess or measure music teacher educators’ intercultural learning.
Instead, I consider Deardorff’s model as a conceptual starting point in discussing intercultural competence in the field of music education, and have used the model as an analytical tool in analysing the interview data in Article III. Through the use of this model, I have considered its instrumental value critically and attempted to expand on its frame by drawing attention to the aspects that surfaced in the study, and that relate to music teacher educators’ intercultural learning and professional development.
For the purpose of examining another perspective on intercultural competence within the study, the framework for intercultural teaching competencies suggested by MacPherson (2010) was used as a theoretical starting point in the data analysis in Article I. In her study, MacPherson first identified five aspects of intercultural teaching competencies by conducting a literature review of the research on intercultural teaching. In the empirical part of the study, she examined the collaborative online conversations of participating pre-service, in-service, and university teachers, and focusing on their decision making in the intercultural incidents that they encountered during their teaching (p. 274). Through these phases, MacPherson aimed to develop an empirically grounded intercultural framework “to integrate the various competencies, orientations, and critical consciousness associated with effective intercultural teaching” (p. 274). A fuller account of the content of the framework is given in section 4.1, as part of the description of the stages of this doctoral study.
3.4. Boundary crossing and Third Space in the process of