Intercultural Development Inventory. Dr. John Brenner Southwest Virginia Community College. BIE-China Presentation April 25, 2009. Background Information. Teach Sociology and am Global Education Coordinator at Southwest Virginia Community College
Related searches for Intercultural Development Inventory
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Dr. John Brenner
Southwest Virginia Community
BIE-China Presentation April 25, 2009
Defined as the… “ability learn from and relate respectfully to people of your own culture as well as people from other cultures” (Trask and Hamon, 2007 p. 128)
“Intercultural competence is a key goal of internationalization because it indicates an awareness and understanding of culturally diverse others and situations, as well as the presence of behaviors that promote productive and effective communication among and across cultures” (Emert and Pearson, 2007 p. 68)
“Global education programs that provide intercultural competence and knowledge, promote continued learning through both informal and formal means, and provide contested knowledge about the fate of a global perspective will enhance students’ ability to be both productive and responsible citizens of the world” (Zeszotarski, 2001 p. 76)
The first three dimensions of the DMIS are ethnocentric, meaning one’s culture is experienced as central to reality.
The next three DMIS orientations are more ethno-relative, meaning one’s own culture is experienced in context with other cultures
Acceptance– people are seen as different but equally important—they see how culture differences operate in human interactions—they do not necessary agree/disagree but understand the differences
Adaptation– this orientation means that the individual can shift his or her frame of reference to the individual culture—the person has developed empathy
Integration– here the orientation is such that one can move in and out of different cultural worldviews—perhaps held by the “global nomads” or long-term expatriates (Hammer, Bennett and Wiseman, 2003. p. 425).
The larger the gap between the Perceived Score (PS) and the Developmental Score (DS), the greater the need for the development of intercultural sensitivity. Non-Students scores have a 24.59 difference:
Finding: which means they are in the acceptance/adaptation mode that has a mid-range of 130.
The larger the gap between the Perceived Score (PS) and the Developmental Score (DS), the greater the need for the development of intercultural sensitivity. Students scores have a 29.28 difference:
There is no class in the United States
“All the race that matters is the human race!”
“Customs differ, of course, but when you really get to know them they’re pretty much like us.”
“I have this intuitive sense of other people, no matter what their culture.”
“If people are really honest, they’ll recognize that some values are universal”.
“Technology is bringing cultural uniformity to the developed world”.
“It’s a small world, after all”.
Bennett, J.M. & Bennett, M. J. 2004 Developing Intercultural Competence: A Reader. www.intercultural.org
Findings: means they are in the acceptance/adaptation mode that has a mid-range of 130.
M Scale Group Profile
A profile in the “unresolved” third of the scale indicates that the group members’ experience of other cultures is heavily oriented toward underlying commonality.
The profile suggests
1. you may have a strong commitment to the idea that people from other cultures are basically “like us” or that people of other cultures should share the same set of “universal” values you have
2. you may have difficulties in identifying important cultural differences that influence intercultural relations
3. you need to resolve these issues before you can exercise your greatest potential of intercultural competence (Bennett & Bennett, 2002)
American Cultural Patterns Matt Christensen, 2008
American’s feeling of dominance
Feeling superior to other countries and cultures
Wanting to be the “best”
We will help other nations whether they want it or not
This can be seen as arrogance
Values Americans Live By L. Robert Kohls
He lists 13 values—he notes that Americans believe they have only been slightly influence by family, church and schools
They assume they have personally chosen their own values to live by
The values of Americans would be sharply different than those of people from other countries and we are only 5% of the World.
1. Personal control over the environment—not fatalistic and believe all things are achievable
2. Change—seen as a good condition, linked to improvement, development and progress—many other cultures view it as something to avoid at all costs
3. Time and its control—it is of the utmost importance..language is filled with references to time, rude to be late and no one should “waste” it
4. Equality/egalitarianism…most cherished of American values. To 7/8ths of the rest of the world status, rank and authority are more desirable. We treat high level people with no deference and low status people highly
5. Individual and privacy—the individual is completely marvelous and unique. Privacy does not even exist as a word in some languages. Americans claim individualism but will almost always vote one of the two major political parties
6. Selp-Help Control. Americans get no credit for being born into a rich family. We should be born poor and rise up on our own. Over 100 words in the dictionary described as self as in self-reliance, self-denial…many of these words are not in other languages
7. Competition and free enterprise..competition brings out the best in a person. Peace Corp workers find it hard to teach in societies that are not competition based in the classrooms
8. Future orientation. a happy present time goes unnoticed. We are always focused on a better future. For a Moslem talking about the future is seen as futile and sinful
9. Action/work orientation. “Don’t just stand there, do something”. Action is superior to inaction and it is sinful to “waste time” to “daydream” or “sit around doing nothing”
10. Informality. Seen as being informal to the point of being disrespectful to those in authority—the “hi” or “How are you?” Greeting
11. Directness, openness and honesty. If you come from a society that uses indirect methods to convey bad news then you will be shocked by Americans bluntness. Americans consider anything not direct as being dishonest and insincere
12. Practicality and efficiency. Americans are viewed as extremely practical, realistic and efficient while priding themselves in not being very philosophically or theoretically oriented..if they had any it would be pragmatism
13. Materialism. Foreigners consider Americans much more materialistic than they think they are…we have material objects and periodically get rid of them to get new more efficient ones
Brislin, R. (1993). Understanding culture’s influence on behavior. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Emert, H. A., & Pearson, D. L. (2007). Expanding the vision of international education: Collaboration, assessment, and intercultural development. New Directions for Community Colleges, 138, 67-75.
Floyd, D. L., Walker, D. A., & Farnsworth, K. (2003, Fall). Global education: An emerging imperative for community colleges. International Education, 33(1), 5-21.
Green, M. F. (2007). Internationalizing community colleges: Barriers and strategies. New Directions for Community Colleges, 138, 15-24.
Hammer, M., & Bennett, M. (1998). The intercultural development manual. Portland: The Intercultural Communication Institute.
Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J., & Wiseman, R. (2007). Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 421-443.
Raby, R. L. (2007). Internationalizing the curriculum: On- and off-campus strategies. New Directions for Community Colleges, 138, 57-66.
Sherif-Trask, B., & Hamon, R. R. (2007). Cultural diversity and families. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York: The Guilford Press.
Zeszotarski, P. (2001). Eric Review: Issues in global education initiatives in the community college. Community College Review, 29(1), 65-77.
More to come!!!