Overview Needs and opportunities Benefits of interaction Students and courses Objectives Design principles Timeline Results Collaborative learning and technology Learning in other cultures Benefits Students’ comments Conclusions

Needs and opportunities Large international/immigrant student body Cultural studies Foreign languages Little interaction between non-native and native speakers Native speakers (NS) Do not seek opportunities to socialize with other cultures Rarely initiate interaction (Wright&Lander 2003) Do not connect with “otherized” peers (Ting-Toomey 1999) Non-native speakers (NNS) difficulty interacting with peers, profs, TAs intimidated in groups not taken seriously inhibited by linguistic and socio-cultural limitations (Cheng & Fox 2008)

Benefits of interaction Interaction contributes to Native speakers’ Increased cross-cultural knowledge Openness, sensitivity and awareness of cultures Academic success Reduction of depression (Geelhoed et al 2003) Non-native speakers’ Linguistic and socio-cultural development Building of self esteem Academic and social acculturation

Students and courses Two first year courses 4Cs: Cross-cultural communicative competence EAP: English for academic purposes Similarities Objectives: academic acculturation (skills & strategies) Content: theories of cross-cultural communication Methodology: sustained content instruction Differences First language, culture and educational background Hours of instruction, material covered

Student collaboration Diverse groups with similar interests: basis for interaction 4Cs: “experts” on Canadian culture and language EAP: “experts” on other cultures Project offered Enhanced learning environment Meaningful, focused communication Cognitive growth through social interaction (Vygotsky 1978)

Objectives 1.To create opportunities for interaction between native and non-native speakers, and 2. To broaden learning opportunities by creating a richer learning environment Benefits: Academic – development of critical thinking and active involvement in learning Social – building of social support system, positive atmosphere for cooperation Psychological – building of self-esteem (Rogers, 2005)

Design principles 1.Creating groups Every 4Cs student assigned 2 EAP students 2.Structuring learning activities Information sheets: project objectives, info about the other group, respective responsibilities, final assignment, evaluation criteria 3.Monitoring group interaction Cooperation between instructors Facilitation of group interaction

Timeline Three phases 1.Preparation 4Cs: acquisition of knowledge (lit.& research methods); questionnaire EAP: acquisition of knowledge; development of language skills 2.Collaboration exchanges: invitation, acceptance, survey, responses, clarification, distribution of results 3.Follow-up assignments 4Cs: data analysis, results; report; journal EAP: summaries, case analysis, journal

Phases and key activities

Collaborative learning and technology Collaborative model not common (Klemm 2005) Monitoring students’ work and progress (Jaffee 1999) Asynchronous, cross boundary interaction – no direct teacher supervision This project Beginning – inertia (compare Stockwell 2003) Lack of responsibility, initiative, commitment, time management (particularly among NNS) NNS students - submissive role: expectation of direction and leadership from NS (Wright & Lander 2003) Teachers’ intervention Increase in communication

Learning in other cultures Teaching styles in NNS contexts: Promotion of competition in classroom Increases motivation Fair practice (benefits hard workers) Helps identify good and weak students Encourages students to put more effort Teachers’ strategies Ranking students Displaying results (in writing or announcements) No collaboration – fear ideas will be stolen

Learning benefits Analysis of students’ work confirmed Roberts’ (2005) and Warschaer et al’s (2006) findings Improved recall of content in sources Engagement in critical thinking, i.e. relating concepts in texts to knowledge gained from interaction; selecting, synthesizing, analyzing

Learning benefits Native speakers Introduced to the process of research Research instrument Analysis of responses Non-native speakers Developed language skills Concepts/vocabulary from texts Language accuracy (editing s) Both groups demonstrated ability to relate theory to practice

Social benefits Building Understanding of “others” NS - insights into other ways of seeing the world NNS – insights into Canadian culture and other cultures Positive atmosphere for cooperation Spirit of cross-cultural courtesy despite occasional language confusion; willingness to help BUT Cooperation did not continue after project

Psychological benefits Building self-esteem Both NS and NNS students cultural informants - information essential for project completion Roles not equal: NS - managers NNS students expansive and frank in their responses Desire for individual visibility Opportunity to have their voices heard

Students’ evaluation of the project NS students Positive comments Regrets that closer links were not established NNS students Liked answering questions Called survey “cool” Offered to explain answers if their language was not clear Offered to meet in person if necessary Majority quoted both language and culture as major barriers to communication

Conclusions Communication technology Opportunities for interaction Rich and comfortable learning environment Benefited all students Development of knowledge and skills necessary for academic success Critical thinking through: recall of texts, interaction, clarification of meanings, analysis and writing Research methods; hands on experience Responsibility for completion of tasks

Future work Next project Measuring the benefits Giving more responsibility to NNS students (NNS questionnaire) Filming of presentations Extending cooperation (writing) New communication platform (project management software)

Thank you