臺日與臺新交流對小學生跨文化溝通之認知能力的影響

THE IMPACTS OF TAIWANESE-JAPANESE AND TAIWANESE-SINGAPOREAN EXCHANGE ACTIVITIES ON PRIMARY STUDENTS' COGNITIVE COMPETENCE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION

10.6151/CERQ.2017.2502.01

黃文定(Wen-Ding Huang)

國際交流 ； 跨文化溝通 ； 認知能力 ； 小學 ； international exchange ； intercultural communication ； cognitive competence ； primary schools

當代教育研究季刊

25卷2期（2017 / 06 / 30）

1 - 41

繁體中文

研究目的　本研究之目的在探討兩所臺灣小學國際交流活動（一所為臺日，另一所為臺新）對小學生跨文化溝通之認知能力的影響。研究設計／方法／取徑　本研究以開放式問題問卷（學習單）與半結構式訪談蒐集資料，由研究者設計問卷，發放參與交流的小學生填寫，並訪談40 位參與交流的小學生。研究發現或結論　本研究之發現有以下四項：一、就文化知識而言，國際交流活動有助於小學生對交流國家文化的認識，但無法促進對其文化體系的系統性理解。二、就溝通規則而言，小學生對溝通規則的覺知乃是建立在師長所強調的「禮貌」概念上，但對於溝通內容之適當性的認識有限。三、就連結與比較而言，國際交流活動有助於小學生印證所學或打破刻板印象，了解文化異同，但小學生未能展現比較不同國家深層文化內涵的能力，也易以偏概全。四、就詮釋與認知彈性而言，交流過程所累積的異文化經驗與知識有助於學生運用認知彈性進行詮釋。整體而言，小學生的詮釋類型多元，但有歸因錯誤、流於空洞以及本質主義的問題。研究原創性／價值　回顧國內外針對小學生實體國際交流之研究，未見針對跨文化溝通之認知能力的專門研究，就此而言，本研究可彌補此不足之處，具有其開創性。此外，本研究對小學生跨文化溝通之認知能力的分析成果與建議，亦有助於未來小學生國際交流活動與跨文化溝通訓練課程之規劃。

Purpose The purpose of this research was to explore the impacts of two primary schools' international exchange activities (one Taiwanese-Japanese and the other Taiwanese-Singaporean) on primary students' cognitive competence of intercultural communication. Design/methodology/approach Open-ended questionnaires (worksheets) and semi-structured interviews were employed to collect data in this research. The researcher designed the questionnaires which were completed by primary students participating in exchange activities. The researcher also interviewed 40 participating primary exchange students. Findings This research derived four findings: 1. Regarding cultural knowledge, international exchange activities promoted the primary students' knowledge of exchange countries' cultures, but they did not facilitate systematic understanding of their cultural systems. 2. Concerning communication rules, the primary students' perception of communication rules was based on the concept of manners as emphasized by their teachers. However, the primary students' perception of the appropriateness of communication content was limited. 3. With respect to relating and comparison, international exchange activities contributed to the primary students' confirming what they had learned, eliminating stereotypes and learning cultural similarities and differences. Nevertheless, the primary students exhibited little competence of comparing in-depth cultural contents between different countries and demonstrated the fallacy of hasty generalisation. 4. Regarding interpretation and cognitive flexibility, the accumulated experience and knowledge of other cultures through the process of exchange facilitated the primary students' employment of cognitive flexibility in interpretation. Generally, the primary students' interpretations were diverse but exhibited the problems of misattribution, a lack of meaning, and essentialism. Originality/value In previous research on primary students' face-to-face international exchange activities, cognitive competence in intercultural communication has been neglected. The present research is original in that it compensates this deficiency. In addition, the analytical results and suggestions provided by this research on primary students' cognitive competence in intercultural communication can facilitate the design of primary schools' international exchange activities and intercultural communication training programmes.

1. 張善禮(2013)。文化本質與文化類型對跨文化國際教育的意涵。輔仁外語學報，10，1-16。
   連結：
2. 黃文定(2015)。評析儒家文化下Deardorff 跨文化能力模式在我國小學國際交流之應用。當代教育研究季刊，23(3)，125-167。
   連結：
3. 黃文定(2015)。小學生國際交流跨文化能力指標之建構。教育研究與發展，11(1)，135-164。
   連結：
4. 教育部（ 無日期） 。學校國際化推動執行成果（ 102 年度） 。取自http://ietw.moe.gov.tw/GoWeb/include/index.php?Page=E-15[The Ministry of Education (n. d.). Implementation results of international exchanges(Year 2013). Website of International Education for Primary & Secondary Schools. Retrieved from http://ietw.moe.gov.tw/GoWeb/include/index.php?Page=E-15]
5. Baker, W.(2015).Research into practice: Cultural and intercultural awareness.Language Teaching,48(1),130-141.
6. Barrett, M.,Byram, M.,Lázár, I.,Mompoint-Gaillard, P.,Philippou, S.(2014).Developing intercultural competence through education.Strasbourg, France:Council of Europe.
7. Bergan, S.(Ed.),van't Land, H.(Ed.)(2010).Speaking across borders: The role of higher education in furthering intercultural dialogue.Strasbourg, France:Council of Europe.
8. Bulmer, M.(Ed.)(2004).Questionnaires.London, England:Sage.
9. Burleson, B. R.(Ed.)(1996).Communication yearbook 19.London, England:Sage.
10. Byram, M.(1997).Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence.Clevedon, England:Multilingual Matters.
11. Byram, M.(2008).From foreign language education to education for intercultural citizenship: Essays and reflections.Clevedon, England:Multilingual Matters.
12. Camilleri, A. G.(2002).How strange! The use of anecdotes in the development of intercultural competence.Strasbourg, France:Council of Europe.
13. Cargan, L.(2007).Doing social research.Lanham, MD:Rowman & Littlefield.
14. Choi, J. H.(Ed.),Foth, M.(Ed.),Hearn, G. N.(Ed.)(2014).Eat, cook, grow: Mixing human-computer interactions with human-food interactions.Cambridge, MA:Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
15. Deardorff, D. K.(2006).Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization.Journal of Studies in International Education,10(3),241-266.
16. Deardorff, D. K.(Ed.)(2009).The Sage handbook of intercultural competence.London, England:Sage.
17. Edgar, A.(Ed.),Sedgwick, P.(Ed.)(1999).Key concepts in cultural theory.London, England:Routledge.
18. Elen, J.(Ed.),Stahl, E.(Ed.),Bromme, R.(Ed.),Clarebout, G.(Ed.)(2011).Links between beliefs and cognitive flexibility: Lessons learned.New York, NY:Springer.
19. Emmel, N.(2013).Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research.London, England:Sage.
20. Gadamer, H.,Weinsheimer, J.(Trans.),Marshall, D. G.(Trans.)(1989).Truth and method.New York, NY:Continuum.
21. Gillham, B.(2007).Developing a questionnaire.London, England:Continuum.
22. Gilroy, P.(1987).There ain't no black in the Union Jack: The cultural politics of 'race' and nation.London, England:Hutchinson Education.
23. Gudykunst, W. B.(2004).Bridging differences: Effective intergroup communication.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
24. Gudykunst, W.,Kim, Y.(1992).Communication with stranger: An approach to intercultural communication.Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.
25. Hall, B. J.(2005).Among cultures: The challenge of communication.Belmont, CA:Thomson Wadsworth.
26. Ho, C. M. L.(2000).Developing intercultural awareness and writing skills through email exchange.The Internet TESL Journal,6(12)
27. Huber, J.(Ed.)(2012).Intercultural competence for all: Preparation for living in a heterogeneous world.Strasbourg, France:Council of Europe.
28. Imahori, T. T.,Lanigan, M. L.(1989).Relational model of intercultural communication competence.International Journal of Intercultural Relations,13(3),269-286.
29. Kim, Y. Y.(1988).Communication and cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative theory.Clevedon, England:Multilingual Matters.
30. Kincheloe, J. L.,Steinberg, S. R.(1997).Changing multiculturalism.Buckingham, England:Open University.
31. Liddicoat, A. J.,Scarino, A.(2013).Intercultural language teaching and learning.Chichester, England:Wiley-Blackwell.
32. Lustig, M. W.,Koester, J.(2010).Intercultural competence: Interpersonal communication across cultures.Boston, MA:Pearson.
33. Machamer, P.(Ed.),Wolters, G.(Ed.)(2010).Interpretation: Ways of thinking about the sciences and the arts.Pittsburgh, PA:University of Pittsburgh.
34. Magala, S.(2005).Cross-cultural competence.Abingdon, England:Routledge.
35. Martin, M. M.,Rubin, R. B.(1995).A new measure of cognitive flexibility.Psychological Reports,76(2),623-626.
36. Miles, M. B.,Huberman, A. M.(1994).Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook.London, England:Sage.
37. Morreale, S. P.,Spitzberg, B. H.,Barge, J. K.(2001).Human communication: Motivation, knowledge, & skills.Belmont, CA:Wadsworth.
38. Neuman, W. L.(2011).Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.Boston, MA:Allyn & Bacon.
39. Nix, D.(Ed.),Spiro, R.(Ed.)(1990).Cognition, education, and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
40. O'Neill, E. J.(2008).University of Virginia.
41. Patton, M. Q.(2002).Qualitative research and evaluation methods.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
42. Samovar, L. A.,Porter, R. E.,McDaniel, E. R.,Roy, C. S.(2013).Communication between cultures.Boston, MA:Wadsworth.
43. Savicki, V.(Ed.)(2008).Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education.Sterling, VA:Stylus.
44. Smith, J. A.(Ed.),Harré, R.(Ed.),Van Langenhove, L.(Ed.)(1995).Rethinking methods in psychology.London, England:Sage.
45. Thom, P.(2000).Making sense: A theory of interpretation.Lanham, MD:Rowman & Littlefield.
46. Ting-Toomey, S.(1999).Communicating across cultures.New York, NY:Guilford.
47. Ting-Toomey, S.(Ed.),Korzenny, F.(Ed.)(1991).Cross-cultural interpersonal communication.London, England:Sage.
48. Wood, J. T.(2010).Interpersonal communication: Everyday encounters.Boston, MA:Wadsworth.
49. Wood, J. T.(2014).Communication in our lives.Stamford, CT:Cengage Learning.
50. 何穎怡譯、de Beauvior, S.(2001)。西蒙波娃的美國紀行。臺北巿=Taipei, Taiwan:先覺=Prophet。
51. 林孟樺譯、Studio Tac Creative編輯部(2014)。日本茶事典。臺北巿=Taipei, Taiwan:日月文化=Heliopolis Culture。
52. 張齡云(2009)。臺北巿=Taipei, Taiwan，國立政治大學=National Chengchi University。
53. 教育部(2012)。中小學國際教育融入課程資源手冊－國小版。臺北巿=Taipei, Taiwan:作者=Author。
54. 教育部(2011)。中小學國際教育白皮書：扎根培育21 世紀國際化人才。臺北巿=Taipei, Taiwan:作者=Author。
55. 陳國明(2003)。文化間傳播學。臺北巿=Taipei, Taiwan:五南=Wunan。
56. 馮承鈞譯、Polo, M.(2010)。馬可波羅行紀（第二版）。臺北巿=Taipei, Taiwan:台灣書房=Taiwan Bookstore。
57. 鄭姵萱(2014)。茶道。新北巿=New Taipei, Taiwan:幸福文化=Happiness Cultural。
58. 韓良露(2003)。狗日子‧貓時間－韓良露倫敦旅札。臺北巿=Taipei, Taiwan:馬可孛羅=Marco Polo。

1. 黃文定(2019)。臺日與臺新交流對小學生跨文化溝通技能之影響。課程與教學，22(2)，1-30。
2. 張世忠(2021)。新住民子女國際教育之推動－以新住民子女國際職場體驗為例。學校行政，136，97-116。