Content uploaded by Héctor Manuel Serna Dimas
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Héctor Manuel Serna Dimas on Feb 13, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
English Language Teaching; Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
ISSN 1916-4742 E-ISSN 1916-4750
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
161
Implementing an Instructional Design on Intercultural Communicative
Competence (ICC) With Foreign Language Students Aimed at Joining
the Corporate World
Héctor Manuel Serna Dimas1
1 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Universidad EAN, Bogotá, Colombia
Correspondence: Héctor Manuel Serna Dimas, Universidad EAN, Calle 79 #11-45, Bogotá, Colombia.
Received: January 8, 2019 Accepted: February 10, 2019 Online Published: February 12, 2019
doi: 10.5539/elt.v12n3p161 URL: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n3p161
Abstract
This study intends the validation of an instructional design on intercultural communicative competence (ICC) in
the beginning levels of German, French, Italian, Portuguese, and English in the Modern Languages program at
EAN University in Colombia. The design constituents: language integration, oral production, fieldwork activities,
and a product/project gravitated around thematic units. The faculty application of the design is evidenced
through annotated lesson plans together with the rationale for their classroom decision-making. The results
indicate that an instructional design on intercultural communicative competence offers teachers and students a
framework whose components acknowledge the participants’ diverse views and promote an intercultural learning
environment in both relational and interpersonal terms.
Keywords: instructional design, interculturality, communicative competence
1. Introduction
Universidad EAN is a Colombian university with undergraduate degrees in engineering, finance, business
management, international business, economics, modern languages, and cultural management. All university
programs are oriented towards goals such as entrepreneurship and sustainability. Moreover, EAN professionals
are meant to make their way into organizations where they can promote and implement such values. The modern
languages program is no exception, and its professionals are educated to be part of the corporate world. In fact,
the program mission determines that professionals in modern languages will develop entrepreneurial aptitudes
that help them contribute to the economic and social growth of people and organizations both at local and
international levels. These capacities will be obtained through their active participation in projects that promote
multilingual/multicultural development. In sum, these professionals will be part of the corporate world where
languages are fundamental in the areas of communications, translations, and international businesses.
This situation poses opportunities and challenges for both the faculty and the students in the program. On the one
hand, it is an opportunity to view language learning removed from its expected views of mastering a linguistic
system or its pedagogical implications which are more pertinent for language student teachers. It is also an
opportunity to educate these language professionals to be part of the corporate world of languages such as
English, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish.
On the other hand, it is a challenge to educate these individuals in a world that is for the most part transnational
which means that the workforce will have the characteristics of being both international and multicultural;
therefore, these professionals must be taught languages from intercultural perspectives. Thus, the language
learning process requires that these students develop interpersonal and relational skills which enable them to
relate to people from different language and cultural backgrounds.
Another challenge is that most of this language learning happens in the classroom which demands from both the
faculty and the students to devise innovative ways to take their language endeavors beyond the classroom. For
example, the language learning situations must integrate research activities, language fieldwork, and
computer-mediated activities so that students have a wide perspective on the complexities of learning languages
in multilingual and multicultural settings.
Including the intercultural communicative competence as the basis of this research process lies in a series of
elt.ccsenet.
o
questions
t
competen
c
their lear
n
which ca
n
language
i
contributi
o
of the ess
e
critical p
o
Berlincou
r
This rese
a
language
t
first phas
e
competen
c
Portugues
e
instructio
n
different
l
instructio
n
integrate t
h
of the ins
t
is conside
r
The instr
u
which the
of the in
s
fieldwork
the consol
Source: S
Universid
a
The resea
r
To wh at
e
evidenced
compone
n
as the in
c
learning?
o
rg
that the langu
a
c
e of their s
t
u
d
n
ing processe
s
n
lead to mor
e
i
nstructors oft
e
o
ns to build le
a
e
ntial element
s
o
sitions in o
n
r
t, Franco, &
S
a
rch project h
a
t
eaching pers
p
e
of the proje
c
c
e in the class
r
e
. The secon
d
n
al design in
l
anguages as
a
n
al design in t
h
he componen
t
t
ructional desi
g
r
ed.
u
ctional desig
n
tasks of class
r
s
tructional de
s
research acti
v
idation of lea
rn
Figur
erna Dimas,
a
d EAN.
r
ch question g
e
e
xtent is the
by the imp
n
ts are: the int
e
c
lusion of fie
l
a
ges faculty a
t
d
ents in the p
r
s
are based e
x
e
stereotypic
a
e
n realize ho
w
a
rning in othe
r
s
to advance i
n
n
e’s own un
d
S
achett, 2016)
.
a
s been develo
p
p
ective of fore
i
ct
concluded
w
r
oom through
a
d
phase was
intercultural
c
a
common te
a
h
e beginning
l
t
s of the inst
r
u
g
n regarding t
h
n
on ICC revol
v
r
oom plannin
g
s
ign are 1) i
n
v
ities develop
e
rn
ing. See Fig
u
e 1. Instructio
n
H. M. (2017
)
e
nerated in ac
c
intercultural
c
lementation
o
e
gration of co
m
l
dwork activi
t
English
L
t
EAN Unive
r
r
ogram. Some
x
clusively on
t
a
l situations i
n
w
difficult it is
r
languages a
n
n
deepening k
n
d
erstanding a
n
.
p
ed in a serie
s
i
gn languages
w
ith the defi
n
a
ction researc
h
oriented to
w
c
ommunicativ
e
a
ching frame
w
l
evels of Ger
m
u
ctional desig
n
h
e planning a
n
v
es around th
e
g
, implementa
t
n
tegration of
c
e
d by students
,
u
re 1.
n
al Design on
)
. Instruction
a
c
ordance with
c
ommunicativ
e
o
f an instruc
t
m
munication
s
t
ies, and the
c
L
anguage Teac
h
162
r
sity have fac
e
of these ques
t
he status of
n
n
the teachin
g
for students
t
n
d cultures. B
e
n
owledge pro
c
n
d that of th
e
s
of phases w
h
in the Moder
n
n
ition and op
e
h
projects in c
o
w
ards the for
m
e
competence
w
ork. The pre
m
an, French, I
t
n
in their cour
s
n
d implement
a
e
matic units t
h
t
ion, and eval
u
c
ommunicati
v
,
4) formulati
o
Intercultural
C
a
l Design on
this third pha
s
e
competenc
e
t
ional design
s
kills, the emp
h
c
ompletion o
f
h
ing
e
d with the de
v
tions have to
n
ative speake
r
g
and languag
t
o think of the
e
ing able to re
l
c
esses and the
e
“other” (S
e
h
ich have aim
e
n
Languages
p
e
rationalizatio
n
o
urses of Ger
m
m
ulation of t
h
that could b
e
sent third ph
a
t
alian, Portug
u
s
es. In this p
h
a
tion of teach
i
h
at are suppor
t
u
ation must b
e
v
e skills, 2)
e
o
n and execut
i
C
ommunicati
v
Intercultural
s
e of the resea
r
e
(ICC) in th
e
centered on
h
asis on the d
e
f
a product /
v
elopment of
t
do with the st
u
r
s of several
o
e learning pr
o
ir native lang
u
l
ate languages
assumption o
f
e
rna Dimas,
Q
e
d at establish
i
p
rogram at E
A
n
of intercult
u
m
an, Italian, F
r
h
e componen
t
e
used by th
e
a
se intends th
e
u
ese, and Engl
h
ase, the exten
t
i
ng processes
b
t
ed by four ce
n
e
arranged. Th
e
mphasis on
o
i
on of a prod
u
v
e Competenc
e
Communicati
v
r
ch project wa
e
teaching of
thematic un
i
e
velopment o
f
project inten
d
Vol. 12, No. 3;
t
he communi
c
tu
dents’ belief
s
o
f their profe
s
o
cesses. Mor
e
u
age and cult
u
and cultures i
f
both attitude
s
Q
uaroni, Tre
u
i
ng an intercu
l
A
N University
u
ral communi
c
r
ench, Englis
h
t
s of an eme
r
e
professors
o
e
validation
o
ish. The prof
e
t
of the appli
c
b
y these prof
e
n
tral elements
e specific ele
m
o
ral productio
n
u
ct/project ai
m
e
v
e Competen
c
s the followin
g
foreign lang
u
i
ts whose ci
r
f
oral skills, a
s
d
ed to conso
l
2019
c
ative
s
that
s
sors,
over,
u
re as
s
one
s
and
u
holz,
l
tural
.
The
c
ative
h
, and
r
ging
f the
f the
ssors
ation
ssors
from
m
ents
n
, 3)
m
ed at
c
e at
g
:
u
ages
r
cling
well
l
idate
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
163
2. Instructional Designs in Language Teaching and Learning
The first element in this theoretical framework is the concept of instructional design and the reason it must
become a fundamental part of an attempt to work on developing students’ intercultural communicative
competence in a foreign language setting. The idea of design takes into consideration a way to do something; it
also demands a procedure, protocol, or at least a series of steps. Designs are meant to provide a wide-angle
perspective on how to go about teaching and learning. Nation and Macalister (2010), for example, consider that
the curriculum design process requires knowledge of aspects such as the environment, needs, and principles that
gravitate around goals which are largely defined by the content, the format, the presentation, and its evaluation in
terms of both monitoring and assessment (p. 3).
Instructional designs have been used in environments where learners need to become proficient in languages that
are not their native. In other words, these languages are their second, third, or even foreign. Some of these
models come from bilingual education: CLIL (Marsh, 1994); CALLA (Chamot & O’ Malley, 1994); SIOP
(Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2000). The above designs share that they all take into consideration the learners and
their needs in terms of both their language and cognitive development; these two aspects have made them
popular and have contributed to their spread and success in various scholarly settings.
In regard to interculturality, Lee, Poch, Shaw, and Williams (2012) suggest pedagogical frameworks that take
into consideration a variety of aspects such as the curriculum and the instructional practices whose goal is to
promote students’ diversity. Intercultural language projects are successful if they promote diversity which in turn
stimulates engagement as students will find a legitimate place to voice their views in what the language courses
are about. The inclusion of culture in language teaching requires a framework that allows learners to understand
its central role in language learning. Moeller and Faltin Osborn (2014) summarize some of these frameworks.
For example, Byram’s (1997) proposal of intercultural communicative competence based on knowledge, skills,
and attitudes; Deardoff’s (2002) model that pays special attention to aspects such as the learner’s attitudes
towards language and culture, and Borghetti’s (2011) teaching framework that combines both cognitive and
affective processes, and the establishment of a classroom that behaves as a community.
The design proposed in this study advocates the relationship between language and culture. In our attempt to
figure out this relationship, the views of Kumaravadivelu (2008) are considered since he conceptualizes the
connection of languages and cultures as a process that ranges from assimilation, pluralism, hybridity, and realism
(p. 4). This last perspective is the one that he finds more encompassing with what is happening with the present
globalization times of languages, cultures, and peoples. Kumaravadivelu defines the premise of cultural realism
as:
“A ‘web of interlocution’ that is effectively challenging the traditional notions of identity formation of an
individual or of a nation. This development is plunging the world in a creative as well as chaotic tension that
both unites and divides people. It is also resulting in an unintended and unexpected moment toward tribalization
that contributes to an increase in ethnic, racial, religious, and national consciousness.” (p. 158).
Cultural realism provides a new and more challenging setting to enact language teaching and learning. In fact,
Kurmaravadivelu advances some pedagogic principles which he describes as a series of shifts:
“a) From target language community to targeted cultural community, b) from linguistic articulation to cultural
affiliation, c) from cultural information to cultural transformation, d) from passive reception to critical reflection,
e) from interested text to informed contexts (p. 172).
Kumaravidelu’s (2011) principles are worth examining against the context of prospective Colombian language
professionals whose attempts at learning languages such as English, French, German, Italian, and Portuguese
take place within the boundaries of the classroom. Furthermore, these languages are foreign in the country whose
official language is Spanish. The above situation shows that it is not enough the sheer presence of native
speaking instructors, the use of the latest commercial textbooks, or even the state-of-the-art technology to
guarantee the enactment of intercultural teaching and learning.
This environment requires a teaching framework that provides relevant contexts and more importantly
opportunities where teachers and learners experience intercultural language projects that cater to both language
and culture learning in both relational and interpersonal terms. In sum, an instructional design that places
teachers and students as legitimate speakers whose emergent relationship is not exclusively mediated by the
bureaucracy of the classroom in terms of lessons, textbook activities, or tests.
The framework should promote a learning environment where the integration of linguistic abilities such as
vocabulary and grammar need to be addressed together with the provision of opportunities to create language
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
164
projects from a variety of sources. Moreover, there must be a concerted place where the use of videos and
podcasts happen along with readings or writings to make sense of both language and culture by means of active
student participation through oral interaction.
Kimber, Pillay, and Richards (2002) examine the role of teachers in a world that demands several competences
such as the digital in computer-mediated settings. These new learning conditions confirm the need for designs
that integrate these perspectives. They quote the work of the New London Group (200) which proposes a design
with six elements “(linguistic, visual, audio, gestural, spatial and multimodal), and four associated components
of pedagogy (situated practice, overt instruction, critical framing and transformed practice).” (p. 162). These
scholars also consider that the notion of design invites teachers to become creators of classrooms practices
specifically tailored to fit the teaching context and the students’ realities, which are pervaded by
computer-mediated experiences.
2.1 Thematic Units
Instruction around thematic units has been around for several years, and it continues to be a valid proposal from
various camps since it promotes a view of learning that is focused on making sense of a topic from a variety of
perspectives through processes of thoughtful integration. In terms of language learning, thematic units aim at
giving students several encounters with language information through a variety of channels.
Zull (2002) provides examples from brain research and learning which demonstrate how integration happens in
the brain; he asserts that there is always a brain cycle when people process sensory input to know and learn about
the world around them. The cycle begins in the sensory cortex to the back integrative cortex and frontal
integrative cortex and then to the motor cortex to end in the sensory cortex again (p. 23). He provides an
example of language processing which he summarizes as follows:
“1. Hear words or see words = concrete experience
2. Remember related words, images, or ideas = reflection
3. Generate new words or ideas = abstraction
4. Speak or write new words or ideas = active testing
5. Hear or see new words and teacher’s response = new concrete experience” (p. 23).
The above explanation on how the brain processes stimuli supports the need to design and prepare class
sequences that resemble such processes as it was shown in the example. Zull invites teachers to consider these
brain cycles when they plan and perform their teaching.
In the field of Content-Based Instruction (CBI), Grabe and Stoller (1997) quote the work of Mohan (1986) and
Grabe (1995) who consider that one of the goals of thematic unit instruction “is to give students multiple
opportunities to work with coherently developed sets of content resources and to revisit that information from a
variety of perspectives, including exposure to visual representations and information.” (p. 11).
2.2 Language Ability Integration
Roegiers (2010) regards integration in pedagogy as a triad of concepts namely “interdependence, coordination,
and polarization”. (p. 30) Interdependence is the work of some related concepts that create a system based on the
functional relationships of its many parts. Coordination has to do with how systems of ideas or concepts work in
congruence. Finally, polarization refers to how systems are set in motion as meaning-making devices.
The planning of classes in terms of listening, speaking, reading, writing together with vocabulary and grammar
should have the same thread that always connects them. This connectivity guarantees that students have constant
exposure to the topics proposed in the unit in terms of both language and content. Furthermore, these topic
activities engage students in events whose purpose is to reflect on how their language learning responds to such
systematicity which is evidenced by the students’ sense of accuracy and fluency in their language production.
This idea of advancing language teaching-learning processes by integrating language and communication skills
is based on the students’ attention to the construction of meanings beyond the concern for the ways in which
these meanings are expressed. Kagan (1995) states that a process of second language acquisition is heightened to
the extent that learners receive linguistic inputs whose nature is clear, appropriate to the development of the
learners, repeated, and accurate (p. 1). Regarding reiteration, Kagan adds that this repeated exposure of linguistic
forms and meanings from different sources facilitates the internalization process beyond a process of partial or
short-term memorization of these ideas.
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
165
Another important aspect to consider in this process of teaching preparation with an integrative perspective has
to do with the apprentices’ language development. Prabhu (1987) and Widdowson (1990) cited by
Kumaravadivelu (2006) expressed their criticisms of the idea that knowledge of a language is linearly based on
the study and management of fragmented units in a cumulative process. These scholars affirm that language
learning is holistic and cyclical with some points of transition of parallel systems of linguistic configuration. (p.
141).
In sum, Kumaravadivelu asserts that in real terms, the production of apprentices can differ from the learning
sequence and is in turn different from the teaching sequence. This conclusion seems to indicate that it is
necessary to move towards an alignment between teaching, learning, and student production, which once again
emphasizes the need to integrate language teaching and learning.
2.3 Oral Production
One of the key aspects in the language learning process is the promotion of the students’ oral production so that
they can gradually build discursive aspects that ultimately determine both their learning and language learning
proficiency.
Garbati and Mady (2015) traced some of the most important research journals in the field of language teaching.
From this exercise, the researchers extracted a series of strategies that were mentioned frequently in these
investigations. The researchers talked about practices such as the explicit teaching of oral skills, scaffolding
activities to provide oral production strategies, the provision of authentic communication spaces, improvised and
planned oral presentations, use of tasks, fluency activities, activities of questions and answers, role-plays as well
as activities in which students are counted for the evaluation and feedback of their production (pp. 1767-1768).
The conclusions of this review of the research in oral production in the second language, as well as the practices
outlined above, agree with the approaches of theorists such as Gibbons (2007) who states, “that instructional
designs adopted by teachers affect the quality and the effectiveness of the learning context” (p. 1768).
On a study on the nature of oral abilities in a foreign language context, Saito and Hanzawa (2016) wanted to test
the effectiveness of foreign language instruction on students’ oral abilities in terms of oral features such as
prosody. Their results showed that there were external factors such as students’ language exposure and aptitude
that influenced the students’ oral development. In fact, they asserted that the students’ oral performance was
heightened by their contact with the language outside class with a variety of other language resources.
Finally, the research and the classroom practices derived from these studies have as a common denominator a
critique of the visions that one can take a single look and a single measure that can be applied to an entire
population. Language students at EAN University may come from the same language and cultural background;
however, there is still diversity in them which calls for language pedagogies that foster interaction so that this
diversity nurtures both language and culture learning. Lee, Poch, Shaw, and Williams (2012) consider that there
is a need for an intercultural pedagogy that promotes such interactions:
“As students engage with one another and encounter differences in their fellow students’ perspectives and
epistemologies, it can at first be challenging for them to generate active dialogue or to reach productive
consensus. Facilitated, purposeful opportunities to interact provide students with experience communicating,
listening, and negotiating across complex cultural, experiential, and epistemological perspectives.” (p. 56).
2.4 Students’ Fieldwork Activities
Students should become aware that they contribute with the input for the construction of concepts and
subsequent learning that is generated from their classroom experiences. In fact, it is their experiences that make
up most of what their language learning is going to be about. These contributions must be related to exploration,
investigation, or expanding activities in relation to the class topics.
Byram (1997) defines fieldwork as “a pedagogical structure with educational objectives constructed by the
teacher in consultation with students” (p. 68) One of the essential elements of this structure of work has to do
with the development of learning skills in action in real time and with a great emphasis on interaction and whose
ultimate goal is the contribution of students to the knowledge that is being generated in the classroom (p. 69).
The instructional design contemplates that these opportunities for interaction among language learners are
increasingly in line with the principles of intercultural communicative competence in which the learners,
according to Byram and Zarate (1994), bring with them a wealth of experiences as well as a socio-cultural
identity constructed mainly in their L1 and C1 which empower them as mediators between cultures.
This last idea poses challenges to both the learners and their teachers. In the case of apprentices, intercultural
elt.ccsenet.
o
communi
c
L2 and C
2
they must
dysfuncti
o
2.5 Learn
i
Students
c
activity s
u
the classr
o
developm
e
develop. I
n
as interne
t
superficia
l
global per
s
This speci
or short-t
e
works, we
As it is se
e
abilities.
N
p
roficienc
y
come to g
e
Source:
S
Universid
a
3. Metho
d
This stud
y
collection
o
rg
c
ative compet
e
2
against whi
c
have the abi
l
o
ns and/or con
f
i
ng Consolida
t
c
an shape thei
r
u
ch as the for
m
o
om strategies
e
nt of explor
a
n
the current
s
t
browsers, so
l
views of the
i
s
pective or a
c
fic aspect of t
h
e
rm projects
s
b pages, podc
a
e
n from Figur
e
N
evertheless,
m
y
. That being
e
nerate as the
l
S
erna Dimas,
a
d EAN.
d
olo
gy
y
is mixed;
i
and analysis
Fieldwork
Option 1
Idioms relate
d
to weather an
d
people
Fieldwo
r
Option
2
Research t
h
relationsh
i
b
etween pe
o
and weath
e
nce will be gi
v
c
h they must e
l
l
ity to discer
n
f
licts with tho
s
t
ion Product/
P
r
learning to t
h
m
ulation and i
m
that are most
a
tory projects
s
cheme of wor
cial networks
,
i
nformation t
h
c
omparative lo
h
e design can
b
s
uch as exhib
i
a
sts, and rese
a
e
2, the thema
t
m
any times st
u
said, the focu
s
l
essons evolv
e
F
H.M. (2017)
.
i
t follows a
s
of quantitativ
e
W
r
Pi
des
c
d
d
r
k
2
h
e
i
p
o
ple
er
English
L
v
en by their a
b
lucidate and r
e
n
aspects of t
h
s
e of their stu
d
P
rojec
t
h
e extent that t
h
m
plementatio
n
conducive to
p
in which stu
d
ld globalizati
o
,
and applicat
i
h
ey locate in o
r
ok among lan
g
be covered as
i
tions, drama
t
a
rch reports.
t
ic unit elicits
a
u
dents require
s
of the unit
m
e
into some so
r
igure 2. Instr
u
.
Instructiona
l
s
equential ex
p
e
data will be
P
We
O
p
reg
i
O
co
u
r
iting
cture
c
ription
L
anguage Teac
h
166
b
ility to relate
e
solve dysfun
c
h
eir “native”
l
d
ents e
m
ergin
g
h
ey participat
e
n
of class proj
e
p
romoting lev
e
d
ents can test
o
n and easy ac
c
i
ons, there is
a
r
der to bring t
h
g
uages and cu
l
class activitie
t
izations, audi
o
a
cycle whose
vocabulary a
n
m
ust be the th
e
r
t of product o
r
u
ctional desig
n
l
Design on
p
lanatory stra
t
followed by
t
P
roject/product
Presentation
Speaking
ather and personalit
y
p
tion 1: Colombian
i
ons and their people
O
ption 2: Tropical
u
ntries and seasonal
countries
h
ing
aspects of the
i
c
tions and/or
c
l
inguistic co
m
g
competence.
e
actively in t
h
e
cts. Kuma
r
av
a
e
ls of cultural
their knowle
d
c
ess to resour
c
a
challenge t
o
h
em to know t
h
l
tures.
s are structure
o
visuals, and
entry point c
o
n
d grammar a
s
e
me and the
m
r project in ag
r
n
in motion
Intercultural
t
egy (Creswe
l
t
he collection
Reading
Weather and
personalities
i
r L1 and C1
w
c
onflicts. In t
h
m
petence that
m
h
e constructio
n
a
divelu (2008
)
awareness a
m
d
ge of the to
p
c
es that provi
d
o
guide studen
t
h
ese topics in
e
d into concret
e
portfolio of
d
o
uld be any of
s
the building
m
eanings stud
e
r
eement with
t
Communicati
v
l
l, 2003) whi
c
and analysis
Vocabulary an
d
grammar
Weather expressi
o
Verb to be
Adjective used
t
describe personali
t
Lis
t
W
e
r
e
Po
d
Wea
t
p
e
Vol. 12, No. 3;
w
ith respect to
h
e case of tea
c
m
ay have po
s
n
of a consoli
d
)
asserts that o
m
ong students
i
p
ics they cho
o
d
e information
ts to overco
m
depth from ei
t
e
learning pro
d
d
ocuments, w
r
the communi
c
blocks of lan
g
e
nts will even
t
t
he thematic u
n
v
e Competen
c
c
h means th
a
of qualitative
d
o
ns
t
o
ties
t
ening
e
ather
e
port
d
casts:
t
her and
e
ople
2019
their
c
hers,
s
sible
d
ation
n
e of
i
s the
se
t
o
such
e the
t
her a
d
ucts
r
itten
c
ative
g
uage
t
ually
n
it.
c
e at
t
the
data.
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
167
The quantitative data is based on the faculty completion of two annotated lesson plans as a checkup of the
application of each one of the instructional components of the design.
The qualitative data will be based on the professors’ rationale for the design application. Therefore, the analyses
will have a hermeneutical vision whose purpose is to analyze the professors’ decision-making based on their
lesson planning and the subsequent rationale for changes or variations as the design components were set in
motion. The role of hermeneutics is to develop understandings from the professors’ implementation of the
instructional design both as a whole and in its parts, which validate the notion of a hermeneutic cycle (Gadamer,
1989).
The interpretation of these teachers’ decisions and their reasoning can be understood through the lens of teacher
cognition. Borg (2003) refers to teacher cognition as “the unobservable cognitive dimension of teaching –what
teachers know, believe, and think.” (p. 81). He offers a comprehensive account of research on teacher cognition
from three foci: cognition and prior language learning experience, cognition and teacher education, and
cognition and classroom practice (p. 81).
For the purposes of this study, the perspective on cognition and classroom practice deserves attention since the
analyses of teachers’ knowledge, as they make decisions on their lessons, and as they depart from their plans,
provides understandings on the implementation of the instructional design on intercultural communicative
competence.
Borg’s examination of teacher research shows that teachers have different reasons to account for their
decision-making. However, the reasons they claim range from motivational aspects to classroom management
issues. As for the reasons to depart from an original lesson, Borg found that teachers had one or some of the
following reasons: years of experience in teaching, a question or unexpected issue arose, student factors such as
discipline, or teachers’ factors such as forgetting a class element (p. 94). Nevertheless, Borg sees these changes
as legitimate since they show that teachers were trying to elucidate the articulation of two aspects of their
teaching namely their pedagogical choices and the instructional context.
3.1 Language Learning Theory
The language learning theory that guides this study is the sociocultural theory which can be defined as a position
that deliberately and decisively involves aspects of the historical, social, and cultural context of individuals
(Johnson, 2009). These elements are fundamental if there is a proposal that promotes teaching and learning
languages in an intercultural perspective; understanding interculturality: as the abilities that individuals from
different languages and cultures display to relate to each other.
Johnson (2009) maintains that cognition in a sociocultural perspective occurs to the extent that learners engage
in social activities which trigger a series of social and cultural relationships around systems of meaning together
with the performance and interaction of these individuals. In conclusion, the researcher states that “cognitive
development is the product of a process mediated by the interaction of social, linguistic, cultural, and contextual
aspects.” (p. 1).
Another central idea in sociocultural theory is the notion of language as a social practice. This conception
maintains that the language is the main generator of experiences of different kinds, and it is the same language
that allows individuals to be and participate in the world in a meaningful way. Johnson asserts that the linguistic
perspective that is most consistent with this idea is the systemic functional linguistics of Halliday (1989),
especially in his definition of understanding language as a semiotic system that gives individuals a series of
linguistic options on which they decide according to the contexts, the activities, and the roles they assume
according to their participation in communicative events (p. 45).
The role of language teachers in their interpretation of language as a social practice in the teaching and learning
processes has to do with a process of awareness about the power of the language to generate meanings that deal
with the creation of individuals in terms of both their personal identities and their roles as social beings.
Finally, language as a social practice in language teaching becomes real as far as these environments approach
language use as a mediating element of the dialogical exercise that must exist among the participants of this
process.
Johnson describes this process in the following way:
“The focus (language as a social practice) is not the correct use of a linguistic form or a communicative function,
however, it is in the nature of the activities in which teachers and students are immersed and what they want to
accomplish by these participants in these activities, and how the language and other cultural artifacts are used as
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
168
tools of mediation in those activities.” (p. 54).
3.2 Participants
Six professors (language coordinators) of English (EN), French (FR), Italian (IT), Portuguese (P), and German
(G) implemented the instructional design in their courses. English contributed to this project with two professors.
This faculty had studies in language pedagogy and were experienced in the teaching of their corresponding
language. It is worth pointing out that not all these professors had participated in the previous two phases of the
project as it was the case of the Portuguese, German, Italian, and one of the English faculty. However, they all
took part in orientation sessions prior to the launching of the project. For example, they all participated in
meetings where they exchanged their thematic unit proposal and had a say on the annotated lesson plan formats.
Table 1 provides information regarding the languages, thematic units, students’ levels of proficiency, and the
criteria the faculty used for the application of the design in terms of their lesson plans or their decision-making
processes as the lessons evolved.
Table 1. Participants
Language Thematic Unit
CEFR
Proficiency levels
Design application criteria
EN
FR
IT
P
G
1
A1
2
A1+
3
A2-B1
4
B1
Lesson
plan
Teachers’
decision-making
processes
1 2
P Interviews 1 2
P Interviews 1 1
EN_1 Inventions 2 1
EN_1 Inventions 2 2
It Professions and crafts 1 1
It Italian language 1 2
G Shopping and invitations 1 1
G Shopping and invitations 1 2
EN_2 Work and study 1 1
EN_2 Work and study 1 2
Fr My living place 1 1
Fr My living place, daily activities
and seasons
1 1
4. Results
The main goal of this study is to make sense of how teachers implemented the instructional design with their
lesson plans as a framework and their correspondence with concrete classroom activities. By analyzing these
circumstances, it can be determined the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal in order to make the necessary
changes or adaptations so that the design eventually fits the program and more importantly the students’needs.
The six professors worked with levels 1 and 2 which means that these students were at the initial stage of their
studies. All had thematic units except for the Portuguese professor who seemed not to have one. However, he
worked on a semester-long project based on an interview with Brazilian businessmen in Colombia.
Each professor reported two annotated lessons plans, and the source of integration stemmed from either the
lesson plan or the actual classroom circumstances. It is noticeable that the preferred pattern was 1 which means
that the basis for integration was at first part of a planned lesson which then evolved as the professors introduced
changes as the lessons progressed. See Table 1.
The first design component is the purposeful integration of the linguistic and communicative skills to get the
cycle started. Table 2 offers a more detailed description of how the integration took place.
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
169
Table 2. Language ability integration
LANGUAGE ABILITY INTEGRATION
Language There is
integration Listening Speaking Reading Writing Vocabulary Grammar
There is an
emphasis on
EN FR IT P G
0-No; 1-Yes
0-No;
1-Yes
0-No;
1-Yes
0-No;
1-Yes
0-No;
1-Yes
0-No;
1-Yes 0-No; 1-Yes
Listening 1
Speaking 2
Reading 3
Writing 4
Vocabulary 5
Grammar 6
P 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 3
P 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
EN_1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
EN-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
IT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1, 2, 5
IT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.2
G 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2, 3,4,5
G 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2, 3,4,5
EN_2 1 1, 2, 3, 4 ,5 ,6 2
EN_2 1 1, 2, 3, 4 ,5 ,6 1, 2, 3, 4
FR 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
FR 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
The Portuguese professor did not acknowledge the integration at first but reckoned it took place in some other
moments of the class sequence. It is worth looking at the English_2 faculty whose planning seemed to indicate
that the place of integration was for the most part around grammar. The German and Italian faculty placed their
emphasis on several abilities at the same time. Unlike these faculty, the first English professor and the French
focused on oral abilities primarily.
It was already established that there was ability integration which varied among the languages, so it is relevant to
know the reasons professors had as they developed this component of the instructional design in their classes.
Table 3. Rationale for ability integration
RATIONALE FOR THE INTEGRATION OF ABILITIES
P “There was no total integration. I would say there was partial integration.”
P “Through a research exercise project put into practice.”
EN_1 “Students investigate a discovery that is recognized in the student's context and that has a high impact in this
century. Based on that, they must present all the data related to the invention from the historical importance and
reason why they chose it. They make an oral presentation. For all that work, they must first think of the invention
or innovation. Then they investigate and create a vocabulary list. Later, each one writes the narrative of the
researched; and finally, a single written report is made in common and the oral presentation is made for group
discussion.
EN_1 “Each activity to be developed in class and this development involves at least one skill and that is a constant.”
IT “The class activities involve the use of each skill at different times. For example, reading aloud to analyze the
structures found, comment on the topic in groups, write a summary.”
IT “I try in each lesson the students, based on a theme, identify in a reading or an audio the vocabulary. We identify
the grammatical part, they discuss their ideas about the topic and if possible, write some sentences/ideas about
it.”
G “Students read the catalogs of different supermarkets, discuss them, review the vocabulary, and create a dialogue.
EN_2 “By appropriating the vocabulary in context and expressions required to analyze and write a resume; students also
interview a professional in real life.”
EN_2 “By appropriating the vocabulary in context and expressions required to analyze and write a resume; students
also interview a professional in real life.”
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
170
FR “Different skills are combined to perform a task.”
FR “Naturally, for example, an oral or written document is used to make oral comments on the subject.”
Table 3 offers the justification for the ability integration which, according to the professors, happened when
students were required to process information in one ability using another one; for example, using writing to
make sense of listening. However, one of the English faculty had a perspective that was more encompassing with
the instructional design cycle in Figure 2 where the abilities tend to overlap in terms of using one to build the
other. That is, these students end project was a presentation about an invention which had started with gathering
data, then the preparation of a vocabulary list, and a narrative as a precursor of the final oral presentation. This
process included reading, vocabulary, writing, and speaking. It is important to emphasize that the thematic unit
was the focus around which students had multiple encounters with the language. The second English faculty also
viewed the use of the abilities in terms using the language to an end project where the abilities provided the
linguistic and communicative background to be able to interview a professional.
The second element of the instructional design was oral production, and how this ability required special
attention since these language professionals are to work in the areas of communication and translation in
business settings where constant and immediate language interaction is a must.
Table 4. Oral production
ORAL PRODUCTION
LANGUAGE There is a clear
emphasis on
oral
production
Description
EN FR IT P G 0-No; 1-Yes
P 1 “In group work, students should talk about the ´micro-research´ activity”
P 1 “In the essay, in the interview, and in the exhibition of what the experience was.”
EN_1 1 ´¨It is really the final product when is subject to debate. ¨
EN_1
1
“All the work developed through fieldwork, skills, and knowledge lead to a time
when they must discuss and argue their ideas as the product of their own
interpretations and reflections.”
IT
1
“Conversations between students in pairs and in groups, role-play activities,
presentations, students´ answers by means of the teacher's elicitation, students’
arguments, interpretation of songs, discussions.”
IT
1
“Conversations between students in pairs and in groups, role-play activities,
presentations, students´ answers by means of the teacher's elicitation, students’
arguments, interpretation of songs, discussions.”
G 1 “Both the methodology and the goal of the activity is given by orality.”
EN_2
1
“The students interviewed professionals in action and simulated different
professions under the format of a business fair.”
EN_2
1
“The students interviewed professionals in action and simulated different
professions under the format of a business fair.”
FR
1
“Through presentations; formulating questions, answering questions, preparing a
speech about the neighborhood and the city.”
FR 1 “Through the interaction between class and the teacher and among students.”
Table 4 shows that there was such an emphasis on oral production on the development of each one of the
thematic units designed by the language professors. Most of the activities that took place matched what Garbati
and Mady (2015) found in their review of oral abilities research in the classrooms in terms of role-plays,
presentations, and interactive activities.
A close look at the description provided by the faculty revealed some aspects that are worth analyzing in terms of
the emergence of oral production in students. First, some professors were more detailed about the variety of oral
communication formats. Second, some of them understood the ability as part of the product whereas others
considered that students needed multiple encounters on a variety of formats to develop their oral production. Last,
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
171
some professors geared their efforts towards having students ready for a presentation, dialogue, or some planned
interaction; others left the advent of speech as something more open in terms of conversations or the participants’
exchanges.
Fieldwork was the next element to be analyzed against the backdrop provided by the lesson plans. Two essential
ideas emerged regarding the work on thematic units. First, students carried out fieldwork activities on their own,
and second, these activities had a relationship with the class contents which could relate to either a language
issue such as vocabulary and grammar or the specific content addressed in the thematic unit.
Table 5. Fieldwork
FIELDWORK
LANGUAGE There is
evidence of
fieldwork
The fieldwork is
related to the class
contents
How do fieldwork activities relate to class contents?
EN FR IT P G
0-No; 1-Yes 0-No; 1-Yes
Description
P 0 0
P 1
1
“With the exercise of speaking, transcribing, understanding, writing,
presenting results.”
EN_1
1
1
“Based on the vocabulary presented in the unit and worked in class, the
student increases it by relating these words to the invention or discovery.
They also use the grammar they studied.”
EN_1 1
1
“When students learn the vocabulary and structures that point to a general
theme. Similarly, the activities that require investigation, discussion, and a
solution to a problem are always aligned to that topic.”
IT 1
1
“It is related because it involves the collection of family data information to
create a family tree. It is essential to identify the profession of each indicated
relative. Through the family tree, the vocabulary seen is used in the writing
of sentences that are then commented in the final activity. On another
activity, the students survey their classmates about the holidays. The
questions help to learn to ask about recent actions and know how to respond
to these with the past perfect.”
IT 1
1
“Fieldwork is fundamental for learning the language, because it allows
students to consolidate the concepts and vocabulary seen in the classroom.
They can also acquire new knowledge according to their interests. It is up to
the teacher to integrate the student's proposals so that they feel motivated to
continue contributing to the process.”
G 1
1
“The catalog revision leads to an encounter with the theme of purchases as
preparation for the assigned invitation.”
EN_2
1
1
“The students made a preliminary inquiry about the daily activities
developed by different professionals; then they interviewed and filmed a
professional in action, based on some guided questions”
EN_2 1 1 “The students made a preliminary inquiry about the daily activities
developed by different professionals; then they interviewed and filmed a
professional in action, based on some guided questions”
FR 1 1 “Fieldwork is an extension of class work.”
FR 1 1 “Fieldwork is an extension of class work. It is intended to reflect on the
cultural implications of living in a country that has seasons or a country from
a tropical zone.”
The faculty seemed to agree that fieldwork was an extension of classwork since students had to work on
language concepts to deepen their understanding of the class topic or had to find information to help them
prepare for the end of the unit project or product. However, the Italian professor had a different view of
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
172
fieldwork since she considered that there was a lot of potential for students to pursue their own interests with
activities that were meant to be done outside the class.
The last component of the instructional design was the end of the unit product or project. The professors
described concrete projects that ranged from deliverables as part of a research project to the actual preparation of
activities intended to be presented in front of an audience as a presentation or a classroom fair.
Table 6. End of the unit product/project
LANGUAGE There is an end of
the unit
product/project End of the unit product/project
ENG FR IT P G 0-No; 1-Yes Description
P 1
“There are 4 deliverables: an organizational and dissemination blog, the transcript
of the interview, a descriptive group text and an individual text of argumentative
nature related to the question of the micro-research.”
P
1
“There are 4 deliverables: an organizational and dissemination blog, the transcript
of the interview, a descriptive group text and an individual text of argumentative
nature related to the question of the micro-research.”
EN_1
1
“The search for information, selection of the most important elements, sharing,
preparation of the written report and oral presentation (comparison between what
was presented by the unit and what was chosen by the students).”
EN_1
1
“Activities in which the ability to solve problems is evidenced from the critical
analysis students made of them.”
IT 1
“1. Family “speed dates”
2. Presentation called:
-Encounter between important people from Colombia and Italy
3. Analyses of the news concerning the theft of a work of art.
4. Contributions to the solution of the theft case:
- Indicating what suspects did the day of the robbery at different times of the day.
- Ask questions about specific details of their activities to their peers.”
IT 1
“The project is an activity in which the student must demonstrate ownership in the
use of the language in relation to a topic that has been chosen and developed based
on the parameters indicated by the teacher, depending on the level of knowledge of
the language.”
G 1 “Dialogue presentations”
EN_2 1
“Writing of a resume in English. Short paragraph writing describing a profession;
interviewing professionals in action and doing simulations of professionals at
work.”
EN_2
1
“Writing of a resume in English. Short paragraph writing describing a profession;
interviewing professionals in action and doing simulations of professionals at
work.”
FR
1
“Class presentation on the students’ place of residence. This activity was planned
as a student fair.”
FR 1 “Prepare a questionnaire about the geography of Colombia.”
These products/projects in words of all the professors were meant to show students ownership over their learning,
and many of them were thought of as projects of interculturality where students had to try to put in relation their
L1/C1 and their L2/C2. For example, both the Italian and French instructors conducted activities in which
students had to compare cultures.
The evidence provided by the professors in their lesson plans showed that they used the language for purposes
other than the manipulation of vocabulary or other linguistic forms. The language was used with a social purpose
aimed at purposeful communication based on the focus of the thematic unit. For example, the research and
subsequent presentation of an invention in one of the English classes.
The above analysis of the annotated lesson plans and the application of the instructional design in interculturality
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
173
requires a more detailed understanding from the professors’ perspectives. What follows is the elaborations of
these faculty based on their answers to three specific questions:
What do you consider to be the place of the instructional design from the didactics of your language?
Based on your experience, what do you think is the relevance of an instructional design in the university
setting?
How was interculturality evidenced in the implementation of the instructional design?
Portuguese
The Portuguese professor did not recognize that there was an instructional design; he viewed the experience
more in terms of a sequence of activities. He was critical of the idea of bringing up the concept of instruction or
instructional design in a university setting that seemed to be devoted to a more universal idea such as education.
He also had a view of interculturality that had to do with worldviews among a number of other things. Thus, he
did not see any of that in the semester-long project of aspiring Portuguese language students interviewing
Brazilian businessmen doing business in Bogotá, Colombia.
English
Unlike the Portuguese professor, the EN_1 faculty considered that the instructional design allowed him to fully
develop the thematic unit. He also considered the design relevant since it helped him fulfill the aims of the
program in terms of giving students opportunities to work with English in relevant professional environments.
The intercultural view in the design, according to this faculty, was accomplished in the sense that he could strike
a balance between the world of the textbook and the world outside the textbook which was for the most part base
on their students’ experiences where they could relate aspects of their L1/L2 and C1/C2.
The EN_2 professor also mentioned both the development of critical thinking and inquiry strategies that need to
be part of language learning processes oriented towards the students’ successful participation in the workplace.
Italian
The Italian professor regarded the place of the instructional design in the didactics of the language as the
connection between language and culture that should guide the teaching of languages. The Italian professor
attributed the relevance of the design to the professor and the lesson plan preparation. In regard to the place of
interculturality in the design, this professor pointed out the moments where both cultures were viewed on an
equal basis.
German
The German professor considered that the principles of the communicative approach were met as the design
provided a structure. Moreover, the professor viewed the relevance of the design in terms of the precision of
class planning and the efficiency of skills articulation. Interculturality emerged when students had opportunities
to depart from the material provided and compare it with cultural aspects that were not precisely their own.
French
Finally, the French professor asserted that there was a relationship between the design and the didactics of her
class; she emphasized the fieldwork component as the most prominent when giving students the chance to work
on cultural aspects. This professor saw the benefit of the design in terms of a guide for both teachers and students;
however, she felt this could become very repetitive. With respect to the last question, the professor reckoned
interculturality was addressed in topics that challenged not only the students’ perspectives in terms of the
Colombian and French culture but also the students’ view of their own culture.
5. Discussion
The language professors applied the concepts of an instructional design to integrate the intercultural
communicative competence of students at Universidad EAN. Their work became evident through the completion
of two annotated lesson plans with their rationale in the application. The professors planned their lessons
according to the proposal, and they reckoned lesson planning and following the design provided a structured and
efficient administration of the thematic unit.
In regard to ability integration, they all complied with the proposal; however, the integration did not take place as
envisioned in the design. Some of the faculty considered that one ability led naturally to the other; nevertheless,
ability integration is more about creating conditions for students to process language concepts through constant
exposure by different means and with a focus in mind, which is usually an oral production activity. In short,
students will be able to make a word part of their discourse if they have heard this word, read about it, used it
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
174
with a purpose in writing and uttered it in a speaking exchange appropriately. By doing this, students will have
better chances to internalize language and ultimately produce it in a new context as their own discourse.
Oral production was the next aspect of the design, and it was addressed by all professors. It is important to point
out the variety of formats for speaking activities which substantiate the idea that oral production is enacted
through a variety of means according to both situations and contexts where language interaction happens.
Although there were opportunities for oral production, some professors directed their efforts to shape the
language production in attention to the end of the unit product/project. On the other hand, other faculty was more
focused on how oral interaction emerged without a preconceived format in mind. However, the first alternative
towards oral production seems to be more appropriate for the beginning levels of proficiency demonstrated by
the learners.
Fieldwork was also part of the faculty lesson plans, and it matched the aims of the project in terms of having
students bring input to the class in terms of exercises, external sources, or research. The professors’ rationale also
matched the idea that students needed to reflect upon the class contents beyond the class activities or the
textbook ideas in order to contribute to the class contents by adding their personal perspectives.
The end of the unit product or project complied with two criteria; on the one hand, students had to carry out
activities to consolidate some unit concepts, and on the other hand, students had to do a class presentation as a
result of the contents and the fieldwork activities.
The faculty perspectives after their design application seemed to indicate that the design imposed a class
structure which became evident in the lesson plans. They also acknowledged the fact that the design components
such as fieldwork encouraged students’ engagement and the promotion of their critical thinking skills which are
fundamental to display the intercultural communicative competence.
In terms of the last three questions regarding the place of the instructional design in the faculty’s teaching
perspectives in both their pedagogy and didactics, it stood out as a common aspect the idea of relevance which
echoes Van Dijk’s (2009) definition of relevance of contexts not as “´objective’ social properties of a situation,
but a subjective definition of a situation.” (p.4) In other words, context relevance has to do not only with some
external elements that contribute to defining a situation but also the way speakers through their interaction agree
on the nature and further development of such a situation as the communicative processes take shape and evolve.
This aspect is very pertinent in foreign language teaching settings where professors need to figure out ways for
the so-called “communicative activities” to outlive the immediacy of the textbook exercises. The best means for
this to happen is to include students’ lived experiences and the teachers’ provisions for the students to voice them
which will validate the idea of meaningful communication in a class.
The faculty considered that working from lesson plans allowed to implement the design more easily although
there were some caveats regarding the understanding of ability integration in the actual application of the design.
The faculty also acknowledged the fact that the nature of the units and their end products provided a place for
interculturality to emerge as part of the class contents and their further development. Nonetheless, the Portuguese
professor conferred a different perspective to his class experience which could be accounted for, as it was
mentioned earlier, the lack of correspondence between the lesson plans and the class actions which motivated a
mismatch between the professor pedagogical views and his instructional context.
Interculturality does not only happen when people try to put in touch different or foreign languages and cultures.
In fact, episodes of interculturality can also happen with students who share the same language and cultural
background. These moments of interculturality may as well occur with other issues such as the social, and
economic background of students as it was expressed by the French instructor.
The above situation restates the need for language learning pro
jects that take into consideration theoretical
perspectives such as sociocultural theory as it considers the individual immersed in historical, social, and cultural
circumstances that will contribute to his becoming as an intercultural speaker.
6. Limitations
Even though there was an important effort to develop a coordinated implementation of the instructional design,
some aspects still need to be evaluated. First, the language faculty integrated both the linguistic and
communicative skills; however, such integration did not match the design cycle as it was projected for all the
languages. Nonetheless, there was a clear idea among all the faculty that fragmented teaching was a hindrance
for language learning processes. Second, there has to be more work and research around the idea of oral
production, and how it is enacted in classroom settings. It seems that there is a competing view between the use
of oral abilities as a means or as a product of language learning. Third, fieldwork requires to be regarded as the
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
175
space that students create for themselves in order to propose and develop autonomous work on different aspects
of the thematic units. Finally, language planning needs to be reconsidered to the light of concepts such as design,
and more importantly the creative demands that such a concept entail.
7. Conclusions
The first aspect to conclude from this study is the need for designs that not only provide a framework to integrate
interculturality in language lessons but also take the learner as essential to the process since each one of the
design components is meant to have the learners as protagonists of the thematic unit.
The second conclusion that stems from this study is the relevance of promoting language learning through the
lens of thematic units as they allow classroom participants to guide their efforts towards a product or project to
consolidate learning. In fact, these products or projects have the quality of creating or recreating language as new
since this language is the students’ own production rather than the parroting of textbook exercises.
In regard to the professors’ understanding of the model, three aspects emerged as important. First, it is required
to have more exchanges among the faculty around the relevance of the model and its implementation. Second, it
is also required to develop more work and a research agenda around ability integration and its impact on foreign
language learning. Finally, research on teachers’ cognition take into account the three foci already cited by Borg
(2003) in terms of language learning experience, teacher education, and classroom practice; however, I think
they need to work as a coherent set to help teachers make sense of their work especially when the classroom
constantly provides unexpected or new circumstances that demand from teachers to reframe their practices.
It is also interesting to reflect upon the project, and how much of its foundations reflect the professors’
pedagogical ideas and classroom practices. Furthermore, it is thought-provoking to develop further research on
how language professors make sense of interculturality and its realization in their classroom practices.
Interculturality does not happen in class as a default result of language teaching and learning. In fact, the
inclusion of interculturality requires frameworks that are built on perspectives on language learning and the
professors’ enactment in their classes via careful planning and rigorous understanding of how languages and
cultures operate and interact in language learning processes.
Finally, at the heart of all the proposals reviewed for implementing language and culture learning lies the central
idea of enacting language learning processes in relational terms beyond the routine teacher and student
classroom relationship. Kramsch (1998) claims that language students have the privilege of becoming
intercultural speakers, and this privilege “must be accompanied by an increased sense of personal and individual
responsibility in the use of words and in the ownership of meanings.” (p. 31). As a result, it is the teacher’s job to
promote language learning in the students’ own words which ultimately unveil the complexity and richness of
culture. In fact, language teaching in foreign contexts does not advance if teachers make the context more
foreign by not giving a proper place to what students have to say about their views on both language and culture
learning from the diversity of their own experiences.
References
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think,
know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36, 81-109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444803001903
Borghetti, C. (2011). How to teach it? Proposal for a methodological model of intercultural competence. In A.
Witte, & T. Harden (Eds.), Intercultural competence: concepts, challenges, evaluations. (pp. 141-159). Bern
Switzerland. Peter Lang.
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communication Competence. Clevendon: UK.
Multilingual Matters.
Byram, M., & Zarate, G. (1994) Definitions, objectives and assessment of socio-cultural objectives. Strasbourg:
Council of Europe.
Chamot, A. U., & O' Malley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA handbook: Implementing the cognitive academic
language learning approach. White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods approaches (2nd ed.).
Thousand, Oaks, Ca: USA. SAGE Publications.
Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and Assessment of Intercultural Competence as a Student Outcome of
Internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10, 241-266. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1028315306287002
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
176
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. (2000). Making Content Comprehensible for English Learners: The
Journal of Education and Training Studies, 1(2). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Garbati, J. F., & Mady, J. C. (2015). Oral Skill Development in Second Languages: A Review in Search of Best
Practices. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(9), 1763-1770. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0509.01
Gadamer, H. G. (1989). Truth and Method (2nd ed.) J. Weinsheimer, & D. Marshall (Trans.). New York: USA.
Gibbons, P. (2007). Mediating Academic Language Learning Through Classroom Discourse. In J. Cummins, &
C. Davison (Eds.), International Handbook of English Language Teaching (pp. 701-718). New York: USA.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-46301-8_46
Grabe, W. (1995). Discourse Analysis in Reading Instruction. In T. Miller (Ed.), Functional Approaches to
Written Text: classroom applications. Paris. TESOL, France.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. (1997). Content-Based Instruction: Research Foundations. In M. A. Snow, & D. M.
Brinton (Eds.), The Content-Based Classroom: perspectives on integrating language and content. White
Plain, N.Y: USA. Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1989). Spoken and Written Language. Oxford: UK. Oxford University Press.
Johnson, K. E. (2009). Second Language Teacher Education: A sociocultural perspective. ESL & Applied
Linguistics Professional Series. New York, NY: USA. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203878033
Kagan, S. (1995). We Can Talk cooperative learning in the elementary ESL classroom. CAL Digest. Retrieved
from http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/kagan001.html
Kimber, K.; Pillay, H.; Richards, C. (2002). Reclaiming Teacher Agency in a Student-Centred Digital World.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 30(2), 155-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660220135667
Kramsch, C. (1998). The privilege of the intercultural speaker. In M. Byram, & M. Fleming (Eds.), Language
Learning in Intercultural Perspective: Approaches through drama and ethnography. Cambridge Language
Teaching Library. Cambridge: UK. Cambridge University Press.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding Language Teaching: From method to postmethod. ESL & Applied
Linguistics Professional Series. New Jersey, NY: USA. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2008). Cultural Globalization and Language Education. Yale: USA. Yale University Press.
Lee, A.; Poch, R.; Shaw, M.; Williams, R. (2012). Engaging Diversity in Undergraduate Classrooms: A pedagogy
for developing intercultural competence. In K. Ward, & L. E. Wolf-Wendel (Eds.), ASHE Higher Education
Report. Wiley Online Library.
Marsh, D. (1994). Bilingual Education & Content and Language Integrated Learning. In International
Association for Cross-cultural Communication (Eds.), Language Teaching in the Member States of the
European Union (Lingua). Paris: University of Sorbonne.
Moeller, A. J, & Faltin Osborn, S. R. (2014). A Pragmatist Perspective on Building Intercultural Communicative
Competency: From Theory to Classroom Practice Foreign Language Annals, 47(4), 669-683.
Mohan, B. A. (1986). Language and Content. Reading, MA: USA. Addison-Wesley.
Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language Curriculum Design. ESL & Applied Linguistics Series. New
York: USA. Routledge.
Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: UK. Oxford University Press.
Roegiers, X. (2010). Una pedagogía de la integración: Competencias e integración de los conocimientos en la
enseñanza. Colab. Jean-Marie De Ketele; trans. Juan José Utrilla. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Saito, K., & Hanzawa, K. (2016). Developing Second Language Oral Ability in Foreign Language Classrooms:
The Role of the Length and Focus of Instruction and Individual Differences. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37,
813-840. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716415000259
Serna Dimas, H. M., Quaroni, E., Treuholz, T., Berlincourt, G., Franco, C. A., & Sachett, D. (2016).
Comunicación Intercultural en el Mundo Globalizado y la Formación Multicultural y Multilingüe de los
Profesionales en Lenguas Modernas. Bogotá, Colombia. Ediciones EAN.
Serna Dimas, H. M. (2017). Instructional Design on Intercultural Communicative Competence at Universidad
EAN. (Working Papers on ICC).
The New London Group. (2000). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures. In B. Cope, & M.
elt.ccsenet.org English Language Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3; 2019
177
Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 9-37). (London,
Routledge).
Van Dijk, T. (2009). Society and Discourse. How social contexts influence text and talk. Cambridge: U.K.
Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511575273
Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford: UK. Oxford University Press.
Zull, J. E. (2002). The Art of Changing the Brain: Enriching the practice of teaching by exploring the biology of
learning. Virginia: USA. Stylus.
Copyrights
Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
