A framework for embedding interculturality as a process into language courses

Julkaistu: 12. helmikuuta 2025 | Kirjoittaneet: Deborah C. Darling ja Haiqin Liu

Introduction

China Today is a module that was introduced to a Chinese language bachelor’s degree programme in Finland to challenge stereotypes surrounding Chinese culture and to enable students to analyse how China is constructed in the media and the potential biases this reveals. One of the ideas behind the course is to move away from cultural stereotypes that are often represented in the media and in language learning textbooks; for example, the representation of national culture as food, fashion and festivals (Risager, 2021). Another intention of the course is to work towards a more nuanced approach that reflects the modern Chinese experience.

While we accept that topics such as food, fashion and festivals are part of a national culture and may help learners become more familiar with other ways of living, we also understand that they do not constitute the culture and that many people within a nation may not strongly relate to these traditions. Additionally, such representations of culture can lead to stereotyping and, when that is negative, they can be harmful to successful intercultural relations. To challenge this, we present here a project-based approach to intercultural learning on a language course, which understands the cultural component of a language course as interculturality as a process (Darling & Liu, 2024, pp. 51-54).

Interculturality as a process

There are different models for developing intercultural competence (e.g., intercultural attitudes, knowledge and skills) and assessing progress in attaining it, such as Deardorff’s model (2020) which suggests evidencing intercultural competence through the collection of reflections, observations and peer assessments (p. 499).  Another popular model for intercultural learning and assessment on language courses is Byram’s (1997) intercultural competence model. This model has many positive features, such as the focus on individual intercultural interactions and the downplaying of the native speaker as a model in language education, but it also frames culture as national culture, minimising diversity within. Anecdotally, teachers have told us that they use these models as they are concrete and easy to teach, and while we see their usefulness we would urge teachers to interact with them critically in the classroom/with students. Engaging in interculturality as a process is one way of doing this.

Our conception of intercultural learning in language education, interculturality as a process (Darling & Liu, 2024, pp. 51-54), sees intercultural learning as an iterative and perhaps uncomfortable process that challenges us to reflect on our pre-existing perspectives and knowledge of the target language and culture. We suggest that students should be prepared for interculturality as a lifelong project that develops as we encounter not only other people who have different backgrounds to ourselves but also artefacts such as art, film and books that offer a different outlook to our own (Dervin & Jacobsson, 2021). Through such encounters we are invited to re-visit our knowledge of and attitudes towards the Other. This may result in greater positivity towards the Other and may lead us to re-evaluate the Self.  In addition, the process will help us to problematise the We/Them and the Self/Other dichotomy. Naturally, re-evaluations of our attitudes and knowledge may result in attitudinally negative shifts in perspective and thus as teachers we need to acknowledge that intercultural encounters can fail (Devin, 2016) and we need to prepare our students for this.  

A common medium of information that can create negativity toward the Other is the media. Before exemplifying how we can harness media discourses as an intercultural tool, we will first discuss how media discourses can shape our perceptions.

Bias in media discourses

Fairclough (2015, pp. 78-83) refers to media discourse as a hidden power. When conducting interviews for news stories, journalists will rarely interview all parties involved and will typically represent the views of the more powerful social grouping, rather than the marginalised ones. Through this exclusion some voices are hidden. Not only are biases conveyed through the content of news stories, but also through language and grammatical devices that disguise agency. In English, one way of disguising agency is through nominalisation. For example, compare:

1. Former president Donald Trump has suggested that immigrants have been eating US citizens’ pets.

2. There has been a suggestion that immigrants have been eating US citizens’ pets.

In sentence two the verb suggested is changed to a noun suggestion, grammatically allowing the agent to be removed and leaving only the content along with its hidden power. Another way to conceal agency is by using the passive voice, for example, ‘Trump asserts that immigrants eat pets’ to ‘immigrants have been asserted to eat pets (by Trump)’.

Fairclough (2015) points out that under the guidance of editors and the news outlets, journalists may not always recognise their participation in creating media discourses. He also argues that, in the context of the media, discourses are not created through a single article but through a collection of stories along with other modes of media. Taking a project-based approach which involves the collection of several articles from different media sources, enables students to identify patterns in media discourses and to see how particular stereotypes or attitudes are constructed.

Using this approach to integrate media materials into language programmes and language courses offers a platform for exposing hidden biases and a chance to analyse and potentially condemn them. Making space for students to critically engage with the content and language used to create media discourses can be an effective way of challenging the representation of the Other and unveiling hidden power. This approach can also compliment the students’ language studies by providing new vocabulary and raising awareness of how language is used in different genres and contexts.

China Today course

Following this approach, Liu’s China Today course, (see Liu & Darling, 2024, pp. 243–258 for further details) was designed to challenge students’ preconceptions about Chinese culture and society using “print” media as a resource. In line with our understanding of interculturality as a process, interculturality on the course was embedded as dynamic and reflective, emphasizing the fluidity of culture and the importance of reflexivity in understanding intercultural interactions. It moved beyond static representations of culture, emphasizing that intercultural learning is a continuous and evolving process shaped by dialogue, reflection and critical examination of dominant narratives and power dynamics.

One of the main goals of the course was to encourage students to critically examine their assumptions about Chinese culture and society, and challenge ‘Western-centric’ perspectives. This was accomplished through collaborative project-based learning, which required students to engage with different perspectives, analyse media biases, and confront stereotypes. Project-based learning is a student-centred instructional method that emphasises active engagement, context-specific learning, and collaboration among learners. It focuses on addressing authentic questions and real-world problems, leading to meaningful educational experiences (Kokotsaki et al., 2016). Therefore, it was an ideal approach to examine media discourses.

In their chosen project groups, students worked together to explore complex issues related to Chinese society, such as media representations of Chinese “wet markets” during the COVID-19 pandemic, Chinese education reforms, and the Hong Kong Extradition Law. Throughout the project work, students were encouraged to reflect on the sources of their knowledge and how their perceptions were shaped by media discourses and other dominant narratives. This reflective process was an important element of embedding interculturality in the course, as it not only exposed students to multiple viewpoints, but also encouraged them to critically analyse their own biases and the socio-political contexts that inform their perspectives.

The course also incorporated an online seminar with students in China, which served as an important way to facilitate intercultural dialogue beyond media constructions of China. This allowed students to directly engage with differing viewpoints, further deepening their understanding of interculturality. Finally, the students produced reflective essays at the end of the course. These provided insights into their intercultural learning processes. As exemplified in Liu and Darling (2024), many students acknowledged how the course helped them deconstruct preconceived notions about Chinese culture and society.

Together, the project work, online seminar and reflective essays, which were analysed for this study, enabled the students to better understand how their construction of China had been shaped by media discourses and dominant societal voices. For some of the students, this was a transformative experience in relation to how they see the Other.

Main findings and implications

The China Today course aimed to enhance students’ understanding of Chinese culture and society. The main findings of our examination of the China Today course (Liu & Darling, 2024) highlight the potential of using project-based learning along with media discourses to better understand interculturality as a process in language education. Our findings include:

1. A critical approach that sees interculturality as a process allowed students to critically assess how discourse is constructed, rather than passively absorbing information. Students were encouraged to challenge their assumptions, especially regarding media bias, cultural stereotypes, and their own presumptions of China. For instance, through projects analysing ‘Western’ media’s representation of Chinese “wet markets” during the pandemic, students learned how language and media shape and propagate cultural perceptions.

2. The course prompted students to question their simplistic views of Chinese society, moving them toward a more nuanced and critical understanding. A recurring theme in student reflections was how their preconceived notions of Chinese culture were challenged. For example, one student admitted that they initially believed rural education in China was inferior or inaccessible, only to discover reforms that significantly improved educational access.

3. Interactions during the online seminar with Chinese students allowed real-time intercultural exchange and fostered dialogue rather than passive learning. The collaborative nature of the group projects provided opportunities for students to engage directly with differing perspectives and to appreciate the complexity of intercultural communication.

4. The course also highlighted the importance of recognising power dynamics in intercultural encounters. Many students reflected on how the ‘Western’ media tends to portray China in a negative light, focusing on censorship or government control, while the Chinese media frames these issues differently. This critical media analysis equipped students to understand interculturality as a dynamic and contested process, influenced by various power structures.

The China Today course demonstrates that intercultural learning can go beyond teaching linguistic skills and surface-level cultural facts by encouraging critical reflection, dialogic engagement, and a deeper understanding of complex cultural dynamics. Analysis of the students’ reflective insights offers implications for language courses that aim at engaging students with interculturality, rather than solely focusing on national culture.

Adopting a critical intercultural approach can encourage deeper reflection on cultural complexity and challenge simplistic stereotypes. Designing courses through the incorporation of project-based learning allows students to explore cultural topics through research, collaboration, and presentation with obvious secondary benefits, such as workplace, language and communication skills. Importantly, this method encourages active engagement and fosters critical thinking about intercultural encounters that may otherwise be unavailable to them.

While it may not always be possible, providing direct intercultural interactions, such as online seminars or exchanges with students in the target culture can provide students with the opportunity to experience the diversity of perspectives within any national context, making intercultural learning more dynamic and meaningful.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the findings from our analysis of the China Today course suggests that intercultural language courses have a greater impact when they move beyond competence-based models to emphasize collaboration, reflexivity, and intercultural dialogue. Integrating project-based learning and critical intercultural approaches fosters deeper reflection, challenges stereotypes, and promotes critical engagement with cultural narratives, media bias, and power dynamics, leading to meaningful and transformative learning experiences.

Deborah C. Darling is a Lecturer in Applied Linguistics at Queen Mary, University of London. https://www.qmul.ac.uk/sllf/language-centre/people/academic/profiles/debbie-darling.html

Haiqin Liu is Lecturer in Education at the Faculty of Education and Welfare Studies, Åbo Akademi University. https://www.abo.fi/en/contact/haiqin-liu/

References

Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Multilingual Matters.

Darling, D.C. & Liu, H. (2024). What’s in a concept? An exploration of ‘interculturality’. In F. Dervin (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Interculturality in Communication and Education. Routledge, pp. 51–66.

Deardorff, D. (2020). Defining, Developing and Assessing Intercultural Competence. In G. Rings & S. Rasinger (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication (pp. 493–503). Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108555067.036

Dervin, F. (2016). Interculturality in Education: A Theoretical and Methodological Toolbox. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54544-2

Dervin, F. & Jacobsson, A. (2021). Teacher Education for Critical and Reflexive Interculturality. Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-66337-7

Fairclough, N. (2015). Language and Power (3rd ed). Routledge.

Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving schools, 19(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216659733 

Liu, H. & Darling, D.C. (2024). Intercultural learning as a process in Chinese language education. In F. Dervin (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Interculturality in Communication and Education. Routledge, pp. 243–258.

Risager, K. (2021). Language textbooks: windows to the world, Language, Culture and Curriculum, 34(2), 119–132. DOI: 10.1080/07908318.2020.1797767