Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
A Paper Proposal
Presented to the Faculty of the College of Graduate Studies and Teacher Education Research
MA-ELE
April 2019
1
Chapter 1
A cornerstone of language acquisition studies is the understanding of not only internal factors—
along the lines of intrinsic motivation, physiological, and psychological dispositions among other; but
external ones as well. Among the plethora of external factors that fundamentally affect the acquisition of
any target language is culture. The difference between the culture of the language learner and the target
language’s culture affiliate may prove to impede or promote proficiency to any language.
As Gkonou and Oxford (2018) puts it, culture and language form a tightly woven tapestry, rich
with vibrant colors, shadows, and highlights. When an individual is learning culture and language, the
tapestry also includes learning strategies, that is, conscious, learner-regulated thoughts and actions for
developing specific skills and general proficiency. Language is a system involving complex communication,
either spoken or written, to express ideas and feelings. Pragmatics, or the appropriate use of a language
Much study on the dynamic relationship between culture, language, and education in general
have been made. Longitudinal and cross-sectional studies on the specific effects of cultural constructs to
language learning have gained much attention over the years. In this paper, however, the focus would be
intercultural sensitivity is the consciousness and understanding of the morals, standards, and principles
of a specific culture, society, ethnic group or race, joined by a motivation to acclimate to one's actions
with such.
2
Bennet (2011) introduced the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) a
grounded theory based on constructivist perception and communication theory. It assumes that the
experience of reality is constructed through perception, and that more complex perceptual categories
yield more complex (sophisticated) experience. Specifically, the DMIS assumes that we are constructing
boundaries of “self” and “other” in ways that guide our experience of intercultural events. The most
ethnocentric construction, Denial, is one wherein only vague categories of “other” are available for
perceiving people from different cultural contexts. At the other end of the continuum, the most
ethnorelative construction of Integration supposes that complex self/other categories are incorporated
into one's personal identity and into decision-making regarding ethicality in multicultural relations.
This model was created as a basic outline to explain the reactions that people have to cultural
differences. The stages of DMIS is a continuum that ranges from ethnocentric to highly ethnorelative. The
DMIS was designed by the theory that cultural awareness is accompanied by improved cognitive
sophistication (Cushner, McClelland, & Safford, 2012). This model is acceptable for both children and
adults as they progress through cross-cultural sensitivity. The stage classification from the DMIS of the
participants, which is fundamental in this paper, are juxtaposed with the level of language performance
of the participants of the study to determine the relation of intercultural sensitivity to target language
proficiency.
The rise of Filipino workers who seek employment overseas is met with the rise for the demand
of target language/ second language training. This case can be exemplified by Overseas Filipino workers
who wish to work in Japan, for instance. Passing the Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) is a
requisite for employment in Japan. The JLPT is a standardized criterion-referenced test to evaluate and
certify Japanese language proficiency for non-native speakers, covering language knowledge, reading
ability, and listening ability. The test is held twice a year in Japan and selected countries (on the first
Sunday of July and December), and once a year in other regions (on the first Sunday of December). The
3
JLPT consists of five levels. Until 2009, the test had four levels, with 4 being the lowest and 1 being the
highest level of certification. Moreover, in order to take the test, one must have undergone
Japanese/Nihongo formal instruction from accredited agencies. The language program usually takes three
(3) months to cover the basics. Recent statistics show that roughly 128,000 OFWs are in Japan comprising
19.7 percent of the foreign workers. This makes Filipinos as the third largest foreign labor force nationality
The existence of intercultural difference and sensitivity among learners of a new language
demand for further study as the success of target language proficiency might be influenced by the
learner’s preconceived notions about the target language’s culture affiliate and language itself.
Coincidentally, this is a dilemma constantly being faced by Overseas Filipino Workers. Their sensitivity to
the target culture’s difference to their own play a significant role in their target language performance—
a concept which is explored in this paper. Learning a new language is a challenging matter especially if the
learner is under an ethnocentric cultural sensitivity level as opposed to one who is more ethnorelative.
Literature Review
Key to the study of the relationship of intercultural sensitivity and target language proficiency is
the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity. The DMIS consists of 6 different stages. These stages
include denial, defense, minimization, acceptance, adaptation, and integration (Cushner, McClelland, &
Safford, 2012). Each stage describes a cognitive structure that is communicated through attitudes and
behaviors (Bennett, 2011). In the pedagogical sense, teachers can use the DMIS to facilitate learning by
recognizing the cognitive stage a student is at and helping the student progress into the next stage.
4
As (Bennett, 2011) puts it, the DMIS stages (positions) are construed both in terms of
basic perceptual structures vis a vis otherness and in terms of certain “issues” regarding cultural difference
that tend to be related to each of the stages. The names of the stages refer to the issues, while the
description of the experience of each stage refers to its perceptual structure. The first three stages of
Denial, Defense, and Minimization are Ethnocentric; they refer to issues that are associated with
experiencing one’s own culture as more “central to reality.” The last three stages of Acceptance,
Adaptation, and Integration are Ethnorelative; they refer to issues associated with experiencing all
cultures as alternative ways of organizing reality. Movement through the stages is not inevitable; it
depends on the need to become more competent in communicating outside one’s primary social context.
When that need is established, it is addressed by building more complex perceptual structures that can
The DMIS is a culture-general model; when more complex perceptual structures are established
for any culture, they apply to all cultures. For instance, greater perceptual sensitivity towards a different
national culture group allows more sensitivity towards a different generational or sexual orientation
group, assuming that those groups are also defined in cultural terms. Additionally, movement through the
stages tends to be one-way; people do not easily become more ethnocentric after having developed
ethnorelative perceptual structures. However, people can rather easily retreat from one ethnocentric
In addition to its use as an individual diagnostic, the DMIS can be interpreted at an organizational
level. More complex organizational structures are parallels to more complex personal perceptual
structures. Greater intercultural sensitivity in an organization means that more complex structures are
allowing cultural difference to be perceived more fully. The resulting climate regarding cultural difference
carries the potential for better resolution of the issues associated with multicultural workforces and global
5
operations. This dynamic shows how the DMIS can be applied for different constructs even at the level of
language acquisition.
On a similar vein, other studies which ground this paper involve the interrelation of language
acquisition/learning and culture and other sociological contexts in general. Duff (2019), explains that
social aspects of second language acquisition (SLA) and the contexts in which people attempt to learn and
use languages and seek to become integrated within new and changing cultures have been examined for
decades from various theoretical perspectives (e.g., Atkinson, 2011; Batstone, 2010; Block, 2003; Duff,
2017). To state the obvious, there can be no learning—or human existence—in a contextual vacuum. The
social dynamics of learning have been foregrounded in SLA with the use of such phrases as the social turn,
sociocultural theory, socialization, (social) identity, social class, (social) power, social cognition, (social)
interaction, social networks, (social) ecology, and (social) context (among others), drawing on numerous
different, yet often intersecting, theoretical frameworks. Context, sometimes a proxy term for social,
environmental, or ecological aspects of language experience, refers not only to immediate contexts of
language experience but also to distributed transnational ties, networks, and imaginaries, as well as
histories. Of course, not all aspects or levels of context are directly or deeply relevant to all SLA processes
or may be consciously attended to by learners. The cultural context, in this sense, may be directly or
The concept of language performance or, more technically, linguistic performance is also core to
this study. By definition, linguistic performance was used by Noam Chomsky in 1960 to describe "the
actual use of language in concrete situations". It is used to describe both the production, sometimes called
the latter describes the mental knowledge that a speaker or listener has of language.
6
Part of the motivation for the distinction between performance and competence comes from
speech errors: despite having a perfect understanding of the correct forms, a speaker of a language may
unintentionally produce incorrect forms. This is because performance occurs in real situations, and so is
subject to many non-linguistic influences. For example, distractions or memory limitations can affect
lexical retrieval (Chomsky 1965), and give rise to errors in both production and perception or distractions.
Such non-linguistic factors are completely independent of the actual knowledge of language, and establish
that speakers' knowledge of language (their competence) is distinct from their actual use of language
(their performance). Within this context, the language performance of the learners is associated with their
Furthermore, this study will intertwine the juxtaposed results of the language learner’s
intercultural sensitivity level and their target language performance to pedagogical implications anchored
on strategy instruction. Strategy instruction usually involves finding out students’ current learning
strategies, choosing a new strategy (or a combination of strategies) that students need the most for
current tasks, demonstrating and naming the strategy for the students, explaining why it is helpful, asking
students to try out the strategy in an authentic task, asking students to decide how useful the strategy
was, and reminding students to use it again (i.e., transfer it to new, relevant tasks). This pattern is
sometimes called fully informed, overt strategy instruction, because the teacher gives learners full
information about the strategy. Teachers can adapt this sequence to create simple, organic steps to meet
students’ needs. Sometimes strategy instruction is rapidly offered to one or two learners, rather than a
whole class. Chamot (2018) recommended differentiating strategy instruction to meet students’ needs
motivation and willingness; target language proficiency level; and strategy knowledge. Not every learning
strategy will work for every learner. Psaltou-Joycey and Gavriilidou (2015), and Cohen (2014) created
teachers’ guides taking into consideration many crucial factors for tailoring strategy instruction to
7
learners’ individual and group needs. All of these concepts are fundamental to establishing the case of
this study.
(Bennett, 2004)
Analysis and
Interpretation
1. Is there a correlation between a language learner’s intercultural sensitivity level and target language
performance?
2. Is there a significant difference between the target language performance of learners with an identified
ethnocentric cultural sensitivity and one who is identified with an ethnorelative cultural sensitivity?
3. Which pedagogical strategies would work best for language learners with a variety of intercultural
sensitivity level?
8
The main hypothesis of this study is that there is a significant correlation between a language
learners’ intercultural sensitivity level and their target language performance. Furthermore, this study
accepts the feasibility of specific pedagogical strategies that would fit best to either an ethnocentric or
This study will only deal with the identification of its participants’ level of intercultural sensitivity
as suggested in the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity. Furthermore, it will also be limited
to the collection of data of the participants’ language performance as reflected by their target language
proficiency test results. The participants of the study will only be limited to overseas Filipino workers
based in Japan who have undergone formal Japanese language training for at least three (3) months and
who has been working in Japan for at least one (1) month.
Definition of Terms
Cultural Sensitivity- consciousness and understanding of the morals, standards, and principles of
a specific culture, society, ethnic group or race, joined by a motivation to acclimate to one's actions with
such.
situations". It is used to describe both the production, sometimes called parole, as well as the
comprehension of language.
Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS)- This model was created as a basic
outline to explain the reactions that people have to cultural differences. The DMIS consists of 6 different
stages. These stages include denial, defense, minimization, acceptance, adaptation, and integration. The
first three belonging to ethnocentric views while the remaining three are considered ethnorelative levels.
9
Chapter 2
Methods
Research Design
This descriptive-quantitative study will involve the identification of the participants’ intercultural
The participants of the study will be overseas Filipino workers based in Japan who have undergone
formal Japanese language training for at least three (3) months and who has been working in Japan for at
least one (1) month. The participants will be made to answer two questionnaires – one adapted from the
DMIS scale to identify their intercultural sensitivity level and another to gather information on their target
language performance.
Instruments
This study will adapt the instrument of the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity to
identify the intercultural sensitivity level of the target learners. While a descriptive survey questionnaire
would be used to gather the information regarding the language performance of the participants as
reflected in their language proficiency test results, in this case, the Japanese Language Proficiency Test.
The questionnaire will also gather other pertinent information on language proficiency of the OFW
participants.
The data gathering procedure will begin with the distribution of the two research instruments to
the target participants. The instruments will be forwarded to the researchers contact in Japan and the
contact will be the one to have the instruments answered by the target twenty (20) respondents. The
10
answered questionnaires will be couriered back to the researcher for analysis and interpretation. An
alternative data gathering procedure would be the use of Google forms to be answered electronically for
Data Analysis
The results of the DMIS-based instrument to gauge the intercultural sensitivity level of the
participants will be juxtaposed with the results of the language performance-based instrument to yield
Potential ethical issues which might be faced by this study would include the unreliability of the
participants’ responses and possible misuse of the information gathered for this research.
11
Appendix
Bennett, M. J. (2004). Becoming interculturally competent. In J.S. Wurzel (Ed.) Toward multiculturalism:
published in The diversity symposium proceedings: An interim step toward a conceptual framework for
the practice of diversity. Waltham, MA: Bentley College, 2002). Additional information at
www.idrinstitute.org
(revised). In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Education for the Intercultural Experience. Yarmouth, Me: Intercultural
Press.
Duff, P. A. (2019). Social Dimensions and Processes in Second Language Acquisition: Multilingual
https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12534.
Rebecca, O. L., & Christina, G. (2018). Interwoven: Culture, Language, and Learning Strategies. Retrieved
Sevilla, O., Sierra, J., & Setterlund, K. (2018, September). Equipping Bilingual Social Work Students from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2018.1474839
Tongson, M. B., & Eslit, E. B. (2018). Teaching Styles and Language Performance: Towards a Development
https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED590796.
12