IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

Intercultural Communicative Competence in Teacher Education:
Cultural Simulation Insights from Hawaiʻi
Jennifer Padua
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa
USA
Monica Gonzalez Smith
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa
USA59

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

Abstract
This article discusses how cultural simulations promote teacher candidate cultural competence.
The case study uses intercultural communicative competence to examine written reflections
and focus group interviews of 21 undergraduate teacher candidates in Hawaiʻi who engaged incultural simulation visits on the island of Oʻahu. Findings reveal that cultural simulations
allowed teacher candidates to develop intercultural competency in knowledge, know-how, andbeing. Implications include how cultural simulations may promote teacher candidates’intercultural competence and offer recommendations on how teacher educators may consist ofcultural simulations in multicultural teacher education.
Keywords: cultural simulation, intercultural communicative
multicultural teacher education, teacher preparation program

60

competence,

Hawaiʻi,

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

Multicultural teacher education (MTE) is a critical component of teacher preparation. The
National Association for Multicultural Education (2019), states that teacher candidates (TCs)need to be “culturally competent... to the greatest extent possible racially, culturally, andlinguistically diverse...multiculturally literate and capable of including and embracing families
and communities to create an environment that is supportive of multiple perspectives,
experiences, and democracy” (para. 5). Additionally, the Teaching English to Speakers of
Other Languages (TESOL) standards 2a (2019), explains that teachers need to demonstrate
knowledge of how dynamic academic, personal, familial, cultural, and social contexts,
including sociopolitical factors, impact the education of students. A large corpus of literaturedetails the criticality of MTE in teacher preparation years (Banks 2019; Banks & Banks 2016;
Gay, 2018; Gorski, 2009; 2016). MTE literature recommends TCs be exposed to a plethora ofdiverse classroom-based field experiences coupled with extensive opportunities to design andenact instruction for culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students. While the benefits ofclinically-rich, diverse, classroom-based, field experiences are well documented, descriptionsof the strategies teacher educators should use to teach TCs about multiculturalism are lacking,or, as explained by Gorski (2016), strategies for engaging TCs in multicultural education topics
are “a never-ending process” (p. 142). More often than not, MTE is introduced to TCs in ‘oneshot’ courses even though research reveals that one-shot courses do little to equip TC with
cultural competence.
The success of MTE depends on teacher educators’ knowledge of culture and diversity, andwhether or not teacher educators embed cultural activities into lessons provided to TCs(Keengwe, 2010). “Conservative” approaches on MTE are used to prepare TCs for “teaching
to the Other”, or to show TCs how to support marginalized students in the classroom. The moredesirable “liberal” and “critical” approach on MTE equips TCs with the knowledge and skills
they need to be multicultural “agents of change” to counter hegemonic teaching in their schools(Gorski, 2012). Despite the large body of research supporting liberal, critical approaches on
MTE, empirical research has yet to describe strategies and assignments teacher educators may
use in MTE to prepare TCs for working with CLD students. Our research aims to fill a gap in
the literature and will offer a description of cultural simulations, a practical strategy, teacher
educators may use for MTE.
Literature Review
Cultural competence is the ability a teacher has to successfully teach to students from a culture
or cultures that differ from their own (National Educational Association, 2019). Culturalcompetence does not occur in a single day, by reading a textbook, or taking a course; it occurs
over time. Researchers examine teachers’ cultural competence by looking for characteristics
of culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2018). Culturally responsive teaching occurs when ateacher uses the cultural characteristics, experiences, and perspectives of CLD students as aconduit for teaching them more effectively. Some culturally responsive teaching characteristics
include student-centered instruction, communicating high expectations, and having positive
perspectives and interactions with parents and families. To enact culturally responsive
teaching, TCs need more than surface-level knowledge about cultural diversity beyond
awareness and respect for different ethnic groups.
Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD) Students
Culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students come from a home environment where alanguage other than English is spoken, whose cultural values or backgrounds differ from the61

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

mainstream, majoritarian culture (Lucas & Villegas, 2013). Learning how to work with andteach CLD students is an integral component of teacher preparation. Teacher education
scholars recommend that TCs receive opportunities to observe, design, and enact instruction
for CLD students while working in diverse, clinically-rich, classroom field experiences (Banks,
2019; Banks & Banks, 2016), albeit most teacher candidates in the United States complete
classroom field experiences in English-only classrooms. Other empirical research reveals thatclinically-rich, diverse, classroom field experiences are not enough to equip TCs with thecultural competence needed to work effectively with CLD students (Lucas, 2011; Lucas &Villegas 2013; Gay 2018). More empirical research is necessary to describe practicalapplications on how TCs work with CLD students to develop cultural competence.
Culture, Multiculturalism, and Cultural Competence
Culture is the set of concepts, identities, representations, attitudes, values, symbols, styles,
rules, patterns, and power relations found in the praxis of particular social communities(Deardorff, 2009). One of the challenges related to the application of culture in MTE is thatthe notion of “culture” is often only associated with ethnic origin issues. For example, MTE
literature defines “culture” alongside “multiculturalism”, and “cultural competence”, as terms
that are different but synonymous (Holm & Zilliacus, 2009). Thus, culture is extremely
difficult to define because it includes the individual, society, action, communications, andinteractions.
Multiculturalism refers to a group’s features, such as ethnic, linguistic, socioeconomic,
religious backgrounds, and positions (Deardorff, 2009). Multiculturalism is often
conceptualized as an all-inclusive term in the literature. Wyatt (2017) explained “multiculturalliterature tends to send the message that ‘we are all the same/ we are all different’ with the aimof convincing teachers of our similarities, while this may be promoting the colorblindness thatteacher education programs try so hard to undo” (p.105). Consequently, teacher preparation
programs (TPPs) struggle to find ways to instruct and sensitize TCs about the present
challenges in our multicultural society. To compensate, many TPPs incorporate stand-alone
MTE courses (Gorski, 2009). MTE centers on raising teachers’ awareness about individual
differences and how they enhance or hinder the ways teachers and students interact (Keengwe,2010). A challenge with MTE is that courses across TPPs are not uniform and depend onteacher educators’ multicultural knowledge.
Cultural competence is defined as a teacher’s cultural awareness. It includes teachers’ cultural
identities, views about differences, and the ability a teacher has to learn and build on thevarying cultural and community norms of their students and their families (National Education
Association, 2019). TCs need to develop cultural competence to communicate effectively withstudent cultures that differ from their own (Banks, 2019). Teachers who build the capacity tocommunicate effectively with students and their families can successfully work with the races,
cultures, and languages represented in their classrooms (Keengwe, 2010). Teachers with a highlevel of cultural competence have an ability to integrate and translate knowledge about
students’ cultures into attitudes, practices, and standards to increase the quality of classroom
instruction and improve student outcomes.
The difference between multiculturalism and cultural competence is highlighted in MTE
literature with the “culture iceberg” (Lázár et al., 2007). The culture iceberg makes a distinction
between “Big C” (multiculturalism) and “little c” (cultural competence) culture. Big C culture
includes visible components such as holidays, foods, art, and popular culture. Whenexperiencing or learning about a new culture for the first time, Big C culture is what one

62

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

discovers first as it is the most overt. In sharp contrast, little c culture is more covert because it
is associated with a specific region, group of people, or language. Examples of little c culture
include cultural norms, behaviors, and communication styles. Little c culture cannot be seen
with the naked eye. TCs need to be led and prompted in discussions of little c culture to become
more aware of and practice how little c culture has implications on CLD curriculum,
instruction, and the school community.
Cultural Simulations
A cultural simulation “is an instructional technique that attempts to recreate certain aspects ofreality for the purpose of gaining information, clarity, values, understanding other cultures, ordeveloping a skill (Cruz & Patterson, 2005, p. 43). Cultural simulations utilize kinesthetic andaffective modes of learning to sensitize teachers to diversity issues through analysis andreflecting on experiential learning. Cultural simulations may include one or more of thefollowing: cross-cultural community-based learning experience in another cultural context;
explicit teaching about explorations and reflections on a specific culture while observing, or
working in that particular setting; and structured field experience in a formal or informal
educational setting (Cruz & Patterson, 2005, Ference, 2006; Smolcic & Katunich, 2017). Most
importantly, a cultural simulation should culminate with opportunities for TC to reflect upon
and analyze their experience. A reflective debrief should take place after the cultural simulation
to provide teachers with opportunities to make conceptual understandings of culture in a safeand friendly environment. The debrief is also space where teacher educators may sort out any
conceptual misunderstandings and encourage critical thinking using a “Pedagogy of
Discomfor” (Zembylas & Papamichael, 2017) to ask TCs reflective questions about race,
gender, class, and sexual orientation to reflect on personally-held ideological values andbeliefs. Reflection is a powerful tool to analyze a teacher’s understanding of culture and theirexperiences working with CLD students (Hahl & Löfström, 2016). Reflective practice provides
a mechanism for teachers to address, reconsider, or change negatively held assumptions or
attitudes about working with CLD students (Wyatt, 2017).
Teacher educators who wish to use cultural simulations as an MTE strategy must engage intime-consuming preparations before, during, and after cultural visits. Before the cultural
simulation, TCs should participate in a pre-trip to learn essential concepts to understand andfully- immerse themselves in the experience. (Cruz & Patterson, 2005). A pre-trip seminar may
use multimodal methods (e.g., readings, videos, guest speakers) when introducing a target
culture. During the simulation, TCs may receive guided questions to engage in activities,
interact with the docent or with each other. After the simulation, teachers may reflect orally or
write about their experience, feelings, and how the simulation provided any new understanding.
In addition to careful planning, teacher educators should participate in the cultural simulation
before introducing the experience to teachers (Cruz & Patterson, 2005). Teacher educatorsneed to be readily available to support a teacher who may exhibit strong emotional feelings
resulting from participating in a cultural simulation.
Hawaiʻi: The “Super-Diverse”
Hawaiʻi has a “super-diverse” culture (Wyatt, 2017) that differs from the United States (US)mainland, where the majority of teachers are White, middle-class females. The US Census
Bureau (2018) indicates that Hawaiʻi’s population is comprised of Asian (37.8%), Whites(25.7%), individuals who identify as being of two or more races (23.8%), Native Hawaiian(10.2%) and Hispanic (10.5%). Hawaii’s unique cultural makeup is evident in the publicschool system, where most, if not all, classrooms include CLD students. A prospective teacher
enrolled in a TPP in Hawaiʻi will have exposure to the classroom field experiences needed to63

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

develop a keen understanding of Big C culture. Due to varying levels of comfort andexperiences teaching MTE, not all Hawaiʻi teacher educators will teach TC about
multiculturalism in the same way. In addition, high levels of diversity are considered
commonplace in Hawaiʻi. Therefore, most may perceive Hawaiian culture as a normal part ofsocial life and not as something unique that TCs need explicit instruction on to develop little ccultural competence (Wyatt, 2017). As a result, there is growing pressure for Hawaiʻi teacher
educators to provide TCs with ongoing exposure to authentic, real-life, cultural experiencesthat mimic everyday societal occurrences (Hawaiʻi Department of Education, 2019). To date,the majority of empirical research on the use of culture for teacher education in Hawaiʻi comesfrom work with in-service teachers. Very little is known about how teacher educators should
work to develop TCs’ cultural competence in TPP.
Conceptual Framework and Research Question
Byram’s (1997) model of Intercultural Communicative Competence (ICC) was initiallydeveloped to serve foreign language education contexts. ICC is described as an “umbrellaterm” that includes cognitive, affective and behavioral components, and is often used to
examine a teacher’s cultural awareness (Brunsmier, 2017), or how one’s appreciation ofcultural norms influence one’s thoughts and behaviors (Munezane, 2015). ICC centers on the“development of the learner” to focus on three factors of intercultural communication:knowledge, know-how, and being. Knowledge includes one’s knowledge about their own andother cultures. Know-how is divided into skills of interpreting and relating to examine how one
makes sense of written or spoken text, or skills of discovery or interpretation to study how
individuals interact with other people or sources to increase their understanding of othercultures. Being centers on attitudes, beliefs, motivations, values, cognitive styles, andpersonalities contributing to one’s identity.
Due to an increase in cultural globalization, researchers often use Byram’s model to examine
culturally diverse contexts or strategies in a TPP. Xu et al. (2017) used ICC to investigate theintercultural competence a multicultural graduate-level special education course. Durham(2018) used ICC to examine how one teacher socially and academically assisted elementary
students. Leh et al. (2015) used ICC to examine how teachers in two different countries
communicated via an online intercultural exchange (OIE). Byram’s (1997) ICC model is usefulto study how MTE is disseminated to TCs in a TPP course because teachers are mediators andfacilitators of their students’ intercultural learning processes. Generally, it is up to the teacher
to put ICC into practice (Brunsmeier, 2017; Leh et al., 2015).
While ICC is a potential conceptual framework to examine culturally diverse contexts and
TPPs, in a recent critical discussion of Byram’s work, Hoff (2014) notes that the ICC modelemphasizes harmony and mutual understanding, while underplaying the potential benefits thatfeelings of conflict and disagreement may have for promoting profound discourses between
the “Self” and “Other.” More empirical research is needed to shed light on how teacher
educators may use ICC to develop TCs’ cultural competence, or as Brunsmeier (2017) notes,“hardly any practical suggestions for initiating ICC exist” (p. 144). This study examines theimpact cultural simulations had in facilitating ICC development amongst a group of TCs in
Hawaiʻi. The research question is, in what ways did cultural simulations promote ICC in
undergraduate TCs in Hawaiʻi?

64

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

Methodology
This research was designed as an intrinsic case study (Stake, 2008). The authors are TPP
faculty members interested in learning how cultural simulations influence TCs’ ICC. Stake(2008) posited case studies “pull attention to both the ordinary experience and also to thedisciplines of knowledge” (p. 448). Since the authors had direct contact with participants, thisqualitative approach offered opportunities to collect multiple sources of data in a natural setting(Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Stake 2006) and to apply an inductive and deductive analysis
leading to descriptive results (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Stake, 2008). Moreover, Creswell
and Creswell (2018) justified reflexivity values on how the researchers’ background “mayshape the direction of the study” (p. 182). With these attributes in mind, the researchers studied
the phenomenon for 16-weeks.
Participants
Twenty-one TCs in the second semester of the TPP were participants. Thirteen TCs were bornand raised in Hawai’i, and eight were born and raised on the U.S. mainland. Unlike other TPPs
where White-Caucasian students are the majority (Sleeter, 2001), the TCs in this study
represented various cultural backgrounds as shown in Figure 1. Nineteen participants werefemale, and two were male. At the time, study participants were pursuing a Bachelor of
Education (B.Ed.) degree, and six were earning a dual license in multilingual learning.
Approval to conduct this study was provided by the Institutional Review Board, and all study
participants gave informed consent.
Mix of two or more races

25%

Vietnamese

5%

Korean5%

Japanese15%

HawaiianGerman10%5%Filipino

15%

Ethiopian10%

Caucasian

10%

Bangladeshi

5%

Figure 1. The ethnic diversity of the 21 participants.
Procedure
Three cultural simulations were scheduled to teach little c. To select cultural immersion venues,
we turned to MTE literature (Sharmaet al., 2012) where cultural immersion activities aredescribed as informal contexts that “disorient” TCs and provide opportunities for TCs toengage in discussions on race, class, and gender issues. We used three local cultural simulationsites as informal learning contexts to develop TCs’ understandings of cultural differences. The
venues were selected based on the ethnic makeup of Hawaii’s public-school students,
participants (TCs), and venue availability within the academic semester. We also selected sites
highlighting various cultural components, such as rituals, ancestral history, and religious

65

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

practices. The authors also requested the venue host to replicate activities as if the participants
were elementary students. The venue host provided a guided tour, shared in-depth historicalknowledge, and led activities. The simulations occurred at the Japanese Tea House, HawaiʻiPlantation Village, and Byodo-In Temple.
1. The Japanese Tea House is located in Honolulu, on the same university campus where
the authors work. The tea house is a part of the Center for Japanese Studies (CJS),
where faculty deliver instruction and conduct traditional Japanese tea ceremonies inJapanese with English translations. During the cultural simulation, TCs engaged in a
traditional Japanese tea ceremony, drank ceremonial grade matcha tea, and ate“higashi”, dry Japanese sweets. They also learned cultural protocols such as entering
the tea house, bowing, showing appreciation for the tea ceremony host, understanding
the purpose for different tea utensils, and replicating tea-drinking motions such as
turning, admiring, drinking from the tea bowl.
2. The Hawaiʻi Plantation Village (HPV) is located in Waipahu, a suburban town outsideof Honolulu. The Hawaiʻi Plantation Village is an outdoor museum consisting ofrestored buildings and replicas of life on the sugar plantation during the 1900s in
Hawaiʻi. At HPV, TCs learned how immigrants from Portugal, Japan, Puerto Rico,
China, Korea, Japan, Philippines, Polynesia, and Okinawa adjusted to life in Hawaiʻiduring the sugar plantation era. They visited replicas of homes, touched artifacts,
learned about clothing, and understood how immigrants utilize natural and commercial
resources to survive financially. In addition, TCs engaged in cultural simulations suchas playing the Japanese taiko drums, learning the Chinese ribbon dance, challenging
each other in the Filipino game of “sungka” (mancala), and making spinning tops using
bottle caps and kukui nuts.
3. The Byodo-In Temple is located in Kaneohe, a suburban town outside of Honolulu.
The Byodo-In Temple is a non-denominational site with no monastic community or
active congregation. Recently, the temple commemorated the 100th anniversary of thefirst Japanese immigrants in Hawaiʻi. TCs visited the temple and walked through amortuary to see how Buddhists revere the dead and the after-life, learned about andpracticed meditation, gained information about the large 18-foot statue of the Lotus
Buddha, and engaged in watercolor activities.
Data Collection
Data methods included written reflection and focus group interviews. Each method was rooted
in a cultural simulation allowing data to be collected before, during, or after the trip, a similar
approach used by Cruz & Patterson (2005). Written reflections were submitted electronicallyon a virtual class discussion board. According to Merriam (2009), written accounts serve as
reliable data sources as each individual determines what is important. The researchers designed
prompts related to cultural topics, terminology, or social norms, specifically for eachsimulation.
Focus groups were conducted at the end of each cultural simulation in a quiet location. Eachgroup included 6-7 members and lasted about 45 minutes. Literature supports the use of focus
groups as a method in discussing specific topics from different points of view (Merriam, 2009).
The researchers designed prompts to facilitate TC reflection of their experience at the cultural
simulation site. All focus group interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed as they werecollected.

66

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

Data Analysis
Two phases of data analysis were conducted to examine written reflections and focus groupinterview transcripts. An in-depth analysis using inductive and deductive processes wereapplied (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam, 2009; Stake, 2008). In the first round, data werechunked using structural codes (Saldaña, 2013), reflecting the three sub-dimensions of ICC(knowledge, know-how, and being). The researchers read through the reflections and focus
group interviews independently and applied descriptive codes (Saldaña, 2013) to identify mainideas. Then, descriptive codes and definitions were shared, and a codebook was created. The
codebook assisted with achieving intercoder reliability (Campbell et al., 2013). The first roundof data analysis resulted in 58 combined descriptive codes and aggregated according to one of
the three sub-dimensions of ICC: knowledge, know-how, or being.
In the second round, the researchers independently (re)read and (re)coded the data using thecodebook as a guide. Coding discrepancies were discussed and resolved until 95% intercoder
reliability was reached (Campbell et al., 2013; Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Next, each
descriptive code was tallied, and the two frequently used codes in each ICC dimension werelabeled as “dominant” to the study findings. Those less frequently used were identified as
outliers and reexamined to determine if any new insights could be combined with a dominant
descriptive code. For example, when analyzing the descriptive codes of “ignorance” (lack ofknowledge or training) and “bias” (the act of being unfair, hurtful or discriminatory), bothcodes appeared in the “knowledge” and “being” sub-dimensions of ICC. The code “bias” waskept because the data revealed an intentional act, and all “ignorance” codes were moved to theknowledge sub-dimension. Lastly, axial coding (Saldaña, 2013) was utilized to form ataxonomy where each ICC sub-dimension is linked to dominant sub-themes (Table 1).
Table 1. Axial coding allowed themes to emerge in each ICC domain.
Knowledge

Know-how

Being

Awareness
Cultural PracticeClassroom Strategy
Language AwarenessValuesBias

Findings
Study findings are rooted in Byram’s (1997) ICC framework, whereby knowledge, know-how,and being are used as themes to discuss new understandings gleaned from the data. The data
revealed that cultural simulations allowed TCs to develop ICC.
Knowledge
Knowledge refers to a prospective teacher’s intercultural awareness. TCs developed keenawareness about the different cultural practices inherent to Hawaiʻi as they began to noticecultural similarities and differences between the different ethnic groups in their target
communities (e.g., Japanese versus Filipino culture). The knowledge sub-dimension included
instances where TC shared a more in-depth or new awareness of culture or personallyexperienced cultural practice (Table 1).

67

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

Awareness. Awareness brought on new meaning or clarity to TCs’ understandings of thevarious ethnic groups in Hawaiʻi. One teacher candidate explained,
The Hawaiian Plantation Village taught me that people of different backgrounds
could live coherently together.
Another candidate made a connection between Hawaiʻi and her Ethiopian (target community),
noticing similar storytelling traditions:
I remember one of the videos that we had to watch for the Hawaiian Plantation
Village stated that so much of history is storytelling, especially in the Hawaiian
culture. I think storytelling is important. My Ethiopian parents tell me stories
about my culture, and I want to do the same for the next generation.
Cultural simulations provide a way for TCs to explore how different ethnic groups in Hawaiʻi
compared or contrasted with the cultures they were familiar with or exposed to when working
in their field experience classrooms.
Cultural practices. Cultural simulations created a safe space where TCs discussed the cultural
practices they engaged in with others. For some TCs, discussions on cultural practices centeredon food traditions.
One type of food that we eat in my Japanese culture is a New Year’s food called“mochi.” Mochi is eaten to promote “stickiness,” or familial bonds, within thefamily.
Traditionally, my mom prepares vegetarian food for the Lunar New Year. It isthought to be good luck in my Chinese culture if you can eat vegetarian dishes
for 24 to 48 hours.
In Ethiopia, our traditional dish is called “injera,” which is a round spongy likebread, and on top of that goes the different sauces. You eat injera with yourhands and scoop the food onto the injera. It is almost like curry. This food isusually prepared by the oldest woman in the household, so if you are the eldest,
it is your responsibility to cook and take care of everyone.
Cultural simulations led TCs to become more aware of various cultural practices to understandhow others’ family traditions compared or differed from their own.
Know-How
Know-how included instances where TCs shared experiences where they were able to function
linguistically across different cultural contexts. As TCs learned how to function linguisticallyin different cultural contexts, they began to consider ideas for new classroom strategies andways to use CLD students’ native languages for instructional purposes.
Classroom strategy. TCs reflected on classroom strategies that they wanted to implement andexpressed the importance of incorporating their knowledge of students’ cultures for instruction.
One candidate explained,68

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

you can be accepting of other cultures but sometimes in the classroom if you
actually know [students’ cultures] ...it builds that much more connection withthe student and those cultural connections are what make student instruction
meaningful and successful.
Another candidate critically recalled a conversation she had with her mom and an educator,
about how she neglected to infuse her knowledge of students’ cultures in her lesson:
I told my mom about my lesson and the story I used to teach the students about
conflict and resolution, and she [my mom] asked me why did you choose Greek
mythology when you could have used Hawaiian legends? I was wrong inchoosing to use legends that provided no cultural connections to my students.
Cultural simulations made TCs more cognizant about how students’ cultures were being used
or not being used in their instruction.
Language awareness. The language awareness sub-theme encompassed instances where TCs
shared new understandings or clarity on how students’ native languages may be used for
instructional purposes. One TC described how her intentions to support CLD students resulted
in insensitivity:
I had confused the language of Japanese and Korean and misused them. I wasinsensitive to assume that I could use the language appropriately and mistook
them for being the same. In my teaching, I improved by learning more about thelanguages and learning more about the proper context of certain phrases andmore nuances and differences between the two languages.
Another TC shared how important she felt it was to allow students to use their native languages
for instructional purposes:...she [student] was like, “I can’t remember the word that everyone’s using, I
can’t remember it…” I said, oh, you can just say it in Tagalog, and I willtranslate it for you. She [the student] told me the word in Tagalog, and it cameup on “Google Translate.” That was a really good experience for me. I know I
code switch a lot. For instance, I might be thinking about something in Japanese,and it’s not coming out in English, so I’m struggling, trying to verbalize what I
want to say in English even though it’s in my head in Japanese.
In another example, a TC reflected on how her knowledge of students’ native languages
allowed her to understand students’ and their families better:
I would hear them [my students] lingering around the classroom door andtalking to each other in different languages, and I thought that was really cool.
They come from the classroom all day talking English, but once they saw theirparents, they reverted back to the language their parents knew. It made me think
how I could use their native language for instruction.
The know-how sub-dimension of ICC included TC practical applications of culturally
responsive pedagogy. Overall findings revealed that cultural simulations emboldened TCs’
abilities to serve their students as intercultural classroom mediators. They started to feel69

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

responsible for noticing and connecting students’ cultures in their instruction and making
learning more meaningful.
Being
Being was the sub-dimension of ICC with the lowest frequency count. This sub-dimension
included the attitudes, beliefs, motivations, values, cognitive styles, and personalities thatlinked TCs’ to a sense of personal identity. Values and biases were prevalent sub-themes in the
being sub-dimension.
Values. TCs shared what their respective cultures valued or believed. For example, throughout
the study, TC s spoke about how they practiced respect for elders:
The respect of your elders is huge in Ethiopian culture. If you do not respect yourelders, you get in a lot of trouble and are frowned upon. Which is why I always treat
my elders with respect and use “Yes ma’am,” “no ma’am,” “yes sir,” “no sir” when
speaking to my elders.
Accept and give things with both hands, bow enough to show your respect andhumbleness, generally, actions and ideas centering around respect. I’ve seen it
reflected across other cultures as well, but I suppose, for the most part, it’s considered
the actions we use to respect elders in Japanese and Korean cultures.
Cultural simulations created a space where TCs shared similar cultural values with each other(how they respected elders) and recognized their cultural similarities even though they
identified as culturally different.
Bias. As TCs reflected on their cultural values, they also encountered biases. One explained abias on her ethnicity:
I cannot even count on my hands the amount of times I have been called a“Nazi.” This has even happened within the past sixth months, coming fromsomeone the same age as I am. It makes me wish I was invisible and often
negatively categorize the type of people who call me a Nazi.
Another TC reflected on societal perceptions of skin color stating,People look at me and think I’m African American, but I’m actually Ethiopian.
This is much different, and I’ve grown to love and feel more connected to my
Ethiopian culture. People who are not familiar with the different shades of“black” have no idea about all the cultural groups that ‘black’ represents, andit angers me.
Other TCs reflected on the racial biases they experienced in the classroom setting whenworking with students. For example, one TC expressed:
I was the only White person in my [field experience] class, and they [students]
all knew it. They [students’] asked me, “What color are you? Peach?”
Negative emotions surfaced when TCs reflected on biases they had encountered. However, as
these emotions were discussed with peers, conversations shifted from anger and70

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

embarrassment to advocacy. Negative emotions became a springboard for dialogue
surrounding issues such as cultural oppression, marginalization, and equity.
One TC voiced her concerns about marginalized student cultures saying:
I feel like as a society, we tend to only celebrate the majority, and that affects
the minorities. As teachers, we need to consider the cultures we are celebrating
and ask ourselves: are we acknowledging the culture of every student in ourclassroom, and if not, we need to do so!
Another TC considered the influences of a hegemonic curriculum:
There are three students in my class who are from Chuuk. I learned that
culturally they do not value school the same way we do here in America. They
enjoy group work, collaborative hands-on tasks, and being outside. I feel like allthese standards and objectives we use to plan our lessons don’t consider what
my Chuukese students need to succeed academically. They [standards] are madefor the “white” American student or student who was born and raised here in
the US, not for culturally diverse students, but we teach to culturally diverse
students, so how is this right?
Cultural simulations raised TCs’ critical consciousness. TCs strengthened their own cultural
identities (values and biases) to reflect on cultural marginalization and hegemonic curriculum
and began to think critically about culture and how it related to social, community, andclassroom practices.
Discussion
TCs developed ICC through cultural simulations. TCs built awareness and discussed different
cultural practices, similarities, and differences between ethnic groups and other target
communities. This finding aligns with existing research of how preservice teachers lookbeyond “individualism” (Keengwe, 2010, p. 10) to accepting cultural differences. The
knowledge sub-dimension of ICC developed TC’s awareness from two perspectives. First, TCs
developed an awareness of the various cultures in Hawaii. Secondly, they began connecting totheir cultural practices and to others. Several TCs were third or fourth generation AsianAmericans and had feelings of cultural loss. For instance, one person shared, “I’m fullJapanese, so it kind of hurt a little to know that hey, this is new to me when this is traditional
Japanese culture”. Findings also reveal that TCs’ feelings of cultural loss should be discussed
in MTE coursework. We say this because in-depth cultural knowledge and empathy reflect theimportance of TC’s being prepared for and immersed in the simulation through readings,
discussions, and reflections (Ference, 2006; Keengwe, 2010).
The know-how sub-dimension of ICC was the most prominent finding. TCs discussed theirpractical understanding of culture, revealing their new insights. Like Brunsmeir’s (2016), theTCs considered alternative classroom strategies that could be used to improve CLD instruction
such as using languages other than English and utilizing students’ culture to increase
engagement and meaning. Keengwe (2010) highlighted teachers need to understand thecultural diversities represented in the classroom and be ready for challenges. However, theresearchers did not adequately prepare our TCs in promoting their own culture in the fieldplacement classroom so students could learn more about them. We didn’t realize some TCs

71

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

felt discomfort during the cultural simulation such as when one TC was asked if her skin color
was peach. Know-how should not only include knowledge of others but also to the TC. We
recognize that the TC’s utterance should have been probed more to cause her to consider why
her student referred to her as “peach”. Moreover, TCs discussed strategies they wanted to
implement in their field experience classrooms; however, we did not investigate if TCs put
these ideas into practice. While we acknowledge that ICC is an important goal of MTE, ourfindings agree with literature (Brunsmeier, 2016), revealing that ICC is not consistently put
into actual teaching practices.
The being sub-dimension of ICC exhibited a shift in TCs’ attitudes, beliefs, and motivations.
Cultural simulations allowed TCs to increase awareness of how personal biases affected theirability to work across and with different cultures present in their field experience classrooms.
They began to critically examine their own cultural identities (values and biases) to reflect onlarger sociopolitical issues such as cultural marginalization and a hegemonic curriculum. In
addition, valuable opportunities to use hegemonic societal issues as seminar discussion topics
were missed and should have promoted critical dialogue. We say this because the being subdimension of ICC had the lowest frequency in the data. Gorski (2012) notes that most MTE
scholars ignore power and oppression concerns and instead focus on cultural diversity mattersin multicultural coursework. Also, we should have included opportunities to learn more about
Native Hawaiian culture, especially since Native Hawaiian students are the largest populationin the public-school system. While we did not intend to ignore TCs’ comments about criticalsociopolitical issues, we acknowledge that we should have provided more post-cultural
simulation (seminar) time to explore topics related to power, race, cultural marginalization,and hegemony. As teacher educators, we should have worked harder to develop a ‘Pedagogy
of discomfort and empathy’ (Zembylas & Papamichael, 2017) to acknowledge TCs’
uncomfortable feelings and respond productively to elicit critical thinking.
Findings from this research underscore the criticality of using a dialogic approach to promotecultural competence in TCs. If the goal is to prepare teachers for teaching diversity and equity
in the classroom, then teacher educators must provide TCs with opportunities to examine andreflect on their own privileges coupled with considerations about what it means and feel liketo experience classroom learning as the “other.” While we recognize other TPPs may not have
Hawaii’s rich cultural diversity, we urge teacher educators to consider ways to mobilize culture
and diversity within TPP curriculum. One idea is to create an online cultural exchange whereTCs communicate with TCs who live in another country (Haley, 2012; Lin 2018). Future
research should examine what online activities and guided questions work best to spawn richdialogue for ICC development. With the current challenges entailed in teaching online during
the COVID-19 pandemic, we believe technology has the potential to serve as a mediatedplatform for ICC. TCs who reside in two different countries may use online platforms tocommunicate and build strong relationships to develop a keen global understanding.
Our research included several limitations. First, participants worked together in a cohort andhad strong, trusting relationships. We acknowledge this study may be difficult to replicate in a
non-cohort model. Secondly, the research examined the role of cultural simulations in a 16week semester and three cultural simulations. While research (Ference, 2006) reveals shortterm simulations help teachers’ cultural competence, we believe longitudinal research may
provide more insight on how teachers develop and use ICC over time with CLD students. We
did not study how TCs used ICC in their classroom-based field experiences and believe
studying ICC’s practical applications will offer insight into how TCs bridge multicultural
theory with practice. Lastly, as researchers, we had an insider position where access to72

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

participants was easy to achieve, and the need for relationship-building with participants was
not a challenge.
Conclusion
The present study found that cultural simulations promoted TCs’ cultural competence. TCs
developed an awareness of other cultures, began to consider ways to integrate student culture
into their teaching, and challenged personally held deficit beliefs about others to question
critical sociopolitical issues. However, the authors found that difficult issues and topics (e.g.,race, gender) were not explored enough and should have been, through the use of intentional
probing questions to elicit pedagogies of discomfort and empathy. Future research is needed
to examine how cultural simulations motivate TCs to become social change agents in theirclassrooms and how online, intercultural exchange between TCs from different countries may
work to mobilize ICC.

73

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

References
Banks, J.A. (2019). An Introduction to Multicultural Teacher Education (6th ed.), Pearson.
Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (Eds.). (2016). Multicultural education: Issues andperspectives (9th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Brunsmeier, S. (2017). Primary teachers’ knowledge when initiating interculturalcommunicative competence. TESOL Quarterly, 51(1),143–155.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.327
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence.
Multilingual Matters.
Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth
semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability andagreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294–320.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113500475
Creswell, J., & Creswell, J. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
Cruz, B. C., & Patterson, J. (2005). Cross-cultural simulations in teacher education:
Developing empathy and understanding. Multicultural Perspectives, 7(2), 40–47.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327892mcp0702_7
Deardoff, D. (2009). The Sage handbook of intercultural competence. Sage.
Durham, C. (2018). Teacher interculturality in an English as a second language elementarypull-out program: Teacher as broker in the school’s community of practice. The
Qualitative Report, 23(3), 677–695.
Ference, R. (2006). Building and sustaining short-term cross-cultural immersion programs inteacher education. AILACTE Journal, 3(x) 11–24.
Gay, G. (2018). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice. Teachers
College Press.
Gorski, P. C. (2009), What we’re teaching teachers: An analysis of multicultural Teacher
education coursework syllabi. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(2), 309–318.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.07.008
Gorski, P. C. (2012). Instructional, institutional, and sociopolitical challenges of teaching
multicultural teacher education courses. The Teacher Educator, 47(3), 216–235.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2012.660246
Hahl, K., & Löfström, E. (2016). Conceptualizing interculturality in multicultural teacher
education. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 11(3), 300–314.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2015.1134544
Haley, M. H. (2012). An online cultural exchange in preservice language teacher education:
A dialogic approach to understanding. US-China Education Review. 528–533.
Hawaiʻi State Department of Education (2019), Race-ethnicity of public school students inthe state of Hawaiʻi, available at: https://dashboard.hawaii.gov/FormalEducation/Race-Ethnicity-of-Students-in-Public-Schools-in-Ha/6zur-cwiz (accessed
13 October 2019).

74

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

Hoff, H. E. (2014). A critical discussion of Byram’s model of intercultural communicativecompetence in the light of bildung theories. Intercultural Education, 25(6), 508–517.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2014.992112
Holm, G., & Zilliacus, H. (2009). Multicultural education and intercultural education: Is therea difference. In M-T. Talib, J. Loima, H. Paavola & S. Patrikainen (Eds.), Dialogs on
diversity and global education, pp. 11–28. Peter Lang.
Keengwe, J. (2010). Fostering cross cultural competence in preservice teachers throughmulticultural education experiences. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38(3), 197–
204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-010-0401-5
Lázár, I., Huber-Kriegler, M., Lussier, D. Matei, G.S., & Peck, C. (Eds.). (2007), Developing
and assessing intercultural communicative competence: A guide for language
teachers and teacher educators. Council of Europe.
Leh, J. M., Grau, M., & Guiseppe, J. A. (2015), Navigating the development of preservice
teachers’ intercultural competence and understanding of diversity: The benefits offacilitating online intercultural exchange, Journal for Multicultural Education, 9(2),98–110. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-12-2014-0042
Lin, M. (2018). “I don’t even know where Turkey is.”: Developing intercultural competence
through e-pal exchanges. Journal of Global Education and Research, 2(2), 68–81.
https://doi.org/10.5038/2577-509X.2.2.1019
Lucas, T. (Ed.). (2011). Teacher preparation for linguistically diverse classrooms: A
resource for teacher educators. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203843239
Lucas, T., & Villegas, A. M. (2013). Preparing linguistically responsive teachers: Laying thefoundation in preservice teacher education. Theory Into Practice, 52(2), 98–109.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.770327
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. JosseyBass.
Munezane, Y. (2019). A new model of intercultural communicative competence: bridging
language classrooms and intercultural communicative contexts. Studies in Higher
Education, x(x),1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1698537
National Association for Multicultural Education. (2019). Definitions of Multicultural
Education, available at: https://www.nameorg.org/definitions_of_multicultural_e.php(accessed 21 April 2019).
National Education Association. (2019). Diversity Toolkit: Cultural Competence for
Educators, available at: http://www.nea.org/tools/30402.htm (assessed 02 July 2020).
Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.), Sage
Publications, Inc.
Sharma, S., El-Atwani, K., Rahatzad, J., Ware, J., Phillion, J., & Malewski, E. (2012). How
disorienting experiences in informal learning contexts promote cross-culturalawareness in preservice teachers: Findings from a study abroad program. LEARNing
Landscapes, 5(2), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v5i2.566
Smolcic, E., & Katunich, J. (2017). Teachers crossing borders: A review of the research into
cultural immersion field experience for teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education
62(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.11.002

75

IAFOR Journal of Education: Undergraduate Education

Volume 8 – Issue 3 – 2020

Stake, R. E. (2008). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),
Strategies of qualitative inquiry (3rd ed.) (pp. 119–149). Sage.
TESOL International Association (TESOL). (2019), Standards for Initial TESOL Pre-K-12
Teacher Preparation Programs. TESOL Press.
United States Census Bureau. (2018), Quick Facts: Hawaiʻi, available at:https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/HI (accessed 12 March 2019).
Wyatt, T. R. (2017). The influence of “super-diversity” on preservice teachers’ sensitivity tocultural issues. Multicultural Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 87–109.
https://doi.org/10.1515/mlt-2015-0014
Xu, Y., Hao, C., & Huennekens, M. E. (2016). Effects of a multicultural perspectives
course on teacher candidates’ intercultural competence. Journal for Multicultural
Education, 10(1), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-07-2015-0025
Zembylas, M., & Papamichael, E. (2017). Pedagogies of discomfort and empathy inmulticultural teacher education. Intercultural Education, 28(1), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2017.1288448
Corresponding author: Jennifer Padua
Contact email: paduajen@hawaii.edu

76