MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906405891 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v7n6p198

Effects of an Intercultural Communication Course in Developing Intercultural Sensitivity

2018· article· en· W2906405891 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
İbrahim Tuncel, Turan Paker

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Student and Expatriate Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntercultural communicationPsychologyEnglish languageIntercultural relationsPedagogyQualitative researchMathematics educationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the study is to see whether intercultural communication, an elective course, taught through case analyses in the department of English language teaching is effective on the level of students’ intercultural sensitivity. For this purpose, we conducted the study based on the explanatory sequential design. The participants were senior students (teacher candidates) in English Language teaching department in Pamukkale University in Turkey. The participants were in two elective courses: intercultural communication and sociolinguistics. The data were collected through intercultural sensitivity scale quantitatively and group focused interviews with students and instructors qualitatively. The quantitative data were analyzed by means of ANOVA for mixed measures to compare the means of two groups. In addition, qualitative data were analyzed through content analysis in terms of emerging codes and themes. Our results indicated that the contribution of intercultural communication course to the development of intercultural sensitivity among students was significant. Both the students and the instructor revealed in the interviews that the activities carried out throughout the semester contributed a lot to increase their awareness towards intercultural communication components and to the development of their intercultural sensitivity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.373 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicInternational Student and Expatriate ChallengesFrench-language works237,207