Comparing Differences in Perceptions of Intercultural Competence between Students and Native English-speaking Teachers in Korean Universities = 한국 대학 내 학생과 원어민 영어교사 간 상호문화 역량 인식의 차이 비교 연구

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 상호문화역량（Intercultural Competence, ICC）에 관한 Byram과 Deardorff의 널리 수용되고 확립된 이론적 틀을 바탕으로, 한국 대학의 EFL 학습자（n = 211）와 이들을 가르치는 원어민 영어교사（NESTs, n = 29）의 ICC에 대한 인식을 조사하는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 이를 위해 여섯 가지 ICC 구성요소에 대한 중요도 인식을 확인하고, 두 집단 간 차이를 비교하였으며, 학생들의 ICC 인식과 자기보고식 영어 성취도 점수 간의 관계를 분석하였다. 학생들로부터 수집한 일반적 배경 정보에는 연령, 자기보고식 영어 성취도 점수, 전공 및 ICC에 대한 일반적 인식이 포함되었다. NESTs로부터는 전공 분야, 교수 경력 및 ICC에 대한 일반적 인식과 관련된 배경 정보를 수집하였다. 모든 참여자는 여섯 가지 ICC 요인의 중요도에 대한 인식을 측정하기 위해 6점 리커트 척도로 구성된 32문항의 설문도구에 응답하였다. 연구문제에 답하기 위해 SPSS 30을 사용하여 설문 문항의 내적 일관성을 확인하였으며, 독립표본 t-검정, 상관분석, 회귀분석 및 ANOVA 분석을 실시하였다. 학생들이 ICC에서 가장 중요하다고 인식한 요인은 상호문화적 동기（Intercultural Motivation, M = 4.71）였으며, 이어 타문화에 대한 태도（Attitude Towards Other Cultures, M = 4.69）, 상호문화적 지식（Intercultural Knowledge, M = 4.68） 순으로 나타났다. 반면, 원어민 영어교사（NESTs）는 타문화에 대한 태도（M = 5.10）를 가장 중요한 요인으로 인식하였으며, 그다음으로 상호문화적 지식（M = 5.06）과 전략적 역량（Strategic Competence, M = 4.99）을 중요하게 인식하였다. 학생과 NESTs 간 응답을 비교한 결과, 타문화에 대한 태도（t = –3.092, p = 0.002）, 상호문화적 지식（t = –2.882, p = 0.004）, 전략적 역량（t = –2.484, p = 0.014）의 중요도 인식에서 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 나타났으며, 세 요인 모두에서 NESTs가 학생보다 더 높은 중요도를 부여하였다. 반면 상호문화적 동기（t = –1.886, p = 0.061）, 언어능력（t = 1.243, p = 0.215）, 유연성과 다양성（t = 0.845, p = 0.399）에 대한 중요도 인식에서는 두 집단 간 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 상관분석 결과, 학생들의 자기보고식 영어 성취도 점수와 상호문화 역량 요인 간에는 유의한 관계가 나타나지 않았다（p 〉 0.05）. 또한 여섯 가지 ICC 요인을 독립변수로, 자기보고식 영어 성취도 점수를 종속변수로 설정한 선형회귀분석 결과에서도 어느 요인도 자기보고식 영어 성취도 점수의 유의한 예측요인으로 나타나지 않았다（p 〉 0.05）. 이러한 결과는 자기보고식 영어 성취도 점수와 학생들이 ICC의 중요성에 대해 가지는 인식이 서로 독립적인 구성개념임을 시사한다. 학생들의 전공을 유사한 계열로 분류하여 공학계열（n = 48）, 간호학계열（n = 139）, 기타 전공（n = 24）으로 구분한 후 일원배치 분산분석（ANOVA）을 실시한 결과, 세 집단이 상호문화역량의 중요성을 인식하는 방식에서 여섯 가지 요인 모두에 걸쳐 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 분석 결과, p값은 0.072에서 0.605의 범위에 있었으며, F값 또한 0.50에서 2.67의 비교적 낮은 범위에 머물렀다. 이러한 집단 간 차이의 부재는 교육 경험의 유사성과 외국 문화에 대한 노출 및 직접적 교류 경험의 제한성에서 비롯된 것으로 해석된다. 본 연구의 결과는 몇 가지 중요한 시사점을 제공한다. 첫째, 본 연구에 참여한 학생들의 경우 ICC의 중요성에 대한 인식과 영어 성취도 점수 간에 뚜렷한 관련성이 나타나지 않았으며, 이는 여러 선행연구에서 보고된 결과와는 차이가 있는 결과이다. 둘째, 교실 맥락에서 전략적 역량이 보다 명시적으로 교수되고, 실제로 연습되며, 지속적으로 강화될 필요가 있음을 보여주었다. 셋째, NESTs의 교수 전략과 학생들이 기대하는 학습 성과 사이에 불일치가 존재함을 확인하였다. 본 연구는 표본 구성과 방법론적 측면에서 몇 가지 제한점을 지닌다. 우선, 총 211명의 학생이 설문에 참여하였으나, 유사 전공별로 집단을 재구성했을 때 보건 및 간호학 전공 학생들이 다수를 차지하여 집단 간 표본 수가 불균형하였다. 이와 함께, 단일 기관에서 모집된 NESTs는 29명에 불과하여 학생과 NESTs 간 표본 규모가 약 7:1에 가까운 불균형을 보였다. 마지막으로, 본 연구는 대부분의 분석에서 양적 자료의 수집과 분석에 전적으로 의존하였다. 향후 연구에서는 학생 전공 간의 보다 균형 잡힌 표본 구성, 학생과 NESTs 간의 보다 균등한 표본 분포, 그리고 보다 풍부하고 엄밀한 질적 자료의 수집이 이루어질 필요가 있다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Using Byram’s and Deardorff’s widely accepted and established theoretical frameworks of Intercultural Competence （ICC）, the study aimed to examine the perceptions of ICC among Korean EFL university students （n = 211） and their NESTs （n = 29） by identifying the perceived importance of six ICC components, comparing group differences, and analyzing the relationship between students’ ICC perceptions and their self-reported English achievement scores. General background data collected from students included their age, self-reported English achievement scores, majors and general perceptions of ICC. Background information from NESTs indicated their fields of study, teaching experience and general perceptions of ICC. All participants completed a 32-item survey instrument using a six-point Likert scale to assess how they perceived the importance of six ICC factors. SPSS 30 was used to determine internal consistency of the survey items as well as to carry out independent samples t-tests, correlations, regression analyses and ANOVA analyses to answer the research questions. The factors students perceived to be most important for ICC were Intercultural Motivation （M = 4.71）, Attitude Towards Other Cultures （M = 4.69） and Intercultural Knowledge （M = 4.68）. NESTs reported Attitude Towards Other Cultures （M = 5.10） as the factor they perceived as most important followed by Intercultural Knowledge （M = 5.06） and Strategic Competence （M = 4.99）. Statistically significant differences emerged when comparing the responses between students and NESTs with respect to how each group perceived the importance of Attitude Towards Other Cultures （t = -3.092, p = 0.002）, Intercultural Knowledge （t = -2.882, p = 0.004）, and Strategic Competence （t = -2.484, p = 0.014）, and in each case the NESTs ranked these factors higher. There were no statistically significant differences in how these groups perceived the importance of Intercultural Motivation （t = -1.886, p = 0.061）, Linguistic Proficiency （t = 1.243, p = 0.215） and Flexibility and Diversity （t = 0.845, p = 0.399）. A correlation test revealed no significant relationships between students’ self-reported English achievement scores and the factors of intercultural competence （p 〉 0.05）. This, along with a linear regression analysis using the six ICC factors as independent variables and the self- reported English achievement scores as a dependent variable, led to the conclusion that none of the factors were significant predictors of self-reported English achievement scores （p 〉 0.05） and that these scores and the perceptions students have of the importance of ICC are independent constructs. When grouped into similar university majors, Engineering （n = 48）, Nursing （n = 139） and Other （n = 24）, an ANOVA analysis revealed that there were no statistically significant differences across any of the six factors in the way the groups perceived the importance of intercultural competence. This analysis resulted in p-values ranging from 0.072 to 0.605 and relatively modest F-values ranging from 0.50 to 2.67. The likely source of this lack of differentiation between groups was the similarity of educational experiences and limited levels of exposure to, and direct contact with, foreign cultures. This study has several important implications. It revealed that among the student participants in this study, there was no apparent connection between perceptions of the importance of ICC and achievement scores, a result that differed from findings reported in several previous studies. In the classroom context, this study showed that there is a need for greater emphasis on Strategic Competence skills to be taught, practiced and reinforced. It also revealed a mismatch between NESTs’ teaching strategies and the desired learning outcomes of students. There were three major limitations to this study. While a total of 211 students participated in the survey, when consolidated into groups that shared similar majors, the groups were numerically unbalanced, with students in health and nursing majors dominating. In addition, only 29 NESTs from a single institution were available for participation in the study, resulting in a nearly 7 to 1 imbalance between students and NESTs. Furthermore, this study relied almost exclusively on the collection and analysis of quantitative data. Future studies would benefit from a greater balance between student majors, a more equitable distribution between students and NESTs and the collection of richer and more rigorous qualitative data.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 1. Introduction 1
• 1.1 Necessity of the Study 1
• 1.2 Purpose of the Study 3
• 1.3 Research Questions 4
• 1.4 Significance of the Study 4
• 1.4.1 Theoretical Significance 5
• 1.4.2 Practical Significance 6
• 2. Theoretical Background 8
• 2.1 Defining Intercultural Competence 8
• 2.1.1 Differences between Communicative Competence and ICC 11
• 2.1.2 Deardorff's (2006) Pyramid and Process Models 13
• 2.1.3 Byram’s Model of Intercultural Competence 18
• 2.1.4 Bennett’s Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) 23
• 2.1.5 Strategies for Developing ICC in English Language Learners 25
• 2.1.6 Challenges in Promoting Intercultural Competence 27
• 2.2 English as a Global Lingua Franca in the Intercultural Context 28
• 2.3 The Importance of ICC in Global Communication 30
• 2.3.1 The Role of ICC for Effective Global Communication 31
• 2.3.2 Assessment of ICC in English Language Learning 32
• 2.3.3 The Function of ICC in English Language Acquisition 34
• 2.4 Components of ICC 36
• 2.4.1 Attitude Towards Other Cultures (ATOC) 37
• 2.4.2 Intercultural Knowledge (IK) 39
• 2.4.3 Intercultural Motivation (IM) 40
• 2.4.4 Linguistic Proficiency (LP) 41
• 2.4.5 Flexibility and Diversity (FD) 42
• 2.4.6 Strategic Competence (SC) 43
• 2.5 Language Learners’ and NESTs’ Perceptions of ICC 45
• 2.5.1 Language Learners’ Perceptions of ICC 45
• 2.5.2 NESTs’ Perceptions of ICC 46
• 2.6 Relationships between Perceptions of ICC and Language Achievement 47
• 3. Methodology 48
• 3.1 Participants 48
• 3.1.1 Korean EFL University Students 48
• 3.1.2 NESTs 49
• 3.2 Instrument 51
• 3.2.1 Korean Students’ Background Information 52
• 3.2.2 NESTs’ Background Information 53
• 3.3 Data Collection 54
• 3.4 Data Analysis 54
• 4. Results and Discussion 56
• 4.1 Students’ and NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Intercultural Competence 57
• 4.1.1 Attitude Towards Other Cultures (ATOC) 58
• 4.1.1.1 Students’ Perceptions of the Importance of Attitude Towards Other Cultures (ATOC) 59
• 4.1.1.2 NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Attitude Towards Other Cultures (ATOC) 60
• 4.1.1.3 Differences between Students’ and NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Attitude Towards Other Cultures (ATOC) 61
• 4.1.2 Intercultural Knowledge (IK) 62
• 4.1.2.1 Students’ Perceptions of the Importance of Intercultural Knowledge (IK) 63
• 4.1.2.2 NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Intercultural Knowledge (IK) 64
• 4.1.2.3 Differences between Students’ and NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Intercultural Knowledge (IK) 65
• 4.1.3 Intercultural Motivation (IM) 66
• 4.1.3.1 Students’ Perceptions of the Importance of Intercultural Motivation (IM) 66
• 4.1.3.2 NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Intercultural Motivation (IM) 68
• 4.1.3.3 Differences between Students’ and NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Intercultural Motivation (IM) 69
• 4.1.4 Linguistic Proficiency (LP) 69
• 4.1.4.1 Students’ Perceptions of the Importance of Linguistic Proficiency (LP) 70
• 4.1.4.2 NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Linguistic Proficiency (LP) 72
• 4.1.4.3 Differences between Students’ and NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Linguistic Proficiency (LP) 73
• 4.1.5 Flexibility and Diversity (FD) 73
• 4.1.5.1 Students’ Perceptions of the Importance of Flexibility and Diversity (FD) 74
• 4.1.5.2 NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Flexibility and Diversity (FD) 76
• 4.1.5.3 Differences between Students’ and NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Flexibility and Diversity (FD) 76
• 4.1.6 Strategic Competence (SC) 77
• 4.1.6.1 Students’ Perceptions of the Importance of Strategic Competence (SC) 78
• 4.1.6.2 NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Strategic Competence (SC) 79
• 4.1.6.3 Differences between Students’ and NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of Strategic Competence (SC) 80
• 4.2 Differences between Students’ and NESTs’ Perceptions of the Importance of ICC Factors 80
• 4.2.1 Significant Differences between Students and NESTs 81
• 4.2.2 Non-significant Differences between Students and NESTs 83
• 4.3 Relationship between Perceptions of the Importance of ICC Factors and Students’ Self-Reported English Achievement Scores 84
• 4.3.1 Relationships between Perceptions of the Importance of ICC Factors and Self-Reported English Achievement Scores 86
• 4.3.2 Differences in Perceptions of the Importance of ICC Factors by Students’ English Achievement Scores 90
• 4.4 Differences in Perceptions of the Importance of ICC Factors by Student Study Area 91
• 5. Conclusion 101
• 5.1 Summary of the Study 101
• 5.2 Implications of the Study 103
• 5.2.1 Mismatch between NESTs’ Teaching Strategies and Desired Learning Outcomes 104
• 5.2.2 Need for Greater Emphasis on Strategic Competence 105
• 5.2.3 Dissociation Between Academic Achievement and Intercultural Competence 105
• 5.3 Limitations of the Study 106
• 5.4 Suggestions for Future Research 109
• References 111
• Appendix A 124
• Appendix B 128