CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 403Language, Communication, and Linguistic StudiesEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningLinguistic Education and Pedagogy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding the "Other Side": Intercultural learning in a Spanish-English e-mail exchange

Open access
O'Dowd, Robert·2003·Language Learning & Technology
DOI 10.64152/10125/25202
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Intercultural learning is often assumed to be an automatic benefit of e-mail exchanges between groups of learners in different countries, but little research exists on whether on-line intercultural collaboration does actually develop learners' understanding of the other culture's perspective and world view.This paper reviews what recent literature suggests intercultural learning to involve and then reports on a year-long e-mail exchange between Spanish and English second year university language learners.Using the results of qualitative research, the paper identifies key characteristics of e-mail exchanges which helped to develop learners' intercultural communicative competence (Byram, 1997).It also outlines elements of e-mail messages which may enable students to develop successful intercultural relationships with their partners.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.64152/10125/25202

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 55

  1. Agar, M. (1980). The professional stranger. New York: Academic Press.
  2. Allport, G. (1979) The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  3. Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
  4. Bausch, M., Christ, H., & Krumm, H. (Eds.). (1997). Interkulturelles Lernen im Fremdsprachenunterricht [Intercultural learning in foreign language teaching]. Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr.
  5. Belz, J. A. (2001). Institutional and individual dimensions of translatlantic group work in network-based language teaching. ReCALL, 13(2), 129-147.
  6. Belz, J. A., & Kinginger, C. (2002). The cross-linguistic development of address form use in telecollaborative language learning: Two case studies. Canadian Modern Language Review / Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 59(2), 189-214.
  7. Belz, J. A., & Müller-Hartmann, A. (2002). Deutsch-amerikanisch Telekollaboration im Fremdsprachenunterricht --Lernende im Kreuzfeuer der institutionellen Zwänge [German-American telecollaboration in foreign language teaching --learners in the crossfire of institutional constraints]. Die Unterrichtspraxis / Teaching German, 35(1), 68-78.
  8. Bennett, M. (1993). Towards ethnorelativism: A development model of intercultural sensitivity. In M. Paige (Ed.), Education for the intercultural experience (pp. 21-71). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
  9. Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. New York: Routledge.
  10. Brammerts, H. (1996). Language learning in tandem using the Internet. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 121-130). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Centre.
  11. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  12. Burwitz-Melzer, E. (2000). Interkulturelle Lernziele bei der Arbeit mit fiktionalen Texten [Intercultural learning aims through working with fictional texts]. In L. Bredella, H. Christ, & M. K. Legutke (Eds.), Fremdverstehen zwischen Theorie und Praxis [Understanding otherness --between theory and practice] (pp. 275-301). Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
  13. Byram, M. (1999). Acquiring intercultural communicative competence: Fieldwork and experiential learning. In L. Bredella & W. Delanoy (Eds.), Interkultureller Fremdsprachenunterricht [Intercultural foreign language teaching] (pp. 358-380). Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
  14. Byram, M., & Morgan, C. (Eds.). (1994). Teaching-and-learning-language-and-culture. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
  15. Canagarajah, A. (1993). Critical ethnography of a Sri Lankan classroom: Ambiguities in student opposition to reproduction through ESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), 600-629.
  16. M. Byram & M. Fleming (Eds.), Language learning in intercultural perspective (pp. 45-76). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  17. Cryle, P. (2002). Should we stop worrying about cultural awareness? In S. Cormeraie, D. Killick, & M. Parry (Eds.), Revolutions in consciousness: Local identities, global concerns in "languages and intercultural communication" (pp. 23-35). Leeds, England: International Association for Language and Intercultural Communication.
  18. Cummins, J., & Sayers, D. (1995). Brave new schools. Challenging cultural literacy through global learning networks. New York: St. Martin's Press.
  19. Davis, K. (1995). Qualitative theory and methods in Applied Linguistics research. TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), 427-453.
  20. Denzin, N. (Ed.). (1970). Sociological methods: A source book. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  21. Donath, R., & Volkmer, I. (Eds.). (1997). Das Transatlantische Klassenzimmer [The transatlantic classroom]. Hamburg: Koerber-Stiftung.
  22. Edmondson, W., & House, J. (1998). Interkulturelles Lernen: ein überflussiger Begriff [Intercultural learning: A superfluous construct]. Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachenforschung, 9(2), 161-188.
  23. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan.
  24. Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., English, K., & Maillet, K. (2001). Giving a virtual voice to the silent language of culture: The Cultura Project. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 55-102. Retrieved February 25, 2003, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/furstenberg/
  25. Grosch, H., & Leenan, W. (1998). Bausteine zur Grundlegung interkulturellen Lernens [Components for beginning the process of intercutlural learning]. In Interkulturelles Lernen (pp. 29-47). Bonn, Germany: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.
  26. Hamburger, F. (1990). Der Kulturkonflikt und seine paedagogische Kompensation [Cultural conflict and its pedagogical compensation]. In E. Dittrich & F. Radttke (Eds.), Ethnizitaet (pp. 311-328). Opladen, Germany: Westdeutsche Verlag.
  27. Hooper, J. (1995). The new Spaniards. London: Penguin Books.
  28. House, J. (1996). Zum Erwerb interkulturelles Kompetenz im Unterricht des Deutschen als Fremdsprache [Acquiring intercultural competence in the German as a foreign language classroom]. Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 1(3), 21. Retrieved November 21, 2002, from http://www.spz.tu-darmstadt.de/projekt_ejournal/jg_01_3/beitrag/house.htm
  29. Hu, A. (2000). Intercultural learning and its difficult aspects --An analysis of the criticism in relation to a controversial subject. In T. Harden & A. Witte (Eds.), The notion of intercultural understanding in the context of German as a foreign language (pp. 75-102). Bern, Germany: Peter Lang.
  30. Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and quality of language production.. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 457-476.
  31. Kern, R. (1998). Technology, social interaction and FL literacy. In J. Muyskens (Ed.), New ways of learning and teaching: focus on technology and foreign language education (pp. 57-92). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
  32. Kinginger, C. (in press). Communicative foreign language teaching through telecollaboration. In O. St.
  33. John, J. Kees, & E. Schalkwijk (Eds.), New insights into foreign language learning and teaching. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Verlag.
  34. Kinginger, C., Gourvés-Hayward, A., & Simpson, V. (1999). A tele-collaborative course on French / American intercultural communication. French Review, 72(5), 853-866.
  35. Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  36. Kramsch, C., & Thorne, S. (2002). Foreign language learning as global communicative practice. In D. Block & D. Cameron (Eds.), Language learning and teaching in the age of globalization (pp. 83-100). London: Routledge.
  37. Meagher, M., & Castaños, F. (1996). Perceptions of American culture: The impact of an electronically- mediated cultural exchange program on Mexican high school students. In S. Herring (Ed.), Computer- mediated communication. Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 187-201). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  38. Meskill, C., & Ranglova, K. (2000). Sociocollaborative language learning in Bulgaria. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 20-40). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  39. In W. Delanoy & L. Bredella (Eds.), Interkultureller Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 160-182). Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
  40. Müller-Hartmann, A. (2000a). The role of tasks in promoting intercultural learning in electronic learning networks. Language Learning & Technology, 4(2), 129-147. Retrieved February 25, 2003, http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num2/muller/
  41. In L. Bredella, H. Christ, & M. K. Legutke (Eds.), Fremdverstehen zwischen Theorie und Praxis (pp. 275-301). Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
  42. Müller-Hartmann, A. (2001). Fichtenschonung oder Urwald? Der forschende Blick ins vernetzte fremdsprachliche Klassenzimmer --Wie Triangulation und Interaktionsanalyse der Komplexität gerecht werden können [Translate]. In A. Müller-Hartmann & M. Schocker-v.Ditfurth (Eds.), Qualitative Forschung im Bereich Fremdpsrachen lehren und lernen (pp. 206-233). Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
  43. Neuner, G. (1997). The role of sociocultural competence in foreign language teaching and learning. In Sociocultural competence in language learning and teaching (pp. 47-96). Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
  44. Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  45. O'Dowd, R. (2000). Intercultural learning via videoconferencing: A pilot exchange project. ReCALL, 12(1), 49-63.
  46. Paxman, J. (1998). The English --Portrait of a people. London: Penguin Books.
  47. Risager, K. (1998). Language teaching and the process of European integration. In M. Byram & M. Fleming (Eds.), Language learning in intercultural perspective (pp. 47-96). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  48. Shetzer, H., & Warschauer, M. (2000). An electronic literacy approach to network-based language learning. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 171-185). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  49. Sercu, L. (1998). In-service training and the acquisition of intercultural competence. In M. Byram & M. Fleming (Eds.), Language learning in intercultural perspective (pp. 255-289). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  50. von der Emde, S., Schneider, J. & Kötter, M. (2001). Technically speaking: Transforming language learning through virtual learning environments (MOOs). The Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 210-225.
  51. Wallace, M. J. (1998). Action research for language teachers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  52. Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 470-481.
  53. Warschauer, M. (2000). On-line learning in second language classrooms: An ethnographic study. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 41-58). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  54. Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds.). (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  55. Woodin, J. (2001). Tandem Learning as an intercultural activity. In M. Byram, A. Nichols, & D. Stevens (Eds.), Developing intercultural competence in practice (pp. 189-202). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
O'Dowd, R.
Venue
Language Learning & Technology
Publisher
National Foreign Language Resource Center
Published
2003-05-01
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
118-144
ISSN
1094-3501 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.64152/10125/25202
OpenAlex
W2140417336
Cited by
403
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 52 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 27
FWCI
57.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Language learning & technology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa) (submittedVersion)
  • Language learning & technology (cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Language, Communication, and Linguistic Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistic Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
intercultural learning, intercultural communicative competence, email exchange, second language learners, intercultural relations, learner perceptions, worldview

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review